CC 2021-06-22_09b Approval of General Plan Amendment and Adoption of Circulation Element UpdateMEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER
BRIAN PEDROTTI, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: ROBIN DICKERSON, PE, CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-
001, ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE,
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, AND MULTIMODAL
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES; LOCATION -
CITYWIDE
D ATE: JUNE 22, 2021
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Adoption of the 2021 Circulation Element Update (CEU) and Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) will provide updated circulation policies and programs, including
updates consistent with recent legislative directives. Adoption of the Multimodal
Transportation Impact Study Guidelines will provide guidelines and procedures for future
multimodal transportation impact study submissions to the City.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
No new budget impacts have been identified. Funding for preparation of the CEU by the
City’s consultant, GHD, was included in the 2019-20 and 2020-21 fiscal year budgets.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt a Resolution:
1.Approving General Plan Amendment 20-001,
2.Adopting the 2021 Circulation Element Update,
3.Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and
4. Adopting the Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines
BACKGROUND:
The City’s Circulation Element (CE) is one of eight (8) elements of the Arroyo Grande
General Plan and identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed
major roads, transit routes, terminals, and public utilities and facilities, and establishes
policies governing circulation consistent with the Land Use Element. The CE sets
standards for streets and highways, levels of service, multi-modal circulation, and
transportation systems. Traffic patterns and volumes of traffic described in the CE are
Item 9.b. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001,
ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
GUIDELINES; LOCATION - CITYWIDE
JUNE 22, 2021
PAGE 2
primarily based on the adopted Land Use Element and informs planning and prioritization
of transportation improvement projects over time. The last comprehensive update to the
City’s General Plan occurred in 2001. Since then, several updates have been adopted
to various elements. The last update to the CE was the addition of the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan in 2012.
Recent legislation has driven change in the way local governments approach CE updates.
This CE update effort is intended to comply with these new legislative directives as
applicable, including:
• The Complete Streets Act (AB 1358)
• Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32)/(SB 32)
• The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) and the
completion of Sustainable Communities Strategies
• CEQA Streamlining for infill projects (SB 226)
• A shift in CEQA transportation metrics away from Level of Service (LOS) to
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) (SB 743)
On May 14, 2019, the City Council authorized a consultant services agreement with GHD,
a traffic engineering firm, to assist with updating the CE. The process of updating the CE
began with obtaining updated traffic counts at various locations throughout the City in
September and October of 2019, including updated peak hour traffic counts as well as
updated regional traffic modeling data. This data set forms the basis for all traffic scenario
modeling and forecasting, which then informs the facility improvements needed to
accommodate the increased traffic demands and level of service impacts through the
year 2040. The update process also included review of existing CE programs and
policies, an evaluation of existing conditions, and development of a report reflecting
current facilities that have been constructed since the element was last updated. GHD, in
conjunction with staff, prepared the Final Existing Conditions and Background Report that
is incorporated into the proposed CEU.
On November 17, 2020, a study session was held during the regularly scheduled
Planning Commission meeting. The following documents were provided to the
Commission for review and comment at that time:
• Existing Conditions Background Report
• A copy of the proposed draft CEU policies
• Proposed Draft of Figure 2-2 Intersections and Road Improvements,
• Proposed Draft of Figure 3-3 Circulation Map: Bicycle Facility Improvements,
• Proposed Draft Figure 3-4 Pedestrian and Transit Facility Improvements
Item 9.b. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001,
ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
GUIDELINES; LOCATION - CITYWIDE
JUNE 22, 2021
PAGE 3
A presentation by GHD provided answers to the Commissioners regarding the CEU
content and steps moving forward, and feedback was received from the public. The staff
report, attachments, and minutes of the presentation from this meeting are provided in
Attachments 2 and 3.
From November 17, 2020, through February 28, 2021, an interactive online map program
was activated and used via Social Pinpoint to receive public comment regarding the City’s
circulation infrastructure and needs. During this time, 73 comments were received
through the interactive map and 21 comments were received through email.
On April 19, 2021, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was circulated in compliance
with CEQA for a 30-day public review and comment period which ended on May 19, 2021.
Only one comment was received from Caltrans.
On April 20, 2021, a project status update was presented to the Planning Commission
where the draft CEU, the MND, and the draft Multimodal Transportation Impact Study
Guidelines were presented, incorporating and addressing the public comments received
from November 2020 to February 2021. The staff report, attachments, and minutes of
the presentation from this meeting are provided in Attachments 4 and 5.
On June 1, 2021, staff presented the final draft of the CEU to the Planning Commission
at a noticed public hearing requesting a recommendation that the City Council adopt the
CEU, the MND, and the Multimodal Traffic Impact Study Guidelines. The staff report,
attachments, and draft minutes of the presentation from this meeting are provided in
Attachments 6 and 7. The final draft documents presented to the Planning Commission
included two revisions to the versions presented on April 20, 2021:
• Removal of a new two-lane arterial road from Fair Oaks to Valley Road along the
future Castillo Del Mar alignment shown on maps within the CEU, as requested by
the public and supported by staff in light of the uncertainties of future development
in the area and uncertainties regarding the Traffic W ay interchange; and
• Addition of a policy requiring compliance with the mitigation measures identified in
the MND in compliance with CEQA.
Following consideration of the CEU, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend
approval of the draft as submitted by staff, with one change, to add a policy to require
that, when reviewing new street designs, reduced street sections receive equal
consideration, including consideration of minimum versus maximum width and private
roads and alleyways.
Item 9.b. - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001,
ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
GUIDELINES; LOCATION - CITYWIDE
JUNE 22, 2021
PAGE 4
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The updated Circulation Element has come a long way from the previous 8-page
Circulation Element of 2001 with a single map (See Attachment 8). The proposed CEU
includes the following items highlighted below.
• Level of Service (LOS) Policy changing threshold to LOS D instead of the
previous LOS C
• New Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Policy
• Strengthened multimodal policies throughout, including Complete Streets,
Roundabouts, and Safe Routes to Schools Policies
• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Policy
• Refined roadway functional classifications, including renaming “Residential
Collector” to “Local Collector”, and defined standard cross-sections
• Provision for Rights-of-Way for planned roadways and policies regarding building
setback lines
• Safety Policy to periodically update the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP)
• Neighborhood Traffic Management policies
• Further refined parking policies to establish and manage on-street parking to
serve the primary uses of each street while balancing the interferences on those
streets
• New Improvement maps, including separate maps for different travel modes
• Refined multimodal improvements beyond the current Bicycle & Trails Master
Plan (e.g. Class IV Bikeways, mid-block pedestrian crossings)
• Identified need to update the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan
• Incorporated an Existing Conditions Background Report and summary text within
the CEU
• Updated list of major circulation improvements for roadways, intersections, and
interchange improvements.
Revisions to the CEU to Address Planning Commission Recommendation:
During the June 1, 2021 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioners requested that
a policy be added to require that equal consideration of reduced street widths be given
to future construction projects to reduce overly wide asphalt sections of streets. The
following policy has been added to the CEU to address this request:
CT1-1.3 In context of new development, new roadways shall have equal
consideration of minimum versus maximum travel way width, and
consideration for private roads and alleyways as an alternative to full
standard local streets.
Item 9.b. - Page 4
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001,
ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
GUIDELINES; LOCATION - CITYWIDE
JUNE 22, 2021
PAGE 5
The final CEU, which incorporates this change, is provided in Attachment 1, Exhibit A.
No other changes have been made to the proposed CEU considered by the Planning
Commission on June 1, 2021.
Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines
As part of the CEU scope of work, GHD has also prepared Multimodal Transportation
Impact Study Guidelines (Attachment 1, Exhibit C). These guidelines establish a
consistent means for assessing potential multimodal transportation impacts of proposed
projects within the City by establishing standards for technical studies consistent with the
latest applicable planning and engineering methodologies, standards, and analysis
procedures. These guidelines will also establish protocol for pre-approving project-
specific technical assumptions through a Memorandum of Assumptions (MOA). The MOA
process will streamline applicant-side workflow by avoiding duplicative work between
draft and final multimodal transportation impact study submissions. The proposed
Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines were presented to the Planning
Commission on April 20, 2021, and June 1, 2021, at which time the Commission voted to
recommend adoption of the Guidelines by Council. No changes were made to the
Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines since the Planning Commission’s
recommendation.
Next Steps
The CEU projects traffic related growth out to the year 2040. As the growth increases,
traffic impacts will cause deterioration of the LOS to various roadways, intersections, and
interchanges. The CEU will identify the proposed projects needed to improve the LOS.
GHD is preparing a CEU Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for these future
improvements, which will identify the proposed improvement, the estimated cost of the
improvements, and the proposed associated Traffic Impact Fees required to fund these
improvements. Once the Circulation Element Update is adopted, the CEU CIP list will be
folded into the City’s CIP budget of funded and unfunded projects. The Traffic Impact
Fee Study is under way and is expected to be completed in July 2021. The Study will be
presented to the City Council for discussion with potential adoption of updated Traffic
Impact Fees following that discussion.
ADVANTAGES:
The adoption of the 2021 CEU and the MND will provide updated policies regarding
multimodal forms of transportation and allow the Circulation Element to comply with new
legislative directives, such as those addressing sustainable communities, complete
streets, and vehicle miles traveled analyses under CEQA. The adoption of the Multimodal
Transportation Impact Study Guidelines will provide guidelines and procedures for future
multimodal transportation impact study submissions to the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 5
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001,
ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
GUIDELINES; LOCATION - CITYWIDE
JUNE 22, 2021
PAGE 6
DISADVANTAGES:
None identified.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The CEU requires environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act. To meet CEQA requirements, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the CEU
was prepared by SWCA as a sub consultant to GHD. See Attachment 1, Exhibit B. The
MND was circulated for public review from April 19, 2021, through May 19, 2021. The
MND has been prepared in accordance with the CEQA, Public Resources Code §21000
et seq., and the State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations (CCR) §15000
et seq. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the MND with the CEU. Specific
projects identified in the CEU may require additional CEQA review at the time of project
development.
The MND has identified 8 areas of potential impact that require mitigation measures: air
quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazard and hazardous
materials, land use, noise, and transportation. The MND includes analyses of each
potential impact, proposed mitigation measures, and required monitoring plans. It is
recommended that the City Council adopt the following findings in compliance with CEQA:
1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared and circulated for public
review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
the State CEQA Guidelines, reflects the lead agency’s independent judgment and
analysis, and adequately addresses potential environmental impacts associated
with the proposed Project; and
2. There is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on
the environment as mitigated in accordance with the measures identified in the
MND; and
3. All potentially significant environmental effects were analyzed adequately in the
referenced MND, subject to the mitigation measures identified in the MND being
incorporated into the CEU and subject to the mitigation monitoring program
identified in the MND, which are hereby incorporated herein in their entirety.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENT:
A notice of public hearing was published in the Tribune and notices mailed to partner
agencies on June 11, 2021. The notice was also posted on the City’s website and at City
Hall. The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
Item 9.b. - Page 6
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001,
ADOPTION OF THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDY
GUIDELINES; LOCATION - CITYWIDE
JUNE 22, 2021
PAGE 7
Attachments:
1. Proposed Resolution
2.Draft Minutes from the November 17, 2020 Planning Commission meeting
3.November 17, 2020 Planning Commission Staff Report
4.Draft Minutes from the April 20, 2021 Planning Commission meeting
5.April 20, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report
6.Draft Minutes from the June 1, 2021 Planning Commission meeting
7.June 1, 2021 Planning Commission Staff Report
8.2001 Circulation Element
Item 9.b. - Page 7
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 20-001 ADOPT ING THE CIRCULATION
ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION
IMPACT STUDY GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65302(b)(1) recognizes the close
relationship between transportation and land use and requires that policies be established
creating a mutually beneficial relationship and that the Circulation Element be correlated
to the General Plan Land Use Element; and
WHEREAS, Section 65302(b)(2) of the California Government Code requires the
Circulation Element to provide for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that
meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways, which includes bicyclists,
pedestrians, children, motorists, persons with disabilities, the elderly, users of public
transportation, and commercial goods movers. This requirement is sometimes referred
to as the “Complete Streets” and complies with the current requirements of State law; and
WHEREAS, the Circulation Element Update provides transportation planning and policies
to assist the City in meeting the requirements of Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008, which requires that metropolitan
planning organizations in California prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy for
meeting their greenhouse gas reduction targets, through coordinated planning for land
use, transportation and housing; and
WHEREAS, The Circulation Element Update and the Multimodal Transportation Impact
Guidelines provide policy changes as required by Senate Bill 473, which amends the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) transportation impact analysis for projects
by replacing auto delay and level of service with Average Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)
as the basis for determining significant impacts under CEQA; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorized a consultant services agreement with GHD to
assist with updating the Circulation Element; and
WHEREAS, a study session was held by the Planning Commission on November 17,
2020, to discuss and receive feedback on the City’s draft Circulation Element Update;
and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Circulation Element Update was
circulated for a 30-day public comment period beginning on April 19, 2021; and
WHEREAS, an update on the Circulation Element was provided to the Planning
Commission on April 20, 2021 along with the Multimodal Transportation Impact
Guidelines to provide status update and information regarding the Circulation Element;
and
Attachment 1
Item 9.b. - Page 8
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing on the Circulation Element Update was held by
the Planning Commission on June 1, 2021, at which time all interested persons were
given the opportunity to be heard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended the City Council adopt the
Circulation Element Update, the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and the Multimodal
Transportation Impact Study Guidelines at the public hearing on June 1, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information and public
testimony presented at the duly noticed public hearing held before it on June 22, 2021,
and the information contained in the Circulation Element Update, staff report, and the
administrative record; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed this project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande
Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA, and adopts a Mitigated Negative
Declaration as the correct CEQA document for the CEU subject to the following findings:
1. The Initial Study-Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-MND) was prepared and
circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines, reflects the lead agency’s
independent judgment and analysis, and adequately addresses potential
environmental impacts associated with the proposed Project; and
2. There is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on
the environment as mitigated in accordance with the measures identified in the IS-
MND; and
3. All potentially significant environmental effects were analyzed adequately in the
referenced IS-MND, subject to the mitigation measures identified in the IS-MND
being incorporated into the Project and subject to the mitigation monitoring
program identified in the IS-MND, which are hereby incorporated herein in their
entirety.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby (i) approves General Plan Amendment No. 20-001; (ii) adopts, by
reference the Circulation Element Update referenced herein as “Exhibit A,” (iii) adopts, by
reference, the Mitigated Negative Declaration referenced herein as “Exhibit B” in
compliance with CEQA and subject to the findings as stated above, and (iii) adopts, by
reference, the Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines referenced herein as
“Exhibit C”.
On motion by Council Member ________, seconded by Council Member_______, and by
the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 22nd day of June, 2021.
Item 9.b. - Page 9
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
_______________________________
CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
__________________________________
WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FROM:
__________________________________
TIMOTHY J. CARMEL, CITY ATTORNEY
Item 9.b. - Page 10
Circulation
Element
June 2021
Exhibit A
Item 9.b. - Page 11
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
VISION ................................................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 2
LOCAL SETTING .................................................................................................................................. 3
LOCAL TRAVEL TRENDS .................................................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER 2: AUTOMOBILE TRAVEL .............................................................................. 6
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS .............................................................................................................. 7
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ................................................................................................ 12
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS ......................................................................................................... 12
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES ................................................................................................................. 17
CHAPTER 3: MULTIMODAL TRAVEL ............................................................................ 26
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ROUTES ......................................................................................... 27
EXISTING BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITY CONDITIONS .............................................. 29
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION .......................................................................................................... 31
PLANNED MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS ............................................................................ 32
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES ....................................................................................... 35
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL POLICIES ....................................................................................... 38
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES ............................................................................................................ 38
CHAPTER 4: TRUCK ROUTES & GOODS MOVEMENTS .................................................. 40
RAILROADS ........................................................................................................................................ 41
AIRPORT .............................................................................................................................................. 41
TRUCK ROUTES ................................................................................................................................. 41
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES .......................................................................... 43
APPENDIX A: EXISTING CONDITIONS BACKGROUND REPORT
Item 9.b. - Page 12
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 1
Chapter 1:
Introduction
Item 9.b. - Page 13
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 2
VISION
The City of Arroyo Grande (City) is a community that embraces mobility through the use of all
transportation modes.
The core value of this Circulation Element is to provide safe and easy travel within and through the City
for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles correlated with the Land Use Element.
This community mobility value is based on creating a “sense of place” with a strong walkable Village Core
and mixed-use corridors. Increasing vehicular and non-vehicular mobility while preserving the local
environment, remaining mindful of the City’s fiscal responsibilities, and utilizing the City’s strategic
location within the southern San Luis Obispo County region are key values reflected in this Circulation
Element.
INTRODUCTION
The Circulation Element presents a set of policies correlated with the Land Use Element of the General
Plan to guide the City’s transportation related infrastructure growth over the next twenty (20) years. A
safe and efficient transportation system is an important contributor to a community’s quality of life and
economic vitality. The circulation system provides access to homes, employment and educational
opportunities, public services, commercial and recreational centers, and regional destinations. It
accommodates travel by automobile, transit, walking, and cycling.
State law recognizes the close relationship between transportation and land use and requires that
policies be established creating a mutually beneficial relationship. California Government Code
§65302(b)(1) requires the Circulation Element to be correlated to the General Plan Land Use Element.
Integrating transportation policies with land use, the General Plan ensures adequate roadway capacity to
accommodate travel demands generated by future planned development. This integration helps to
promote walking, cycling and transit use for shorter trips thereby reducing the air quality impacts and
greenhouse gas emissions associated with automobile use.
The Circulation Element also complies with Government Code §65302(b)(2) in planning for a balanced,
multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of streets, roads, and highways,
which includes bicyclists, pedestrians, children, motorists, persons with disabilities, the elderly, users of
public transportation, and commercial goods movers. This requirement is sometimes referred to in this
Element as “Complete Streets.”
Local transportation planning is a coordinated effort involving multiple agencies. The goals and policies
set forth in this document are intended to not only promote local planning, but also foster cooperation
between jurisdictional partners such as the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), the
County of San Luis Obispo, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and adjacent local
jurisdictions.
Item 9.b. - Page 14
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 3
The transportation planning and policy set forth in the Circulation Element is also a critical component of
the City’s responsibility towards meeting the requirements of Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. SB 375 requires that metropolitan planning
organizations in California prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) for meeting their
greenhouse gas reduction targets, through coordinating planning for land use, transportation, and
housing.
Senate Bill 743 amends the California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) transportation impact analysis for
projects by replacing auto delay, level of service (LOS) as basis for determining significant impacts under
CEQA with Average vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The legislation in SB 743 does not preclude agencies
from adopting the use of auto LOS outside of CEQA in the local transportation planning and policy set
forth in the Circulation Element.
LOCAL SETTING
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San Luis
Obispo County, California. The City lies about 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area and 150 miles
north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of 114 feet. The City of
Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis Obispo, along the US 101
coastal corridor. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated areas of the City of Pismo Beach to
the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast direction. US 101 is the
primary State highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San Luis Obispo
County and the State. State Route 227 also provides more localized access to/from the City, connecting
Arroyo Grande with the City of San Luis Obispo and surrounding County community.
LOCAL TRAVEL TRENDS
Data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2009-2013 (2013) and 2013-2017 (2017) American
Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, form the basis of the following demographic analysis. Based
on the ACS data, the population in the City has increased by roughly 560 from 17,411 in 2013 to 17,971 in
2017, approximately a 3.2% increase.
Prior to examining the various transportation modes in the City, the following sub-section will examine
some recent trends and current facts concerning commuter mode-choice and travel times in the City.
Table 1-1 presents the various means of transportation reported in the City of Arroyo Grande between
2013 and 2017 ACS estimates.
Item 9.b. - Page 15
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 4
Table 1-1: Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics
Means of Transportation and Carpooling 2009-2013 ACS 2013-2017 ACS
Number Percent Number Percent
Workers 16 and over 35,401 - 36,196 -
Car, Truck, or Van 31,188 88.1% 32,070 88.6%
- Drove Alone 27,082 76.5% 28,124 77.7%
- Carpooled 4,107 11.6% 3,945 10.9%
Public Transportation (all types) 389 1.1% 398 1.1%
Motorcycle or Other means 354 1.0% 290 0.8%
Bicycle 389 1.1% 434 1.2%
Walked 991 2.8% 688 1.9%
Worked at home 2,089 5.9% 2,317 6.4%
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
As presented in Table 1-1, the number of workers in the City did not increase significantly between the
two five-year estimates. This increase in workers is approximately 2.2%. Overall, these statistics indicate a
consistent trend of a large percentage of commuters driving alone. Carpooling, motorcycle use, and
walking decreased between 2013 and 2017, while biking and working at home increased. Public transit
use remained consistent.
Table 1-2 and Figure 1-1 present the reported travel times from the 2013 and 2017 ACS. As presented in
Table 1-2 and Figure 1-1, the average travel time to work for all workers increased by 1.6 minutes, a 7%
increase from the 2013 ACS.
Table 1-2: Travel Time to Work
Travel Time
2009-2013 ACS 2013-2017 ACS
Number Percent Number Percent
Did not work at home 33,312 - 33,879 -
Less than 10 minutes 5,397 16.2% 3,930 11.6%
10 to 14 minutes 5,463 16.4% 4,946 14.6%
15 to 19 minutes 5,996 18.0% 6,742 19.9%
20 to 24 minutes 6,363 19.1% 6,606 19.5%
25 to 29 minutes 2,065 6.2% 2,914 8.6%
30 to 34 minutes 4,430 13.3% 4,709 13.9%
35 to 44 minutes 1,299 3.9% 1,660 4.9%
45 to 59 minutes 1,099 3.3% 949 2.8%
60+ minutes 1,166 3.5% 1,457 4.3%
Mean Travel Time (minutes) 21.6 23.2
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
Item 9.b. - Page 16
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 5
Figure 1-1: Travel Time to Work
As summarized in Table 1-2 and Figure 1-1, more commuters are experiencing longer travel times to work
(15+ minutes) in 2017 than in 2013. A large majority of commuters, about 70%, spent less than 25
minutes commuting. Approximately 40% of commuters had a commute time of 20-25 minutes, indicating
a presumably high amount of non-localized employment.
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
Less than
10
minutes
10 to 14
minutes
15 to 19
minutes
20 to 24
minutes
25 to 29
minutes
30 to 34
minutes
35 to 44
minutes
45 to 59
minutes
60+
minutesNumber of CommutersTravel Time
2009-2013 ACS 2013-2017 ACS
Item 9.b. - Page 17
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 6
Chapter 2:
Automobile Travel
Item 9.b. - Page 18
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 7
STREETS AND HIGHWAYS
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses throughout
the City and beyond. A route’s design, including number of lanes needed, is determined by its functional
classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient movement at the
development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element.”
STATE FREEWAYS
Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other road, railways, or
pedestrian pathway, and instead are served by interchanges are classified as freeways. Freeways can
either be toll or non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 mph. The following
freeways service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101
US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101 serves as the
principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo County (and other
portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and the Los Angeles urban
basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major connection between and
through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo County, US 101 represents a
major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general four-lane divided freeway cross-
section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo Grande, US 101 forms full-access
interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as
well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue.
STATE HIGHWAYS
Controlled access facilities whose junctions with cross streets are characterized by at-grade intersections
rather than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or undivided
roadways, with speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highways service the
surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
STATE ROUTE 227
State Route 227 (SR 227) is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north-south direction
connecting the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a general two-lane
highway type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a significant parallel commuter
route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City of Arroyo Grande.
ARTERIAL STREETS
Arterial facilities serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily to
distribute cross-town traffic from freeways / highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Item 9.b. - Page 19
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 8
Specifications & Engineering Standards define two categories: Primary Arterials and Arterials. Primary
Arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and Arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane. Within the
City, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds ranging from 30 to 45
mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent land uses. The following
arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
EAST BRANCH STREET
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown commercial
thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The duality of purpose of
this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking does create safety and capacity concerns. The high
volume of traffic (18,500 ADT) at times conflicts with the community’s desire to have a pedestrian-
friendly downtown.
ELM STREET
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north-south between State Route 1 (SR 1) in the
south, and Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between Ash
Street and Grand Avenue.
FAIR OAKS AVENUE
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east-west connectivity across
US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm Street in the
west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design standards.
GRAND AVENUE
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east-west Primary arterial through and within the City (two travel
lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the City). West of
the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and extends further west
to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand Avenue becomes East Branch
Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR 227. Grand Avenue represents one of
the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
HALCYON ROAD
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north-south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the City of
Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City, with the
southernmost terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue, Halcyon Road is a
four-lane primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road and El Camino Real, forms
a full-access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange.
Item 9.b. - Page 20
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 9
OAK PARK BOULEVARD
Oak Park Boulevard is a two- to five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern City
limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjacent Cities of Grover Beach and Pismo Beach.
Oak Park Boulevard forms a partial-access interchange with US 101, with only a northbound on-ramp, and
extends south of US 101 as a four-lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south
beyond The Pike as 22nd Street. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old
Oak Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a northeasterly
direction to connect with SR 227.
TRAFFIC WAY
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends from
East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to the south.
VALLEY ROAD
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to State
Route 1 (SR 1) south of the City limits.
WEST BRANCH STREET
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road, and also a frontage road east of US 101 with both
commercial and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street and
provides important circulation and commercial accessibility east of the freeway.
COLLECTORS
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to
residential, commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications & Engineering
Standards define two categories: collectors and local collectors. Collectors feature turn lanes at
intersections and may feature a two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), while local collectors do not have turn
lanes.
JAMES WAY
James Way is a predominantly-east-west two-lane road serving as a local collector between Oak Park
Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
PRINTZ ROAD
Printz Road is a predominantly-east-west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s northern
limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for several small local
roads.
Item 9.b. - Page 21
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 10
THE PIKE
The Pike is a two-lane east-west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion of
The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City limits.
RANCHO PARKWAY
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north-south collector that runs between West Branch Street and James
Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along W Branch Street, including the
Walmart, and residential areas north.
Other Collector Roads
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino Mercado,
Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo Drive, and Tally Ho Road
are other important roadways serving local collector functions within the City.
The study area and existing roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 2-1.
Item 9.b. - Page 22
£¤101
Fair Oaks Avenue RodeoDriv e
Halcyon RoadE ast C h erry Aven ueElm StreetB risco Road
CourtlandStreetCam ino Mer c a do
CorbettCanyonRoadAsh Street
Traffic
W
a
y CorbettCanyonRoadElmStreetBranchMill R o a dTallyHoRoadHuasna Rd
E a stB ra n ch S t r e e tRanchoParkway
Farroll Avenue
The Pike FairOaksA venueValley RoadOakParkBoulevardElCaminoReal
W
estBranchStreet
E a s t Gr a nd Av en ue
James W
ay
Oak Park BoulevardFIGURE 2-1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Miles
Project No.
Revision No.D
11144936
Date 03/23/2021
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
BACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal Conic
Horizontal Datum: North American 1983
Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.
Created by: rsouthern
N:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG2.1 ExCirc_FunctClass.mxd
Print date: 27 May 2021 - 18:52
Legend
4-Lane (Primary)
Arterial
2-Lane Arterial
Collector
Local Collector
US 101
Local Streets
City Sphere of
Influence
City Limits
EXISTING CIRCULATION &
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
Item 9.b. - Page 23
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 12
LOCAL STREETS
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications map (Figure 2-1) as freeways, highways, arterials, or
collectors are designated as local streets.
EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour turning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019 and Thursday, November 21, 2019. The
City roadway facilities were evaluated on a daily volume basis using weekday counts taken in November
2019. Conditions were identified by generating a Level of Service (LOS) determination. LOS is a
description of a facility’s operation, ranging from LOS A (indicating free-flow traffic conditions with little
or no delay) to LOS F (representing congested conditions where traffic flows exceed design capacity,
resulting in long queues and delay).
The Existing Conditions Background Report is included in Appendix A. This background report presents
the results of the operational analysis in greater detail. The following headings summarize facilities that
were found to be operating below acceptable LOS thresholds:
INTERSECTIONS
The following study intersections operate at unacceptable LOS during the AM or PM peak hours under
Existing conditions:
▪ East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real
▪ East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
▪ East Branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
▪ Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
▪ Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road
ROADWAYS
All study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing Conditions. There are no roadway
segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
In order to accommodate existing and planned land uses within the City, including future needs within its
Sphere of influence (SOI), traffic carrying capacity improvements to the roadway network will be needed.
New arterial and collector roads will provide access to new and established residential, commercial, and
industrial areas, connecting those areas with the existing local and regional transportation system.
Collector streets will include residential frontage, whereas arterial streets will not. Collector and local
Item 9.b. - Page 24
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 13
roads in neighborhoods will serve those residents. The new roadways and interchanges will continue to
expand the existing network of roadways that characterize the City’s vehicular circulation network.
Bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements are discussed in subsequent sections of this document.
Study Areas have been identified where some major projects are located. Improvements to roadways or
intersections within Study Areas should be coordinated and analyzed together. In addition, intersection
improvements will be required at major intersections along new roadways and improved roadways,
including but not limited to additional turn lanes or channelization, installation of traffic signals, or
construction of roundabouts. These improvement locations are listed in Table 2-1, and shown in Figure
2-2. Additionally, Table 2-2 presents the standard cross-sections and associated design features for the
City’s functional roadway classifications.
Item 9.b. - Page 25
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 14
Table 2-1: Major Circulation Improvements
Roadway Improvement From / To Improvement
East Grand Avenue City Limits El Camino
Real
Streetscape Project
East Branch Street Garden Street Huasna Road Roadway Widening for bicycle
lanes and sidewalk
Fair Oaks Avenue Woodland Drive Traffic Way Complete Streets Project (Road
Diet and bicycle lanes)
Halcyon Road El Camino Real City Limits Complete Streets Project (Road
Diet and bicycle lanes)
Intersection Improvement East-West Roadway North-South Roadway
New Traffic Signal or
Roundabout
East Branch Street Huasna Road/Corbett Canyon
Road
New Traffic Signal or
Roundabout
E Grand Avenue El Camino Real
New Traffic Signal or
Roundabout
Farroll Avenue Halcyon Road
Intersection Improvements East Branch Street Bridge Street/Nevada Street
Realignment of On Ramp East Grand Avenue US 101 Southbound Ramps
Roundabout Fair Oaks Avenue Halcyon Road
New Traffic Signal or
Roundabout
Fair Oaks Avenue Orchard Street
Roundabout East Grand Avenue US 101 Northbound Ramps
Roundabout East Branch Street Traffic Way
New Traffic Signal or
Roundabout
The Pike Elm Street
Interchange Improvement East-West Roadway North-South Roadway
Brisco Road Interchange
Modification Project
Brisco Road US 101
New Interchange Construction
South Traffic Way overcrossing
with ramps, and Fair Oaks
Avenue/Castillo Del Mar
extensions
US 101
Item 9.b. - Page 26
Item 9.b. - Page 27
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 16
Table 2-2: Proposed Standard Cross-Sections
Classification Number
of Lanes
Right of
Way Width
Additional Features
State Freeway 101 4 – 6 lanes 120’ or greater ▪ Caltrans design standards apply, or as
mutually approved
▪ Interchange access only
Primary Arterial Street 4 lanes 110’ ▪ City-controlled access
▪ Includes Class II or IV bikeways, 10’
sidewalks, transit turnouts
▪ Median/Center turn lane and on-street
parking optional
▪ Other optional design features allowed
(see note)
Arterial Street
(includes SR 227)
2 lanes 86’ ▪ State- or City-controlled access
▪ Includes Class II or IV bikeways, 10’
sidewalks, some transit features
▪ Median/Center turn lane and on-street
parking optional
▪ Other optional design features allowed
(see note)
Collector Street 2 lanes 78’ ▪ City-controlled access
▪ Includes Class II bike lanes, 6’ sidewalks,
some transit features
▪ Median/Center turn lane and on-street
parking optional
▪ Other optional design features allowed
(see note)
Local Collector Street 2 lanes 60’ ▪ City-controlled access
▪ Includes Class II bike lanes or Class III
bicycle boulevard, 6’ sidewalks
▪ On-street parking optional
▪ Other optional design features allowed
(see note)
Local Street 2 lanes 52’ ▪ Includes 6’ sidewalks on one or both sides
▪ Full driveway access allowed
▪ Includes on-street parking
▪ Design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or
other special conditions
Note: All street standards shall be reviewed and revised as determined appropriate, including optional features
such as landscaped medians, curb bulb-outs, and parkways, and/or street trees and similar design amenities
when approved by the City. Alternative local street standards for neo-traditional subdivisions or Planned
Developments/Specific Plans will also be considered.
Item 9.b. - Page 28
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 17
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES
Streets & Highways Standards
CT1 Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map (Figure
2-2) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program. Make
efficient use of existing transportation facilities, improve these facilities, and build new
facilities as necessary in accordance with the Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards: Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and State’s adopted
Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each classification. Variations and
modifications in Standards and planned alignments may be permitted with City Council approval
or City Engineer / Public Works Director approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1 Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards appropriate to a
designated connected system of “Scenic Streets and Highways” for resident and visitor
enjoyment.
CT1-1.2 Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be consistent with the
Proposed Standard Cross-Sections shown in Table 2-2.
CT1-1.3 In context of new development, new roadways shall have equal consideration of
minimum versus maximum travel way width, and consideration for private roads and
alleyways as an alternative to full standard local streets.
CT1-2 Intersections: Roundabouts should be considered when evaluating new or modified
intersection controls as an alternative to intersection signalization. Protected active
transportation intersection elements should be considered when intersections are improved
along a protected (Class I or Class IV) bikeway route.
CT1-3 State Facilities: State facilities are to be designed and constructed per Caltrans design
standards or as mutually approved.
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets: 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn lane, access
management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features: minimum 110’ right-of-way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets: 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional landscaped
parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some
transit and other design features; minimum 86’ of right-of-way.
Item 9.b. - Page 29
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 18
CT1-6 Collector Streets: 2 lanes with or without a turn lane; access management, bike and
pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways and on-street parking where feasible; minimum 78’ of right-of-way.
CT1-7 Local Collector Streets: 2 lanes without a turn lane; bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional landscaped parkways and on-
street parking where feasible; minimum 60’ of right-of-way.
CT1-8 Local Streets: 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan,
sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or other special
conditions; minimum 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-9 Complete Streets: Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to enable safe
access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and
abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and revised for design, construction,
operation, and maintenance to achieve a network of complete streets. Optional features include
landscaped medians, curb bulb-outs and parkways and/or street trees and similar design
amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the movement of
vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit, bicyclists, and
pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification and adjacent land use.
CT1-9.1 Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience of
pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of consideration to
automobiles.
CT1-9.2 Use roadway rehabilitation and maintenance projects as opportunities to
introduce or enhance multimodal facilities and amenities by making the best use of
available right of way, including narrowing travel lanes to standard dimensions, striping
new or enhanced bikeways, adding or enhancing crosswalks, improving intersection
markings, and other transportation “best practices”.
CT1-9.3 Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects by closing gaps in multimodal
networks and enhancing the quality of multimodal facilities and amenities.
CT1-9.4 Improve the existing street network to minimize nonmotorized and transit travel
times and improve the mobility experience of transit, bicycle, and walking trips between
new projects and surrounding land uses in an effort to reduce vehicle trips.
Item 9.b. - Page 30
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 19
CT1-9.5 Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists of all skill
levels and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other mobility limitations.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements: Consider alternative improvements to traditional street,
highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards, which maximize access
to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent mobility to all roadway users. These
improvements may include treatments that improve the safety and/or comfort of active
transportation and transit users, such as consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets),
green paint for conflict markings, buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two -stage turns, and
other alternative striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City
Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT1-11 Auto Circulation: Provide efficient citywide automobile circulation by maintaining and,
where necessary, improving local and regional roadway facilities. Continue to seek opportunities
to improve connectivity throughout the City and to maintain safe and efficient regional
connectivity with improved access to US 101.
CT1-12 Signal Operations: Provide and maintain coordinated traffic control systems that move
traffic within and through the City in an efficient and orderly manner. Upgrade systems as
technology evolves.
CT1-13 Safety: Maintain and periodically update a Local Roadway Safety Plan consistent with
state and federal requirements for Highway Safety Improvement Program calls-for-projects.
CT1-14 Access Management: Minimize, to the maximum extent feasible, the number of access
points along arterial roadways, including by consolidating or relocating driveways to provide for
more efficient traffic movement.
Vehicle Miles Traveled
CT2 Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and the City’s
adopted Policy.
CT2-1: Reduce VMT: Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of significance, as
established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA
pursuant to SB 743.
Automobile Level of Service (LOS)
CT3 Attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS “D” or better on all street segments
and controlled intersections to the maximum extent feasible.
Item 9.b. - Page 31
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 20
CT3-1 Degradation of LOS: New development, which is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS
E or below or further exacerbate conditions already below LOS D, shall be required to make
transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation to the maximum extent
feasible. Improvements to non-automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or
intersection may also be considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
CT3-2 Transportation Monitoring: The City should conduct periodic traffic counts, monitor
selected streets and model arterial and collector street network.
CT3-2.1 The City should periodically review actual system performance to consider
Capital Improvement Programs, operational improvements, and/or policy revision and
refinement.
CT3-3 Transportation Study Requirements: Require that General Plan Amendments, Specific
Plans, Rezoning Applications, and development projects that generate 100 or more peak hour
trips are studied in accordance with the City’s adopted Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
Transportation Studies may also be required at the discretion of the City’s Public Works and/or
Planning Departments.
Parking
CT4 Establish and manage on street parking to serve the primary purposes of the uses of each
street while balancing the interferences that on-street parking may have on the primarily
purposes of those streets.
CT4-1 On-Street Parking: The City shall manage curb parking in business and commercial
districts to provide for high turnover and short-term use to those visiting businesses and public
facilities.
CT4-1.1 Management of on-street parking shall not preclude consideration of converting
on-street parking spaces to parklets.
CT4-2 Village Core Parking Lots: Develop adequate public or shared off-street parking lots
conveniently located behind and beside buildings in the Village Core and East Grand Avenue
corridor, consistent with area design guidelines.
CT4-3 Parking in-lieu districts: Support parking district(s) to collect in-lieu fees from new
development to construct public parking where parking requirements cannot be met.
CT4-4 Parking in Industrial Areas: Encourage secure off-street parking for tractor-trailer rigs in
industrial land use areas where feasible.
Item 9.b. - Page 32
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 21
CT4-5 Parking in Agricultural Areas: Discourage on-street parking in Agricultural areas to
enhance visibility and minimize trespassing.
Coordinated Land Use & Circulation
CT5 Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation system
and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such as safe and
uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of greenhouse gases, air,
and noise pollution, and access to bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
CT5-1 Government Code Consistency: Provide and maintain a citywide circulation system that is
correlated with planned land uses in the City and surrounding areas in the region consistent with
Government Code §65302.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development: Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments” and
coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family residential and special
needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and near Office, Regional Commercial,
Business Park, and major Community Facility areas.
CT5-2.1 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that serve
regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial areas and the Village
Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street missed use and commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way and Rancho
Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street
corridors.
CT5-3 High Density Development: Consider higher density allowance and reduced parking
requirements within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating Development Code.
CT5-4 Community Design: Utilize the circulation system as a positive element of community
design, including street trees and landscaped parkways and medians, special streetscape features
in Mixed Use corridors and Village Core, and undergrounding of utilities, particularly along major
streets.
CT5-5 Provision of Rights of Way: When new development occurs in the vicinity of adopted
“Study Areas” as shown in the Circulation Map (Figure 2-2) or “Plan Lines”, and where legally and
financially feasible, require installation or funding of all or a portion of right-of-way and
improvements associated with new development.
Item 9.b. - Page 33
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 22
CT5-6 Building Code Bicycle Facility Requirements: Update Building Code to include
requirements for enhanced bicycle facilities such as, showers, repair stations, e-bike chargers,
lockers, etc., for buildings that support large employers
CT5-5.1 Update Development Code to include bicycle-parking requirements for new
development.
CT5-7 Building Setback Lines: The City shall amend its municipal code enabling adoption of
official building setback lines for the city, and to provide for the designation, recording,
enforcement of, and appeal from such official building setback lines for the purposes of
conveying planned multimodal transportation infrastructure. The amended Municipal Code shall
prohibit issuance of building permits for structures within designated setback areas.
CT5-8 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Plan and prioritize Village Core and East Grand Avenue
corridor improvements that reduce congestion and promote non-motorized travel between
nearby complimentary uses.
CT5-9 Travel Demand Management: Consider ways to shift travel demand away from the peak
period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, especially in situations
where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators (e.g., large retail developments
on highway corridor). Strategies to consider include:
a) Requiring employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use;
b) Requiring shuttle service to major events and destinations;
c) Requiring events to occur at off-peak hours;
d) Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large shopping or
office centers; and
e) Performing periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control system with
emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to optimize flow along
arterial corridors.
Planning & Funding
CT6 Coordinate circulation and transportation planning and funding of collector and arterial
street and highway improvements with other local, County, SLOCOG, State and federal
agencies. Request contribution to major street improvement projects from other
jurisdictions that generate traffic within the City.
CT6-1 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Coordinate and support SLOCOG updates to the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) to maintain consistency with the City of Arroyo Grande’s General Plan.
CT6-2 Interchange Priorities: Coordinate and support progress on the Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Traffic Way/Fair Oaks Avenue interchange improvements to US Route 101.
Item 9.b. - Page 34
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 23
CT6-3 County Impact Fee Program Support: Encourage the County to establish a “Road Impact
Fee” within Arroyo Grande Fringe areas of the County to fund new development’s proportional
share of transportation improvements.
CT6-4 City Transportation Impact Fee Program: Maintain and periodically update a multimodal
city circulation and transportation impact fee program for new or intensified development in
Arroyo Grande to ensure proportional share developer participation and implementation of the
City’s adopted multimodal infrastructure plans, programs, and policies.
CT6-5 Right of Way Acquisition: Pursue acquisition of public street right-of-way as opportunity
for dedication and/or purchase arises. Attempt to obtain ultimate right-of-way for street
improvements at the time of development, except when lesser right-of-way will avoid significant
social, neighborhood, or environmental impacts and will perform equivalent traffic movement
function.
CT6-5.1 Plan lines establish planned right-of-way acquisitions necessary to implement
future roadway improvements, plan lines are intended to prevent development from
obstructing or precluding planned infrastructure. Adopt plan lines, or planned right-of-
way acquisitions, as necessary to accommodate planned widening, extension, or
realignment improvements and include Right-of-Way acquisition costs into
Transportation Impact Fee Program.
CT6-6 Regional Travel Demand Model Consistency: Encourage Caltrans, SLOCOG, and the
County to refine and maintain a regional transportation demand model to be consistent with
adopted City plans and policies and to assist in regional and local circulation and transportation
planning, CIP funding, and new development project environmental and impact analysis.
CT6-7 County MOU for Development Review: Pursue MOU with the County for referral of
development projects and long-range plans in the County’s Nipomo Mesa area.
CT6-8 Supplemental Private Funding: Utilize assessment and improvement districts and other
supplemental private funding to correct local area deficiencies such as inadequate parking, transit
and streetscape enhancement, or completion of local street or trail segments that benefit the
area.
CT6-9 Regional Coordination: As both City and regional travel increase transportation demand,
work cooperatively with regional partner agencies, including Caltrans, San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments, San Luis Obispo County, and others, to plan and fund improvement projects that
increase roadway capacity while maintaining or improving access to multi-modal facilities
following the City’s community and circulation priorities.
Item 9.b. - Page 35
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 24
CT6-9.1 Coordinate local actions with State, regional, County, and neighboring agencies
to ensure consistency between local and regional actions.
CT6-9.2 Coordinate with partner agencies to implement regional transit solutions as part
of the SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategy.
CT6-10 Debt Financing: Consider debt financing for projects identified in the Transportation
Impact Fee Program to advance high priority improvements such as but not limited to the Brisco
Interchange project.
CT6-11 Environmental Clearance: Any future circulation improvement projects identified in this
Circulation Element shall implement the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative
Declaration (MND) prepared during the update of the Circulation Element (Initial Study/Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update,
Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California. SWCA Environmental Consultants. May 2021 ).
In addition, future circulation improvement projects shall be evaluated at the time of proposed
development to determine whether the MND prepared for the most recent update of the
Circulation Element can be relied on (tiered from) to document compliance with CEQA, if the
particular improvement is exempt from CEQA, and/or if further CEQA analysis is required for the
particular project or proposed improvement.
Neighborhood Traffic Management
CT7 Provide safe and well-connected neighborhood streets that balance automotive
circulation needs with neighborhood context and bicycle and pedestrian users’ safety.
CT7-1 Local Streets: On residential, Local Streets strive to achieve an average daily (ADT)
automobile volume of 1,500 or less.
CT7-2 Local Collector Streets: On Local Collector Streets strive to achieve an average daily (ADT)
automobile volume of 3,000 or less.
CT7-3 Degradation of Neighborhood Traffic Conditions: New development that causes Local
Streets to exceed 1,500 ADT, Local Collector streets to exceed 3,000 ADT, or further exacerbates
streets already exceeding these thresholds shall be required to implement traffic calming
measures on those affected neighborhood streets to the maximum extent feasible.
CT7-4 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines : The City shall maintain and periodically
updates its Neighborhood Traffic Calming Guidelines in accordance with industry best practices.
CT7-5 Non-Automobile Connections: Design new street network and modify existing street
network where possible to enable direct physical connections within and between residential
Item 9.b. - Page 36
Chapter 2: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 25
areas, shopping destinations, employment centers, and neighborhood parks/open spaces,
including, where appropriate, connections accessible only by pedestrians and bicycles.
Item 9.b. - Page 37
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 26
Chapter 3:
Multimodal Travel
Item 9.b. - Page 38
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 27
PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ROUTES
The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, which includes proposed
bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to complete the partial network already
in place in the City and connecting to adjacent communities. The plan encourages the use of walking and
bicycling and recognizes the following functional classifications of bicycle facilities.
Class I Bike Path
Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive
use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized. Class I bikeways must be
compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These bikeways are intended to
provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational opportunities as compared to facilities that share
right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane
Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on each side of a street or
highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike lanes ranges between four and
six feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curb and gutter). Bike lanes are demarcated by
a six-inch white stripe, signage, and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route
Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street
or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs and shared lane marking pavement
stencils. Shared lane markings or “Sharrows” help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use the
full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane markings
help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and a bicycle to
travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily recommended on low-speed
streets.
While Class III routes do not provide measures of separation, they have an important function in
providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law, bicycles are allowed on all roadways in California
except on freeways when a suitable alternate route exists. However, Class III bikeways serve to identify
roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway
No Bikeway Designation. A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not officially designated as a bikeway.
This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and recreation. In some instances, entire street
systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking
Item 9.b. - Page 39
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 28
for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In other cases, prior to designation as a bikeway , routes may need
improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Bikeway (Separated/Protected Bikeway/Cycle Track)
Known as separated bikeways, protected bikeways, or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways provide a separate
travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the roadway and are protected
from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade
separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical barriers, or on -street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Highway Design Manual (HDM, July 2020). It
is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as Class I, II, III, and IV should not be construed as a
hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other. Each class of bikeway has its appropriate
application.
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities” (2012) and National Association of City Transportation Officials “Urban
Bikeway Design Guide” are used as resources to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Bicycle Boulevard
Bicycle Boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in order to prioritize bicycle
safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
▪ Slow traffic speed and low volume.
▪ Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
▪ Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
▪ Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
▪ Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the roadway
is a priority route for bicyclists.
Item 9.b. - Page 40
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 29
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For instance,
diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block but discourage through traffic
by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also calm traffic and improve pedestrian safety as
well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle Boulevards are generally applicable to local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes
Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a designated buffer space
separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane. A buffered
bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered preferential lanes (section 3D-01). Buffered
bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the traveled way, allow room for bicyclists to pass
without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and can be used to provide a buffer between on-street
parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes are ideal for streets with extra lanes or extra lane width,
and along roadways with higher travel speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green Colored Bike Facilities
Green Colored Bike Facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle lane
through an intersection or transition trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane markings. The
Federal Highway Administration has issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15, 2011 for the optional
use of green colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.
Bike Boxes
Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the crosswalk at
signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to motorists by getting ahead
of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle incursion into crosswalks. Bike Boxes
also improve safety for conflicts with right-turning vehicles when the traffic signal turns green. Bike boxes
can be utilized to facilitate left turn positioning and gives priority to cyclists.
EXISTING BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN FACILITY CONDITIONS
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as Class II
and Class III bikeways. The city also has short segments of off-street trails typically consisting of soft
surface (decomposed granite) materials.
Arterials and collectors that are north-south roadways which do not have bicycle facilities, include
portions of Elm Street, Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road, Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park
Boulevard. Arterials and collectors that are east-west roadways which do not have bicycle facilities
include portions of Farroll Avenue, E. Grand Avenue, E. Branch Street, and E. Cherry Avenue. Subsequent
Bicycle LTS analysis is included.
Item 9.b. - Page 41
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 30
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the City for
active transportation modes. As part of this Circulation Element update, roadway facilities will be
identified where it is possible to modify the existing cross-section and increase the active transportation
components for pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed Circulation Element Policies are
requirements to update the existing City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan. It is proposed for the bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment of bicycle Level
of Traffic Stress (LTS) will be required to specifically evaluate the performance of the existing bicycle
system and to help identify bicycle facility improvements.
Existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
Bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS). LTS are
calculated for roadway segments and intersections using the methods documented in the paper, “Low
Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity”, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-19, May 2012. The
figure below presents the four scoring classifications.
Figure 3-1: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions
Existing Bicycle LTS was evaluated Citywide on arterials and collectors. Major gaps exist along current
Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike lanes, or bike lanes only in one
direction), at the following locations, negatively impacting LTS:
▪ East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
▪ East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and approximately 300’ east of Brisco Road
▪ Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
▪ Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
▪ Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
▪ Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
The analysis and results of the existing LTS analysis conducted for the City of Arroyo Grande are detailed
in the Existing Conditions Background Report.
Item 9.b. - Page 42
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 31
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCo Transit), a
branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SoCo Transit will merge with SLORTA in
early 2021. Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 are loop routes that serve major arterial roadways in the City as
shown in Figure 3-2. The Avila-Pismo Trolley (not shown on Figure) connects to SoCo Transit Routes at the
Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town Center/Walmart, and Ramona
Gardens Park, and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium Outlets.
Figure 3-2: Transit Services in Arroyo Grande
Item 9.b. - Page 43
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 32
PLANNED MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS
The framework of every circulation system is the City’s public street network to move people and goods.
From this basic framework of public streets, other mode specific, like pedestrian and bike paths and
private streets, are added to accommodate all modes of travel for life’s daily needs. The goal of this local
and regional planning effort is to interconnect the City and adjacent communities seamlessly via a safe
and convenient bicycle and pedestrian network for recreational and commuter use, as well as improving
air quality by reducing vehicular trips. Various multimodal improvements have been recommended or
approved within the General Plan and the various planning documents in order to address the
multimodal needs of the transportation system. Specifically, the City’s current Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
(2012) details proposed multimodal improvements for Arroyo Grande .
Consistent with the proposed hierarchy of streets in Figure 2-2 and the current City Bicycle & Trails
Master Plan, the Circulation Plan for Bicycle Facility Improvements are shown in Figure 3-3, and the
Circulation Plan for Pedestrian and Transit Improvements are shown in Figure 3-4. The improvements in
the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master Plan have been modified in some cases to reflect the amended
policies and standard cross-sections in this Circulation Element. These changes include the option for
Class II or Class IV bikeways on arterial streets and the option for Class II bikeways or Class III bicycle
boulevards on collector streets. Refinements to these maps were also a result of additional transportation
analysis and public input. These improvements have been created to guide the future multimodal
circulation planning and improvements to the City of Arroyo Grande’s circulation system.
Item 9.b. - Page 44
Item 9.b. - Page 45
Item 9.b. - Page 46
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 35
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES
Bicycle Transportation
CT8 Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle Improvements Map
(Figure 3-3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities, improve these facilities,
and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all areas of the
City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize connections with schools,
parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1 The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the existing
bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing offsite gaps
per the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan to the maximum extent feasible. Improvements maybe
facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-2.1 New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not obstruct
or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan and proposed
improvements (Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4) in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications &
Engineering Standards, State Engineering Standards & Specifications, and the National
Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
CT8-3.1 Update the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan, to incorporate pedestrian travel, in accordance with State guidelines
and industry best practices.
CT8-3.2 Ensure that the future updates to the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
maintains consistency with the requirements of the Streets and Highway Code in order to
be eligible for further funding for improvements from the State, such as the Active
Transportation Program (ATP).
CT8-4 Class I Bike Path: An essential part of developing a low-stress bicycle network, these off-
street paths and trails are designated for both pedestrian and bicycle use.
Item 9.b. - Page 47
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 36
CT8-5 Class II Bike lanes: On-street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated from
automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, Class II bike lanes shall be provided
to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto lanes.
When Class II bike lanes exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the facility
shall be converted to protected Class IV bikeway or a parallel Class I to the maximum extent
feasible.
CT8-6 Class III Bike Route: On-street automobile lanes shared by both bicycles and
automobiles. In order to increase awareness and visibility of bicyclists sharing the roadway with
motorized vehicles, Class III bicycle facilities shall include respective signage (Bikes May Use Full
Lane) and markings such as shared lane markings (sharrows) to the maximum extent feasible.
When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the
facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Bike Boulevard: On Local Collectors where Class II bike lanes are not present, and
on local streets where LTS 3 is exceeded, Class III bike routes should be upgraded to the
maximum extent feasible with features commensurate with a bicycle boulevard.
When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the
facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes: On-street separated bikeways reserved for use by
bicyclists only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and sidewalk s.
Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or two-way facilities on one
side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete curbs, landscaping, parking lanes,
bollards, or other vertical elements.
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
CT9 Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better on all
bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress network.
CT9-1 Designation of LTS Standards: The City shall designate and adopt context-specific LTS
standards that exceed the general LTS 3 goal, including designation of a low-stress bicycle
network of complimentary LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities, as part of an Active Transportation Plan,
and/or through Safe Routes to School Plan(s).
CT9-2 Degradation of LTS: New development which is projected to degrade bicycle LTS below
the designated standard, or further exacerbate conditions already below the standard, shall be
Item 9.b. - Page 48
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 37
required to make transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation to the
maximum extent feasible.
Pedestrian Transportation
CT10 Schedule and complete projects to fill gaps in City’s sidewalk network and construct new
connections identified in the Pedestrian and Transit Infrastructure Improvements Map
(Figure 3-4) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program.
CT10-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas of
the City as a priority system, prioritize connections with schools, parks, transit, and major public
facilities.
CT10-1.1 The City should strive to include implementation of planned pedestrian facilities
as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT10-2 Pedestrian Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the
existing pedestrian network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing
offsite gaps. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT10-2.1 New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of pedestrian infrastructure.
CT10-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement pedestrian infrastructure in accordance with City and
State Engineering Standards & Specifications.
CT10-3.1 Provide pedestrian facilities that are accessible to persons with disabilities and
ensure that roadway improvement projects address accessibility by employing universal
design concepts consistent with ADA requirements.
CT10-3.2 Strive to attain an effective walkway width (continuous clear path of travel) of
8’ or more in high pedestrian traffic areas.
CT10-3.3 Pedestrian walkways on roadways with speed limits above 35 mph shall be
buffered (e.g., on-street parking, bike lanes, landscape strips, etc.) from the adjacent
travel lane to the maximum extent feasible.
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan: Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan into a Citywide
Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode improvement plan and policies.
Item 9.b. - Page 49
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 38
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL POLICIES
Safe Routes to School
CT11 Create safe and inviting environments for students, families, and staff to walk, bicycle,
and use public transportation to and from school.
CT11-1 Develop Safe Routes to School Plan(s): Develop a focused Safe Routes to School Plan (or
Plans) for all K-12 schools in Arroyo Grande to improve safe and convenient walking and biking to
school.
CT11-2 Designate Low-Stress Bicycle Network: Designate a low-stress bicycle network that
supports safe bicycle access to schools for all ages and abilities. A network of LTS 1 and LTS 2
facilities should be designated in the vicinity of schools when preparing and updating Safe Routes
to School Plans and/or the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
CT11-3 Prioritize Active Transportation Network Improvements: Prioritize the closure of gaps in
the pedestrian network (sidewalks, crosswalks) and the low-stress bicycle network. Seek
connections and paths between homes and schools, especially where dead-end streets, cul-de-
sacs, and other street patterns impede circulation. Identify, improve, and formalize “shortcuts”
and “goat paths” where feasible and implement wayfinding.
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES
Transit Service
CT12 Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit operators
and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops: Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of all
residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1 New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit stops shall
be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum ¼ mi walking
distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum extent feasible.
CT12-1.2 Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider “best
practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban Street Design
Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit islands, to minimize
conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3 Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop elements such
as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding, consistent with “best
Item 9.b. - Page 50
Chapter 3: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 39
practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design Guide, Urban Bikeway Design
Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators: In cooperation with the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) or
other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit system for local and regional
travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or disabled persons.
CT12-2.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial and/or
collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, park and ride, transfer and other
facilities or features to be provided in connection with new developments.
CT12-2.2 Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement transit
intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal priority, queue
jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
CT12-3 Employers: The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public transit
and/or provide van/carpools, private shuttles, or other trip reduction (flex time, telecommuting,
bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts: Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and other educational
institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system, including parking and loading
areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit providers, public parks, and maintenance and
storage facilities, and coordination with safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
CT12-5 Marketing: Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing and
promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit services available
for local and regional trips.
Item 9.b. - Page 51
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 40
Chapter 4:
Truck Routes & Goods
Movements
Item 9.b. - Page 52
Chapter 4: Truck Routes & Goods Movements
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 41
RAILROADS
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The nearest
Amtrak station is located in City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of the City of Arroyo Grande. The primary
access to the station is on W. Grand Avenue east of Highway 1. The SoCo Transit Bus Route 21 provides
service to the railway station for City of Arroyo Grande.
AIRPORT
Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. The SoCo Transit Bus route 21 provides
service to this airport for City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational activities and is
accessible by Highway 1 via W. Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the City of San
Luis Obispo about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by three commercial airlines providing
services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Francisco, and Seattle. It is also home to
full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is located on the west side of SR
227, about 2 miles east of US 101. Public transit service is provided to the airport by SLO Transit Route 1B
(City of San Luis Obispo) and transfer via Regional Route 10.
TRUCK ROUTES
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles through
and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum annoyance to
residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for large trucks, known as
STAA trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on the National Network including the
Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 highway through the City of Arroyo Grande and
statewide is a National Truck Network. California State Route 1 is a California Legal Truck Network, north
of City of Arroyo Grande passing through the San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access
Arroyo Grande is SR 227. SR 227 north of Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck
Network and the California Legal Advisory Truck Route. Figure 4-1 presents a map of approved truck
routes, provided by the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 53
FIGURE 4-1
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.4_TruckRoutes.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 09:46
TRUCK ROUTES
Item 9.b. - Page 54
Chapter 4: Truck Routes & Goods Movements
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element | Page 43
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES
Truck & Emergency Services Transportation
CT13 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the arterial
and collector street network to minimize impact on local streets, particularly residential
neighborhoods.
CT13-1 Truck Routes: Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining city’s designated
routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT13-1.1 Continue to sign truck routes and ensure that clear signage is provided from
regional gateways to truck routes in the City.
CT13-2 Deliveries: Promote off-peak truck deliveries within the village core.
CT13-3 Emergency Access Design: Emergency access design standards shall limit cul-de-sac
lengths to the maximum extent feasible, provide a logical grid or connected system of local
streets providing at least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize through traffic on
local streets, particularly traversing single-family residential neighborhoods.
Item 9.b. - Page 55
City of Arroyo Grande | Circulation Element
Appendix A:
Existing Conditions
Background Report
Item 9.b. - Page 56
GHD | 669 Pacific Street, Suite A, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
11144936 | 2101 | R1584RPT007.docx | November 6 2020
Circulation Element
Update
Existing Conditions Background Report
Prepared for:
City of Arroyo Grande
Final Report
Item 9.b. - Page 57
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page i
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 9.b. - Page 58
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Existing Setting .................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends ................................................................................ 4
1.3 Roadway System ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 State Freeways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.2 State Highways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.3 Arterial Streets .................................................................................................. 9
1.3.4 Collectors ........................................................................................................ 10
1.3.5 Local Streets ................................................................................................... 10
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and Parameters .................................................................. 11
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) .......................................................................................... 11
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies ........................................................................................ 11
2.1.2 VMT Policies ................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations .............................................................................. 13
2.2.1 Intersection Operations .................................................................................. 13
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ...................................................................... 14
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations ....................................................................... 16
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters ...................................................................... 16
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies ................................................................................. 16
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress .......................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria ........................................................................................ 18
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy .......................................................................................... 20
3. Existing Traffic Operations ......................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies ............................................ 21
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ........................................................................ 25
3.3 Truck Routes .................................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................... 30
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions ............................................................ 33
Item 9.b. - Page 59
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 2
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis ................................................ 36
3.6 Public Transportation ....................................................................................................... 38
3.7 Rail ................................................................................................................................... 39
3.8 Air ..................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure Index
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Figure 1.2 Roadway Functional Classifications .................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions ............................................................. 18
Figure 3.1 Existing Intersection Lane Geometrics & Control ............................................................ 22
Figure 3.2 Existing Intersection Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................ 23
Figure 3.3 Existing Daily Roadway Traffic Volumes ......................................................................... 26
Figure 3.4 Map of Truck Routes in the City of Arroyo Grande ......................................................... 29
Figure 3.5 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan..................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.6 City of Arroyo Grande Sidewalk Inventory ...................................................................... 34
Figure 3.7 Existing Bikeways Map .................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3.8 City of Arroyo Grande Major Roads Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ...................... 37
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande .......................................................... 38
Table Index
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics........................................................... 5
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections ............................................................. 15
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds ........................................................... 16
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters ....................................................................................... 16
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes .................................... 18
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic ........................................................................................... 19
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes ............................................................................................. 19
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations .................................................................... 24
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ....................................................................... 27
Item 9.b. - Page 60
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 3
Appendix Index
Appendix A Traffic Counts
Appendix B Synchro Reports
Appendix C Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix D Bicycle LTS Analysis Worksheets
Item 9.b. - Page 61
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 4
1. Introduction
The City of Arroyo Grande has retained GHD to complete updates to the City’s General Plan
Circulation Element (CE), associated Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) and nexus study, and
finalization of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines. As part of the CE update, this Existing
Conditions Background Report has been prepared in order to document available background data,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), existing traffic operations, multimodal facilities, transit services, and
other pertinent transportation information describing the City’s transportation baseline. This report
summarizes the City’s existing roadway facilities in the context of a regional setting and existing
service levels on critical facilities. Daily and peak hour traffic volumes are presented and analyzed,
and facilities with deficit capacity are identified. The Existing Conditions sets the transportation
baseline and will be utilized as the groundwork for forecasting transportation conditions, which will
then be utilized to assess future transportation needs.
The City’s ultimate objective is to update their Circulation Element to include policies, goals, and
objectives that will create an optimal multi-modal transportation system for the City. Policies goals,
and objectives will be consistent with the requirements of AB 1358, "The California Complete Street
Act", and SB 743, the change from Level of Service to VMT as the measure of transportation
impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to provide integrated smart growth
planning. The updated Circulation Element and TIF will also bring the City’s planning efforts in
compliance with the goals set forth in San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2019
Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) as required by SB
375, “The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008”, authorized by AB 32, “The
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006”.
1.1 Existing Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San
Luis Obispo County, California. The City lies about 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area
and 150 miles north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of
114 feet. The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis
Obispo, along the US 101 coastal corridor. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated
areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast dire ction. US 101
is the primary State highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San
Luis Obispo County and the State. State Route 227 also provides more localized access to/from the
City, connecting Arroyo Grande with the City of San Luis Obispo and surrounding County
community.
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends
Data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2009-2013 (2013) and 2013-2017 (2017) American
Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, form the basis of the following demographic analysis.
Based on the ACS data, the population in the City has increased by roughly 560 from 17,411 in
2013 to 17,971 in 2017, approximately a 3.2% increase.
Item 9.b. - Page 62
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 5
Prior to examining the various transportation modes in the City, the following sub-section will
examine some recent trends and current facts concerning commuter mode-choice and travel times
in the City. Table 1.1 presents the various means of transportation reported in the City of Arroyo
Grande between 2013 and 2017 ACS estimates.
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics
As presented in Table 1.1, the number of workers in the City did not increase significantly between
the two five year estimates. This increase in workers is approximately 2.2%. Overall, these statistics
indicate a consistent trend of a large percentage of commuters driving alone. Carpooling ,
motorcycle use, and walking decreased between 2013 and 2017, while biking and working at home
increased. Public transit use remained consistent.
Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1 present the reported travel times from the 2013 and 2017 ACS. As
presented in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, the average travel time to work for all workers increased by
1.6 minutes, a 7% increase from the 2013 ACS.
Number Percent Number Percent
Workers 16 and over 35,401 -36,196 -
Car, Truck or Van 31,188 88.1%32,070 88.6%
Drove Alone 27,082 76.5%28,124 77.7%
Carpooled 4,107 11.6%3,945 10.9%
Public Transportation (excludes taxi)389 1.1%398 1.1%
Motocycle, taxi, or other 354 1.0%290 0.8%
Bicycle 389 1.1%434 1.2%
Walked 991 2.8%688 1.9%
Worked at Home 2,089 5.9%2,317 6.4%
Means of Transportation
2013-2017 ACS2009-2013 ACS
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
Item 9.b. - Page 63
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 6
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work
Number Percent Number Percent
Did not work at home 33,312 -33,879 -
Less than 10 minutes 5,397 16.2%3,930 11.6%
10 to 14 minutes 5,463 16.4%4,946 14.6%
15 to 19 minutes 5,996 18.0%6,742 19.9%
20 to 24 minutes 6,363 19.1%6,606 19.5%
25 to 29 minutes 2,065 6.2%2,914 8.6%
30 to 34 minutes 4,430 13.3%4,709 13.9%
35 to 44 minutes 1,299 3.9%1,660 4.9%
45 to 59 minutes 1,099 3.3%949 2.8%
60+ minutes 1,166 3.5%1,457 4.3%
Mean Travel Time (minutes)
Travel Time
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
23.221.6
2009-2013 ACS 2013-2017 ACS
Item 9.b. - Page 64
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 7
As summarized in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, more commuters are experiencing longer travel times
to work (15+ minutes) in 2017 than in 2013. A large majority of commuters, about 70%, spent less
than 25 minutes commuting. Approximately 40% of commuters had a commute time of 20-25
minutes, indicating a presumably high amount of non-localized employment.
1.3 Roadway System
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses
throughout the City and beyond. A route’s design, including number of lanes needed, is determined
by its functional classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient
movement at the development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element.” The study area and
existing roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 1.2.
1.3.1 State Freeways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other road, railways
or pedestrian pathway, and instead are served by interchange are classified as highways. Highways
can either be toll or non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 mph. The
following freeways service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101
serves as the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo
County (and other portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and
the Los Angeles urban basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major
connection between and through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo
County, US 101 represents a major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general
four-lane divided freeway cross-section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo
Grande, US 101 forms full-access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way
and Fair Oaks Avenue.
1.3.2 State Highways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions with cross streets are characterized by at grade
intersections rather than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or
undivided roadways, with speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highways
service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
State Route 227 (SR 227) is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north-south
direction connecting the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a
general two-lane highway type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a
significant parallel commuter route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City
of Arroyo Grande.
Item 9.b. - Page 65
Fair Oaks AvenueJames WayOak Park BoulevardElm StreetThe PikeHalcyon RoadEl Camino RealValley RoadFair Oaks AvenueEast Grand AvenueWestBranchStreetHuasna RdRodeoDriveFarroll AvenueTallyHoRoadAsh StreetRanchoParkwayTrafficW ayCorbettCanyonRoadEast Branch StreetBranchMillRoadBrisco RoadCourtland StreetCaminoMercadoEast Cherry AvenueCarpenter Canyon Road£¤101£¤10112272271227FIGURE 1.20 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5MilesProject No.Revision No.411144936Date11/02/2020CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORTMap Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 FeetPaper Size ANSI AoData source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.Created by: rsouthernN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG1.2_RoadClassification.mxdPrint date: 02 Nov 2020 - 15:04LegendCity LimitsUS 101Sphere of Influence4-Lane (Primary)Arterial2-Lane Arterial Collector Residential Collector RoadsState Routes andHighwaysROADWAY FUNCTIONALCLASSIFICATIONItem 9.b. - Page 66
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 9
1.3.3 Arterial Streets
Arterial facilities serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily
to distribute cross-town traffic from freeways / highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Specifications and Engineering Standards define two categories: Primary Arterials and Arterials.
Primary Arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and Arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane.
Within the City, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds
ranging from 30 to 45 mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent
land uses. The following arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown
commercial thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The
duality of purpose of this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking does create safety and
capacity concerns. The high volume of traffic (18,500 ADT) at times conflicts with the community’s
desire to have a pedestrian-friendly downtown.
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north-south between State Route 1 (SR 1) in
the south, and Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between
Ash Street and Grand Avenue.
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east-west connectivity
across US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm
Street in the west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design
standards.
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east-west Primary arterial through and within the City (two
travel lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the
City). West of the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and
extends further west to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand
Avenue becomes East Branch Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR
227. Grand Avenue represents one of the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed
westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north-south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the
City of Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City,
with the southernmost terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue,
Halcyon Road is a four-lane primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road
and El Camino Real, forms a full-access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand
Avenue interchange.
Oak Park Boulevard is two-to-five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern
City limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjacent Cities of Grover Beach and
Pismo Beach. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101, and extends south
of US 101 as a four-lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south beyond
The Pike as 22nd Street. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old Oak
Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a
northeasterly direction to connect with SR 227.
Item 9.b. - Page 67
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 10
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends
from East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to
the south.
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to
State Route 1 (SR 1) south of the City limits.
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road, and also a frontage road east of US 101 with both
commercial and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street,
and provides important circulation and commercial accessibility east of the freeway.
1.3.4 Collectors
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to
residential, commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications and Engineering
Standards define two categories: Collectors and Residential Collectors. Collectors feature turn
lanes at intersections and may feature a two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), while residential collectors
do not have turn lanes.
James Way is a predominantly-east-west two-lane road serving as a residential collector between
Oak Park Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
Printz Road is a predominantly-east-west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s
northern limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for
several small local roads.
The Pike is a two-lane east-west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion
of The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City limits.
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north-south collector that runs between West Branch Street and
James Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along W Branch
Street, including the Walmart, and residential areas north.
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino
Mercado, Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo
Drive, and Tally Ho Road are other important roadways serving Residential Collector functions
within the City.
1.3.5 Local Streets
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications map (Figure 1.2) as freeways, highways,
arterials, or collectors are designated as local streets.
Item 9.b. - Page 68
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 11
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and
Parameters
The following section outlines the analysis parameters and methodologies that will be used to
quantify the measures of circulation system effectiveness.
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
SB 743 was signed into law in 2013, with the intent to better align CEQA practices with statewide
sustainability goals related to infill development, active transportation, and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new
metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. Among the changes to
the State CEQA Guidelines was removal of vehicle delay and Level of Service (LOS) from
consideration as environmental impacts under CEQA. For land use projects, OPR identified Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita (for residential), VMT per employee (for office), and net VMT (for
retail) as new metrics for transportation analysis. For transportation projects, lead agencies for
roadway capacity projects have discretion, consistent with CEQA and planning requ irements, to
choose which methodology to use to evaluate transportation impacts.
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies
Various methodologies are currently available to calculate VMT. Travel demand models, sketch
models or planning tools, spreadsheet models, research, and data can all be used to calculate and
estimate VMT. GHD is investigating local VMT further and will update this section based on the
results of additional analysis and validation.
Boundary-Based and Project-Based VMT
Not all VMT is measured equally, and not all models are equally equipped to assess VMT.
Boundary-based VMT is calculated by multiplying traffic volumes on all roadway segments in a
study area by each segment’s length. This type of VMT is easily calculated, but is not adequate for
CEQA analysis under SB 743. Project-based (or tour-based) VMT is more challenging to calculate,
as it requires estimating or measuring the length of individual trips by purpose, where trips cross
study area and jurisdictional boundaries.
SB 743 generally requires project-based VMT to be estimated, since boundary-based VMT
approaches do not account for the full lengths of trips that leave a particular study area (whether
that be a City, County, or State). For this reason, regional travel demand models, “big data”, and
household travel surveys that are not limited by local jurisdictional boundaries are the preferred
tools to estimate VMT under SB 743.
Published Data
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments’ Staff Report dated October 2, 2019 states baseline
and recommended VMT for incorporated Cities and County communities, based on the regional
Travel Demand Model. This information is presented below.
Item 9.b. - Page 69
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 12
The Baseline Regional VMT per capita (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 13.43
o Recommended threshold is 15% below baseline at 11.42
The Baseline Regional VMT per employee (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 8.59
o Recommended threshold is at 15% below baseline at 7.3
No baseline or threshold set for Retail.
The Staff Report shows an average daily VMT per capita for Arroyo Grande of approximately
9.5 for residents, and 7 for employees.
2.1.2 VMT Policies
With the adopted CEQA Guidelines (revised, January 20, 2016), transportation impacts are to be
evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The new guidelines became
effective statewide on July 1, 2020. GHD has assisted the City in establishing a VMT Policy, which
the City has adopted on September 8, 2020, and establishes the thresholds of significance and
screening criteria for VMT. Per the City’s Policy, and consistent with OPR’s Technical Advisory on
Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, the target for VMT reduction is 15% below baseline for
residential and office projects, and no net increase in total regional VMT for retail, industrial, and
other projects. The City’s baseline VMT and significance thresholds are listed below.
Baseline Residential VMT per capita: 20.2
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per capita: 17.2
Baseline Office VMT per employee: 14.0
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per employee: 11.9
Retail, Industrial, & Other: No Net increase in total regional VMT
Mixed-Use: Evaluate components independently considering internal capture, and compare to
the corresponding threshold. Alternatively, analyze only the project’s the dominant use.
Redevelopment: If a project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds above
apply.
A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if
proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective
thresholds recommended above.
Screening Criteria
The City has also identified screening thresholds for projects that are presumed to be less than
significant impact. The following are examples (not inclusive) of land use and transportation projects
that are identified exempt by OPR, therefore should not require VMT analysis:
A) Small Projects – less than 110 vehicle trips per day
B) Projects that are within ½ mile of a transit stop at the intersection of two transit routes with 15
minute headways or less, unless the project:
Item 9.b. - Page 70
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 13
i) Has floor-area-ratio of less than 0.75;
ii) Includes more parking than required by the City’s zoning code;
iii) Is inconsistent with the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, City Zoning Code, or
City Land Use Policies, including the City’s General Plan or any applicable Specific Plan ;
or
iv) Replaces affordable housing with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units.
C) Local-serving retail projects, which are generally defined as projects within the City that are
less than 50,000 square feet in size. The determination of whether a retail project is local-
serving or regional-serving shall be made by City staff on a case by case basis to determine
whether they are likely to attract regional trips. For instance, auto dealerships and specialty
retailers may propose less than 50,000 square feet of retail space but be de emed regionally
serving.
D) Transportation projects that are expected to reduce or have no impact on VMT will not
require a quantitative analysis. These projects include, but are not limited to, road diets,
roundabouts, roadway rehabilitation and maintenance, safety improvements that do not
substantially increase auto capacity, installation or reconfiguration of lanes not for through
traffic, timing of traffic signals, removal of on-street parking, addition or enhancement of
pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities and services.
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations
Although VMT will be used to determine CEQA transportation impacts, the City intends, by policy, to
continue to use Level of Service as a metric to evaluate traffic operations to assess need, type, and
timing of transportation improvements.
Traffic operations were quantified through the determination of "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of
Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade "A" through
"F" is assigned to an intersection, or roadway segment, representing progressively worsening traffic
conditions. LOS "A" represents free-flow operating conditions and LOS "F" represents over-capacity
conditions. Levels of Service was calculated for all intersection control types, and freeway ramp
merge and diverge sections using the methods documented in the Transportation Research Board
Publication Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016
(HCM 6).
2.2.1 Intersection Operations
The Synchro 10 (Trafficware) software program was used to implement the HCM 6 analysis
methodologies for signalized and stop-controlled intersections. Intersection Level of Service (LOS)
was calculated for all control types using the methods documented in HCM 6, excluding the
clustered intersections and locations with non-NEMA-standard phasing, due to limitations within
HCM 6 methodology. The specific locations include the Brisco Road / US 101 partial interchange
and Brisco / El Camino Real, which used Synchro Timing methodology to determine intersection
Item 9.b. - Page 71
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 14
delay. For signalized or all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is
based on the calculated averaged delay for all approaches and movements. For two-way or side-
street stop controlled (TWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is based upon the calculated
average delay for all movements of the worst performing approach. The vehicular -based LOS
criteria for different types of intersection controls are presented in Table 2.1.
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
A supplemental traffic signal “warrant” analysis was completed. The term “signal warrants” refers to
the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or
ascertain the need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This
study employed the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the 2014 California
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014 CA MUTCD, Revision 5). The signal warrant
criteria are based upon several factors including volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic,
frequency of accidents, location of school areas etc. The CA MUTCD indicates that the installation
of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the signal warrants are met. The ultimate
decision to signalize an intersection should be determined after careful analysis of all intersection
and area characteristics.
This traffic operations analysis specifically utilized the Peak -Hour-Volume based Warrant 3 as one
representative type of traffic signal warrant analysis. Signal warrant analyses were only conducted
for non-signalized intersections which are projected to operate beyond the LOS thresholds. Section
3.1 of this Report further discusses which intersections are evaluated for the peak hour signal
warrant. The Signal Warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C.
Item 9.b. - Page 72
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 15
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections
Level of
Service
Type
of
Flow Delay Maneuverability
Stopped Delay/Vehicle
(sec)
Signalized
Un-
signalized
A Stable Flow Very slight delay. Progression is very
favorable, with most vehicles arriving
during the green phase not stopping at
all.
Turning movements are
easily made, and nearly
all drivers find freedom
of operation.
≤10.0 ≤10.0
B Stable Flow Good progression and/or short cycle
lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS
A, causing higher levels of average
delay.
Vehicle platoons are
formed. Many drivers
begin to feel somewhat
restricted within groups
of vehicles.
>10.0 >10.0
and and
≤20.0 ≤15.0
C Stable Flow Higher delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths.
Individual cycle failures may begin to
appear at this level. The number of
vehicles stopping is significant, although
many still pass through the intersection
without stopping.
Back-ups may develop
behind turning vehicles.
Most drivers feel
somewhat restricted
>20.0 >15.0
and and
≤35.0 ≤25.0
D Approaching Unstable Flow The influence of congestion becomes
more noticeable. Longer delays may
result from some combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle
lengths, or high volume-to-capacity
ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the
proportion of vehicles not stopping
declines. Individual cycle failures are
noticeable.
Maneuverability is
severely limited during
short periods due to
temporary back-ups.
>35.0 >25.0
and and
≤55.0 ≤35.0
E Unstable Flow Generally considered to be the limit of
acceptable delay. Indicative of poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high
volume-to-capacity ratios. Individual
cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
There are typically long
queues of vehicles
waiting upstream of the
intersection.
>55.0 >35.0
and and
≤80.0 ≤50.0
F Forced Flow Generally considered to be
unacceptable to most drivers. Often
occurs with over saturation. May also
occur at high volume-to-capacity ratios.
There are many individual cycle failures.
Poor progression and long cycle lengths
may also be major contributing factors.
Jammed conditions.
Back-ups from other
locations restrict or
prevent movement.
Volumes may vary
widely, depending
principally on the
downstream back-up
conditions.
>80.0 >50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016 (HCM 6)
Item 9.b. - Page 73
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 16
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations
Existing roadway LOS was determined on a daily basis with counts collected on weekdays in
November, 2019. The LOS for 37 roadway segments throughout Arroyo Grande were established
using the capacities in Table 2.2
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds
Note: All volumes are approximate and assume ideal roadway characteristics. Actual thres hold volumes for
each Level of Service listed above may vary depending on a variety of factors including (but not limited to)
roadway curvature and grade, intersection or interchange spacing, driveway spacing, percentage of trucks and
other heavy vehicles, travel lane widths, signal timing characteristics, on-street parking, volume of cross traffic
and pedestrians, etc.
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters
This evaluation of Existing conditions incorporates appropriate heavy vehicle adjustment factors,
peak hour factors, and signal lost time factors and reports the resulting operational analysis as
estimated using the HCM 6 based analysis methodologies.
Table 2.3 presents the technical parameters that were utilized for the evaluation of the study
intersections and ramp segments for the analysis scenarios. All parameters not listed should be
assumed as default values or calculated based on parameters listed.
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters
Technical Parameter Assumption
1 Intersection Peak Hour Factor Based on counts, intersection overall
2 Intersection Heavy Vehicle % Based on counts, intersection overall, minimum 2%
3 Pedestrian & Bicycle Volumes Based on counts
4 Grades 2% or less, level terrain
5 Signal Timings Based on Caltrans and City signal timing plans
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies
City of Arroyo Grande
The City of Arroyo Grande’s current LOS policy is identified in the General Plan Circulation Element
(October 2001), and specifies the following minimum LOS standards for all streets and intersections
within the City’s jurisdiction:
CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)’C’ or better on all streets and controlled
intersections.
A B C D E
Four Lane Freeway 28,000 43,200 61,600 74,400 80,000
Two Lane Highway 2,400 4,800 7,900 13,500 22,900
Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 22,000 25,000 29,000 33,000 36,000
Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000
Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,500 18,000
Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
Two Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000
Roadway Type
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) – Total of Both Directions
Item 9.b. - Page 74
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 17
CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS ‘D’ at a minimum and plan improvement to
achieve LOS ‘C’ (Los ‘E’ or ‘F’ unacceptable = significant adverse impact unless
Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings approved). The design and
funding for such planned improvements shall be sufficiently definite to enable
construction within a reasonable period of time.
Based on the current City policy, LOS C will be utilized as the acceptable threshold for the
evaluation of intersection and roadway operations in this report .
It should be noted however, as part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to
change the LOS policy to the following:
CT3. Strive to attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS ‘D’ or better on all street
segments and controlled intersections.
CT3-1. New development that is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS E or below or further
exacerbate conditions already below LOS D should be conditioned to make
transportation improvements that offset the level degradation. Improvements to non-
automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or intersection may also be
considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
If the City decides to adopt this change in LOS policy to LOS D as the threshold, this will change
the findings of deficient locations identified within this report.
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
Bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS). LTS
must be calculated for roadway segments and intersections using the methods documented in the
paper, Low Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-
19, May 2012. Bicycle LTS quantifies the stress level of a given roadway segment by considering a
variety of criteria, including street width (number of lanes), speed limit or prevailing speed, presence
and width of bike lanes, and the presence and width of parking lanes. Bicycle LTS is a suitability
rating system of the safety, comfort, and convenience of transportation faci lities from the
perspective of the user. Moreover, the methodology allows planning practitioners to assess gaps in
connectivity that may discourage active users from traversing roadways.
Bicycle LTS scores roadway facilities into one of four classification s or ratings for measuring the
effects of traffic-based stress on bicycle riders, with 1 being the lowest stress or most comfortable,
and 4 being the highest stress or least comfortable. Generally, LTS score of 1 indicates the facility
provides a traffic stress tolerable by most children and less experienced riders, such as multi-use
paths that are separated from motorized traffic. An LTS score of 4 indicates a stress level tolerable
by only the most experienced cyclists who are comfortable with high-volume and high-speed, mixed
traffic environments. The figure below presents the four scoring classifications, subsequent tables
show the criteria associated with determining the LTS score.
Item 9.b. - Page 75
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 18
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria
The Bicycle LTS methodology is comprised of three scoring categories: roadway segments,
intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, and unsignalized intersection crossings. The
Bicycle LTS scoring criteria for intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, for roadway
segments with mixed traffic, and for roadway segments where bike lanes exist are provided in the
Tables below.
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes
Right-turn Lane Configuration
Right-turn
lane length
(ft)
Bike Lane
Approach
Alignment2
Vehicle Turning
Speed (mph)3 LTS Score
With Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 150 Straight ≤ 15 LTS 2
Single >150 Straight ≤ 20 LTS 3
Single Any Left ≤ 15 LTS 3
Single1 or Dual Exclusive/
Shared Any Any Any LTS 4
Without a Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 75 ≤ 15
(no effect
on LTS)
Single 75-150 ≤ 15 LTS 3
Otherwise LTS 4
1 Any other single right turn lane configuration not shown above.
2 The right turn criteria are based on whether the bike lane stays straight or shifts to the left.
3 This is vehicle speed at the corner, not the speed crossing the bike lane. Corner radius can also be used
as a proxy for turning speeds.
4 There is no effect on LTS if the bikeway is physically separated from traffic, as on a shared -use path.
Item 9.b. - Page 76
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 19
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic
Street Width
Speed Limit 2-3 lanes 4-5 lanes 6+ lanes
Up to 25 mph LTS 1 or 21 LTS 3 LTS 4
30 mph LTS 2 or 31 LTS 4 LTS 4
35+ mph LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4
1Use lower value for streets without marked centerlines or classified as residential and
with fewer than 3 lanes; use higher value otherwise.
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes
Lane Factor
LTS Score
LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4
Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction) 1 (no effect) 2 or more (no effect)
Sum of bike lane and parking
lane width (includes marked
buffer and paved gutter)
15 ft. or
more 14 or 14.5 ft.2 13.5 ft. or less (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed
25 mph or
less 30 mph 35 mph
40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas) rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Not Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction) 1
2, if directions
are separated
by a raised
median
more than 2,
or 2 without a
separating
median (no effect)
Bike Lane Width (includes
marked buffer and paved
gutter) 6 ft. or more 5.5 ft. or less (no effect) (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed
30 mph or
less (no effect) 35 mph
40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas) rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Note: 1 (no effect) = factor does not trigger an increase to this level of traffic stress.
2 If speed limit < 25 mph or Class = residential, then any width is acceptable for LTS 2.
Item 9.b. - Page 77
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 20
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy
As part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to adopt the following Policy
related to thresholds for Bicycle LTS:
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
approaches or crossings that already exceed LTS 3 at intersections with Class II or Class III
facilities.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
segments that already exceed LTS 3 on Class II or Class III routes.
This Report contains the analysis of Bicycle LTS of arterial and collector roadways, and approaches
of major intersections to review current bicyc le connectivity throughout the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 78
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 21
3. Existing Traffic Operations
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour tu rning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019 and Thursday, November 21, 2019.
These counts were collected while school was in session. The AM peak hour is defined as the one
continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and the PM peak hour
is defined as the one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM
under typical weekday conditions.
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies
Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations were quantified using
existing traffic volumes, lane geometrics, and intersection controls. Figure 3.1 presents the existing
lane geometrics and intersection control types that are currently in place at the study intersections.
Figure 3.2 presents the existing weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
Item 9.b. - Page 79
Item 9.b. - Page 80
Item 9.b. - Page 81
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 24
Table 3.1 presents a summary of the LOS and delay (in sec/veh) at each study intersection under
Existing conditions.
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 James Way & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 29.4 C 18.6 B -
2 James Way & Rodeo Dr AWSC C 8.3 A 9.1 A -
3 James Way & Tally Ho Rd AWSC C 8.6 A 8.8 A -
4 W Branch St / US 101 NB Ramp & Oak Park Ave Signal C 8.3 A 10.6 B -
5 El Camino Real & Oak Park Ave Signal C 12.1 B 13.4 B -
6 W Branch St & Camino Mercado / US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.1 B 17.4 B -
7 W Branch St & Rancho Parkway Signal C 6.4 A 8.3 A -
8 W Branch St & Brisco Rd Signal C 12.0 B 22.9 C -
9 US 101 NB Ramps & Brisco Rd Signal C 41.2 D 51.6 D -
10 El Camino Real & Brisco Rd Signal C 43.8 D 51.8 D -
11 W Branch St & Rodeo Dr TWSC C 11.8 B 10.8 B -
12 El Camino Real & US 101 SB Ramps / Halcyon Rd Signal C 19.9 B 23.1 C -
13 E Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 16.2 B 22.9 C -
14 E Grand Ave & Courtland St Signal C 9.7 A 11.2 B -
15 E Grand Ave & Elm St Signal C 9.6 A 12.2 B -
16 E Grand Ave & Brisco Rd TWSC C 12.8 B 18.8 C -
17 E Grand Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 23.2 C 23.6 C -
18 E Grand Ave & El Camino Real TWSC C 50.6 F 41.1 E No
19 E Grand Ave & US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 9.7 A 13.2 B -
20 E Grand Ave & US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 11.3 B 28.0 C -
21 E Grand Ave / E Branch St & W Branch St TWSC C 104.0 F 111.5 F Yes
22 E Branch St & Wesley St / Traffic Way Signal C 17.7 B 17.1 B -
23 E Branch St & Nevada St / Bridge St TWSC C 42.8 E 23.0 C Yes
24 E Branch St & Short St none C -----
25 E Branch St & Mason St Signal C 11.3 B 11.1 B -
26 E Branch St / Huasna Rd & Corbett Canton Rd / Stanley
Ave
AWSC C 21.2 C 20.3 C -
27 S Traffic Way & Traffic Way / US 101 Ramps TWSC C 11.2 B 12.8 B -
28 Fair Oaks Ave & Traffic Way Signal C 13.5 B 12.7 B -
29 Fair Oaks Ave & US 101 SB Ramp / Orchard Ave AWSC C 39.8 E 16.9 C Yes
30 Fair Oaks Ave & Valley Rd Signal C 12.2 B 8.1 A -
31 Fair Oaks Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 54.2 D 17.0 B -
32 Farroll Ave & Halcyon Rd TWSC C 109.0 F 37.9 E No
33 The Pike & Halcyon Rd AWSC C 22.3 C 13.3 B -
#Intersection
Control
Type1,2
Target
LOS
AM Peak PM Peak
Notes:
1. AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control; RNDBT = Roundabout
2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for AWSC,
3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3
4. Bold = Unacceptable Conditions
5. OVR = Delay over 300 seconds
Warrant
3 Met?
Item 9.b. - Page 82
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 25
As presented in Table 3.1, the following study intersections operate at unacceptable LOS during the
AM or PM peak hours under Existing conditions:
9 – US 101 Northbound Ramps & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
10 – El Camino Real & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
18 – East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
31 – Fair Oaks Avenue & Halcyon Road (at LOS D)
32 – Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road
Of the locations listed above, several are unsignalized intersections that meet peak hour traffic
signal warrant criteria, as follows:
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
New daily roadway traffic counts were taken in November 2019, two weekday counts at each
location, and compared to daily roadway counts taken in May 2012. Figure 3.3 presents the existing
daily roadway volumes at the study intersections.
Item 9.b. - Page 83
Item 9.b. - Page 84
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 27
Table 3.2 presents a summary of the prior 2012 average daily traffic (ADT) and current 2019
roadway volumes and LOS at each roadway segment.
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
As presented in Table 3.2, all study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing
Conditions. There are no roadway segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
2012
#Street Segment Facility Type Past ADT Average ADT LOS
1 E. Grand Avenue west of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 21,630 19,770 A
2 E. Grand Avenue east of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,600 19,220 A
3 E. Grand Avenue west of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,630 15,710 A
4 E. Grand Avenue east of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 19,610 17,400 A
5 E. Grand Avenue east of US 101 NB Ramps Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 24,090 19,650 A
6 East Branch Street east of Traffic Way Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,490 13,700 C
7 East Branch Street east of Crown Hill Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 11,410 10,980 C
8 Huasna Road east of SR 227 Two Lane Collector 6,600 8,190 C
9 Huasna Road east of City Limits Two Lane Collector - 5,080 A
10 SR 227 south of Tally Ho Road Two Lane Highway 3,300 3,860 B
11 SR 227 south of Royal Oak Place Two Lane Highway 1,880 1,950 A
12 Corbert Canyon Road north of SR 227 Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 1,500 3,610 A
13 North Halcyon Road north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,900 9,740 B
14 Elm Street south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 10,250 A
15 El Camino Real north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 2,310 A
16 S. Halcyon Road south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 17,280 14,360 A
17 S. Halcyon Road north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 12,920 A
18 S. Halcyon Road south of The Pike Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 6,700 8,530 A
19 Fair Oaks Avenue east of S. Halcyon Road Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,220 8,800 A
20 Fair Oaks Avenue east of Valley Road Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,800 11,350 A
21 Valley Road south of Fair Oaks Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 5,900 7,620 A
22 Traffic Way south of Branch Street Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 13,180 10,770 A
23 West Branch Street north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 3,900 3,180 A
24 West Branch Street west of Brisco Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 13,900 12,810 A
25 West Branch Street east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,000 13,540 C
26 Rancho Pkwy. north of W. Branch Street Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,400 8,390 A
27 Old Oak Park north of Noyes Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,090 1,470 A
28 Noyes Road north of Old Oak Park Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,960 6,210 A
29 Oak Park Boulevard south of El Camino Real Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 20,400 16,060 A
30 Oak Park Boulevard south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,490 11,030 A
31 Oak Park Boulevard north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,850 9,350 A
32 James Way west of Oak Park Boulevard Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 7,710 6,160 A
33 James Way east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 6,340 6,110 A
34 James Way west of Talley Ho Road Two Lane Collector 3,470 3,570 A
35 El Camino Real west of Brisco Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,630 4,610 A
36 Farroll Avenue east of Oak Park Street Two Lane Collector 4,820 4,850 A
37 Branch Mill Road east of E. Cherry Avenue Two Lane Collector 1,710 1,690 A
2019
Item 9.b. - Page 85
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 28
3.3 Truck Routes
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles
through and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum
annoyance to residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for
large trucks, known as STAA trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on the
National Network including the Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 highway
through the City of Arroyo Grande and statewide is a National Truck Network. California State
Route 1 is a California Legal Truck Network, north of City of Arroyo Grande passing through the
San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access Arroyo Grande is SR 227. SR 227 north of
Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck Network and the California Legal Advisory
Truck Route. The following list of streets is the approved Truck Routes in Arroyo Grande:
Barnett Street, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Branch Mill Road, from East Cherry Avenue to the Easterly City Limit
Brisco Road, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Corbett Canyon Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
East Branch Street, from Highway 101 Overpass to East Branch Street/Crown Hill
East Cherry Avenue, from Traffic Way to Branch Mill Road
East Grand Avenue, from Highway 101 Overpass to the Westerly City Limit
El Camino Real, from Oak Park Boulevard to Barnett Street
Fair Oaks Avenue, from Halcyon Road to Traffic Way
Halcyon Road, from El Camino Real to the Southerly City Limit
Huasna Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
Nelson Street, from Traffic Way to South Mason Street
Oak Park Boulevard, from El Camino Real to City Limit
South Elm Street, from East Grand Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
South Mason Street, from Nelson Street to East Branch Street
The Pike, from the Westerly City Limit to Halcyon Road
Traffic Way, from East Branch Street to Highway 101
Valley Road, from Fair Oaks Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
Figure 3.4 presents a map of approved truck routes, provided by the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 86
FIGURE 3.4
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.4_TruckRoutes.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 09:46
TRUCK ROUTES
Item 9.b. - Page 87
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 30
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, presented in Figure 3.5.
The plan includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to
complete the partial network already in place in the City and County. The plan encourages the use
of walking and bicycling. The following functional classifications of bicycle facilities are utilized within
this document.
Class I Bike Path. Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-
of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic
minimized. Class I bikeways must be compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA). These bikeways are intended to provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational
opportunities as compared to facilities that share right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane. Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on
each side of a street or highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike
lanes ranges between four and six feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curb and
gutter). Bike lanes are demarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route. Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the
same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs
and shared lane marking pavement stencils. While Class III routes do not provide measures of
separation, they have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law,
bicycles are allowed on all roadways in California except on freeways when a suitable alternate
route exists. However, Class III bikeways serve to identify roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway. (No Bikeway Designation). A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not
officially designated as a bikeway. This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and
recreation. In some instances, entire street systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient
bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In othe r
cases, prior to designation as a bikeway, routes may need improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Separated Bikeways. Known as separated bikeways or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways
provide a separate travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the
roadway and are protected from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may
include, but is not limited to, grade separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical
barriers, or on-street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Highway Design Manual (HDM, July
2020). It is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as Class I, II,III, and IV should not be
construed as a hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other. Each class of bikeway has
its appropriate application.
Item 9.b. - Page 88
FIGURE 3.5
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.5_BikeMasterPlan.mxdPrint date: 30 Sep 2020 - 08:41
2012 BICYCLE & TRAILSMASTER PLAN
Item 9.b. - Page 89
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 32
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities” (2012) and National Association of City Transportation Officials
“Urban Bikeway Design Guide” are used as resources to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Bicycle Boulevard. Bicycle Boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in
order to prioritize bicycle safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
Slow traffic speed and low volume.
Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the
roadway is a priority route for bicyclists.
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For
instance, diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block, but discourage
through traffic by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also calm traffic and improve
pedestrian safety as well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle Boulevards are generally applicable to
local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a
designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane
and/or parking lane. A buffered bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered
preferential lanes (section 3D-01). Buffered bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the
traveled way, allow room for bicyclists to pass without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and
can be used to provide a buffer between on-street parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes
are ideal for streets with extra lanes or extra lane width, and along roadways with higher travel
speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green Colored Bike Facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle
lane through an intersection or transition trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane
markings. The Federal Highway Administration has issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15,
2011 for the optional use of green colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.)
Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the
crosswalk at signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to
motorists by getting ahead of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle
incursion into crosswalks. Bike Boxes also improve safety for conflicts with right -turning vehicles
when the traffic signal turns green. Bike boxes can be utilized to facilitate left turn positioning and
gives priority to cyclists.
Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”) help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use the
full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane
markings help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and
Item 9.b. - Page 90
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 33
a bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily
recommended on low-speed streets.
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as
Class II and Class III bikeways. The city also has short segments of off-street trails typically
consisting of soft surface (decomposed granite) materials. The trails are typically situated in open
space along a creek tributary. The two exceptions are trails located along Equestrian Way and
Grace Lane which are decomposed granite paths located behind the curb. These do not meet Class
I Bike Path standards (10-foot paved path with 2-foot shoulders, or 12-foot paved path).
Figure 3.6 presents the existing sidewalk inventory, provided by the City. There are gaps in the
sidewalk network; a Pedestrian Safety Review conducted by ITS Berkeley in 2010 and the Draft
Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan identifies some areas where there are opportunities for
improvement. The ITS study focused on key intersections throughout the City and suggested
recommendations that could improve the pedestrian safety crossing large streets with many lanes
of traffic. The Draft Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan focused on multimodal improvements
along the Halcyon Road corridor, connecting Arroyo Grande Hospital, residences, and the
elementary school. Locations near and between residences, schools, parks, retail centers, and City
services should provide adequate sidewalks and marked crossings.
Figure 3.7 presents the existing bikeway by classification along arterial and collector roadways
throughout the City. There are gaps in the network of bicycle facilities. Arterials and collectors that
are north-south roadways which do not have bicycle facilities, include portions of Elm Street,
Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road, Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park Boulevard.
Arterials and collectors that are east-west roadways which do not have bicycle facilities include
portions of Farroll Avenue, E. Grand Avenue, E. Branch Street, and E. Cherry Avenue. Subsequent
Bicycle LTS analysis is included.
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the
City for active transportation modes. As part of this Circulation Element update, roadway facilities
will be identified where it is possible to modify the existing cross-section and increase the active
transportation components for pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed Draft Circulation
Element Policies are requirements to prepare a Pedestrian Master Plan and update the exis ting
Bicycle and Trails Master Plan. It is proposed for the bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment
of bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) will be required to specifically evaluate the performance of
the existing bicycle system and to help identif y bicycle facility improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 91
FIGURE 3.6
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.6_SidewalkInventory.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 10:33
SIDEWALK INVENTORY
Item 9.b. - Page 92
Fair Oaks
Avenue
James Wa
y
R o d e o D riveEl C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike ValleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill R o adFarroll Avenue
Brisc
o
Road Rancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h S treetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest
B
r
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Cherry
Ave
n
ue
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
Courtland Street£¤101
£¤101
FIGURE 3.7
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/28/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.7_AGExBikeways.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 11:47
Legend
US 101
City Limits
Roads
Bike Facility
Class I
Class II
Class III
Gap
Bike Lane Gap
Directional Gap
Directional Gap
Bike Lane Fading
Severe Bike Lane
Fading
EXISTING BIKEWAYSAND GAPS MAP
Item 9.b. - Page 93
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 36
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis
Mineta Transportation Institute criteria was applied to roadway segments with bike lanes (with and
without on-street parking) and roadway segments without bike lanes (mixed traffic segments) to
determine existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress, presented in Figure 3.8. As shown, the majority of
segments along major roads (arterials and collectors) within the City of Arroyo Grande can be
considered high stress (LTS 3 or 4). Even with the presence of bike lanes, the high stress nature of
roadway segments within the City are primarily due to roadway speed limits of 35 miles per hour or
greater, and roadways with three or more total travel lanes. For those roadways with speed limits
lower than 35 mph, lack of adequate bike lane striping or physical separation between cyclists and
vehicles (i.e., buffers) results in high stress conditions. In addition, lack of adequate bicycle
protection (i.e., bike pockets) at intersections with lengthy vehicle right turn pockets, or gaps in bike
lane striping at intersection approaches, result in high stress conditions at all intersections along
major roads within the City of Arroyo Grande.
Other factors were noted as contributing to high stress conditions, including quality and condition of
existing bike lane striping and gaps in striping along segments on either side of the roadway.
Segments with significant bike lane striping fading along existing Class II bicycle routes were noted
at the following locations:
West Branch Street between Oak Park Boulevard and Camino Mercado
El Camino Real between Hillcrest Drive and Brisco Road
Oak Park Boulevard Between Ash Street and The Pike
The Pick between Oak Park Boulevard and Elm Street
Valley Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Castillo Del Mar
Major gaps along existing Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike
lanes, or bike lanes only in one direction) occur at the following locations:
East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and Grande Foods Market
Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
Vehicle on-street parking is also a contributor to high stress conditions for cyclists, and is allowed
on the majority of the City’s arterials and collectors.
LTS inputs and scores are provided in Appendix D.
Item 9.b. - Page 94
Fair Oaks
Avenue
James Wa
y
R o d e o D riveEl C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike ValleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill R o adFarroll Avenue
Brisc
o
Road Rancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h S treetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest
B
r
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Cherry
Ave
n
ue
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
Courtland Street£¤101
£¤101
FIGURE 3.8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/28/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.8_AGBikeLTS_rev2.mxdPrint date: 30 Sep 2020 - 08:36
Legend
LTS
1 (Low Stress)
2 (Low-Medium
Stress)
3 (Medium-High
Stress)
4 (High Stress)
US 101
City Limits
Roads
MAJOR ROADS BICYCLELEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS (LTS)
Item 9.b. - Page 95
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 38
3.6 Public Transportation
The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCoTransit),
a branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SoCo Transit will merge with
SLORTA early 2021. Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 serve major arterial roadways in the City as shown
in Figure 3.9. The Avila-Pismo Trolley (not shown on Figure) connects to SoCo Transit Routes at
the Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town Center/Walmart, and
Ramona Gardens Park, and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium Outlets.
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande
The following Route descriptions, and the above Figure, are from the South County Transit Short-
Range Transit Plan (December 23, 2019).
Route 21 provides hourly service between 6:29 AM and 7:29 PM on Weekdays, 7:29 AM and 7:29
PM on Saturdays, and 7:29 AM and 6:29 PM on Sundays. The route consists of a large clockwise
loop traveling south on James Way and West Branch serving Arroyo Grande, west on Grand
Avenue serving Grover Beach, and north on Price Street and US 101 to complete a smaller
counter-clockwise loop serving Pismo and Shell Beach. This route connects with RTA Route 10 at
the top of the hour at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets (Pismo Beach Outlets), and with Routes
24, 27, and 28 at Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in Grover Beach at 29 minutes after the
hour.
Route 24 provides service hourly from 6:29 AM to 7:29 PM on weekdays, 7:29 AM to 7:29 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:29 AM to 6:29 PM on Sundays. This loop route serves the core of Pismo Beach,
Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande primarily in a counter -clockwise direction. It is largely aligned
with Route 21, except that Route 24 adds service to downtown Arroyo Grande but does not serve
Item 9.b. - Page 96
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 39
the Shell Beach area of Pismo Beach. From the Pismo Beach Outlets, the route travels northwest
towards Pismo Beach circling south down Highway 1 to Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in
Grover Beach. The route then travels east on Grand Avenue, north towards Arroyo Grande, and
west looping back towards the Town Center/Walmart stop before returning to the Pismo Beach
Outlets.
Route 27 provides hourly service from 6:03 AM to 8:13 PM on weekdays only. This route travels in
clockwise direction serving Arroyo Grande, Oceano and the eastern portions of Grover Beach. This
route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Gardens at 29 minutes after the hour and with
Route 28 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Route 28 provides hourly service from 6:20 AM to 8:14 PM on weekdays, 7:32 AM to 8:14 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:32 AM to 7:14 PM on Sundays. This route travels in a counter-clockwise direction
serving the same route as Route 27 in reverse order (except for one block around Long Branch
Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard). This route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Garden
Park at 29 minutes after the hour and with Route 27 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Avila-Pismo Trolley runs April through September during holidays, weekends, and Fridays. Hourly
service is generally provided between 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM with hours extending to 9:00 PM during
June, July, and August. The trolley connects with SoCo Transit Routes 21 and 24 and RTA 10 at
the Pismo Beach Outlets at the top of each hour. No fare is charged on this service.
RTA Route 10 provides hourly regional service between San Luis Obispo to Santa Maria. SoCo
Transit is connected to other cities by RTA Route 10. RTA Route 10 makes stops in Arroyo Grande
at E. Grand Avenue at El Camino Real and El Camino Real at Halcyon Park and Ride.
3.7 Rail
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The
nearest Amtrak station is located in City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of the City of Arroyo
Grande. The primary access to the station is on W. Grand Avenue east of Highway 1. The SoCo
Transit Bus Route 21 provides service to the railway station for City of Arroyo Grande.
3.8 Air
Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. The SoCo Transit Bus route 21
provides service to this airport for City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational
activities and is accessible by Highway 1 via W. Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the
City of San Luis Obispo about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by two commercial
airlines providing services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Francisco, and
Seattle. It is also home to full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is
located on the west side of SR 227, about 2 miles east of US 101.
Item 9.b. - Page 97
Arroyo Grande Circulation Element | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Martin Inouye
Martin.Inouye@ghd.com
Todd Tregenza
Todd.Tregenza@ghd.com
916.782.8688
Item 9.b. - Page 98
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendices
Item 9.b. - Page 99
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix A
Traffic Counts
Item 9.b. - Page 100
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 5227173250305221236740
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 83 40 19 1 3 51 5 0 11 7 24 3 24 12 9 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 116 39 18 3 8 56 16 0 9 3 18 1 44 27 12 1
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 175 74 35 4 8 75 19 0 11 8 32 0 26 34 15 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 130 53 27 3 9 67 22 0 14 14 29 2 21 27 10 0
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 75 59 25 4 7 87 14 0 10 18 35 3 34 12 7 2
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 72 60 33 6 7 49 3 0 8 10 29 1 30 15 5 1
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 69 85 44 6 8 53 14 0 10 24 39 3 37 24 5 1
TOTAL 772 437 218 30 52 488 96 0 78 86 227 15 252 158 67 5
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 35 47 29 0 11 106 18 5 13 35 52 3 34 20 2 1
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 52 40 31 0 10 97 18 0 13 34 54 1 29 19 11 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 53 36 45 0 12 105 15 1 15 18 61 1 30 18 7 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 52 55 36 1 8 110 8 0 21 43 64 0 28 18 7 0
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 62 43 32 1 19 129 11 1 21 34 86 0 51 13 7 1
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 34 39 36 0 10 117 9 0 14 33 46 0 33 24 12 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 55 27 39 0 6 122 12 0 8 17 33 1 31 8 9 1
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 41 19 27 0 10 81 9 0 4 16 37 0 30 10 2 0
TOTAL 384 306 275 2 86 867 100 7 109 230 433 6 266 130 57 3
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 496 225 105 14 32 285 71 0 44 43 114 6 125 100 44 3
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 219 174 144 2 49 441 52 2 70 129 265 2 138 68 32 1
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.822 1.4%
PM 52 441 49 0.852
PM 0.876 0.4%
AM 71 285 32 0.898
PHF 0.823 0.798 AM PM
70 44 44 32
129 43 100 68
265 114 125 138
PM AM
PHF 0.81 0.838 PHF
0.727 496 225 105 AM
0.939 219 174 144 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3N Oak Park Blvd
N Oak Park Blvd
James WayJames Way
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
N. Oak Park Blvd / James Way
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1340
-120.6053
Item 9.b. - Page 101
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000001
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0002000000000002
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0002000000000003
TOTAL 0004000000010006
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000100000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000100000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000001000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000001
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000100000000
TOTAL 0000000301000001
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000010001
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000101000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 02 PM0000
PM Peak Total 1 1 AM 0000
Peds <>01 AM PM
00 00
10 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>10
Peds <>0000AM
1000PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
N Oak Park Blvd
James Way James Way
N Oak Park Blvd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
N. Oak Park Blvd / James Way 35.1340
San Luis Obispo -120.6053
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Item 9.b. - Page 102
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 200000001191061410
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 914101111130262200
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 5015000300232033201
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 804000001104061701
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 503100100202072300
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 100200010013100103701
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 802000101197122600
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 80100010124121103300
TOTAL 551312018151413845020413
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 7050000024812133901
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 606100100366133800
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 1203000100459034000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 5070000004912023700
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 6041100004611113410
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 608020102478113201
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 402010001255053000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 304000101316042200
TOTAL 490392404063276942227212
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 3108100402763122911901
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 300211002021783921115401
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.833 1.3%
PM2000.5
PM 0.942 0.9%
AM 4001
PHF 0.883 0.736 AM PM
22 00
178 76 119 154
39 31 29 11
PM AM
PHF 0.787 0.959 PHF
0.813 31 0 8 AM
0.85 30 0 21 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
James Way / Rodeo Dr
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1342
-120.5840
Page 1 of 3Rodeo Dr
Rodeo Dr
James WayJames Way
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 103
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0007000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0003000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0001000100000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0001000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000010000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0001000000020000
TOTAL 00014000100030000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000100000001
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000100000001
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0001000100000001
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000100000001
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000100000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000001
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0001000500000005
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 0003000100030000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0001000400000004
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 07 PM0001
PM Peak Total 0 9 AM 0003
Peds <>40 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>30
Peds <>1000AM
4000PM
Turning Movement Report
James Way / Rodeo Dr 35.1342
San Luis Obispo -120.5840
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Rodeo Dr
James Way James Way
Rodeo Dr Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 104
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 4200012130901200000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 81100021182902020000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 1118000252722002810000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 151901021520901400000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 617000182011401110000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 580001928060700000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 10900011131160500000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 1014010183201301310000
TOTAL 6998020145203696011050000
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 816020223223701310000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 1014000173302401320000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 1815000203202602100000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 1411000182202901900000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 1114000202302302310000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 1318000182703102300000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 112001033251170900000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 8600016230250600000
TOTAL 931140301642173212012740000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 40650108511755207340000
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 565800076104010908610000
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.831 2.3%
PM 104 76 0 0.865
PM 0.926 0.2%
AM 117 85 0 0.692
PHF 0.903 0.651 AM PM
109 52 0 0
00 00
86 73 0 0
PM AM
PHF ##### ##### PHF
0.772 40 65 0 AM
0.864 56 58 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
James Way / Tally Ho Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1301
-120.5744
Page 1 of 3Tally Ho Rd
Tally Ho Rd
James Way
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 105
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000010000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000010000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000010000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000100000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000020100010000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000200000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000200000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000200000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000300000001
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000900000001
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0000020000010000
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000500000001
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 21 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 6 AM 0200
Peds <>10 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>10
Peds <>0000AM
5000PM
Turning Movement Report
James Way / Tally Ho Rd 35.1301
San Luis Obispo -120.5744
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Tally Ho Rd
James Way 0
Tally Ho Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 106
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 956627215533440000198290
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 99852049773110000226621
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 1191372610146042500002010850
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 981634021390311000059161213
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 85131396198142200003861034
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 10213145418955530000456672
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 10015367521684010000568563
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 9015560328872930000639774
TOTAL 788 1021 324 36 137 611 304 20 00003226960017
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 6010087253170454000010220741
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 60104961321733720000859623
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 74123873361744620000936471
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 611037413417335100009817442
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 701347704720541200009612420
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 66839013018631100007914562
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 6110111223914036100008414553
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 611008613517435300007719541
TOTAL 513 848 709 11 306 1395 306 16 000071411143413
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 3855781911771334168700001983634712
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 265464334514972515970000372441956
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.914 1.6%
PM 159 725 149 0.881
PM 0.935 0.7%
AM 168 334 71 0.853
PHF ##### #####AM PM
0 0 347 195
00 3644
0 0 198 372
PM AM
PHF 0.741 0.961 PHF
0.902 385 578 191 AM
0.936 265 464 334 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3N Oak Park Blvd
N Oak Park Blvd
W Branch StUS 101 Onramp
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Oak Park Blvd / W. Branch St / US 101 NB On-Ram
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1305
-120.6065
Item 9.b. - Page 107
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000100000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000100000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000200000000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000010000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000010000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000010000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000020000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000001
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000010000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000020000
TOTAL 0000000000080001
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000040001
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 00 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 5 AM 0000
Peds <>10 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>04
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
N Oak Park Blvd
US 101 Onramp W Branch St
N Oak Park Blvd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
Oak Park Blvd / W. Branch St / US 101 NB On-Ram 35.1305
San Luis Obispo -120.6065
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Item 9.b. - Page 108
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 17 141 5 4 14 36 22 2 28 2 14 2 2 3 20 0
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 9 163 5 0 15 37 40 0 26 6 24 0 0 3 21 3
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 22 202 3 4 15 30 39 4 46 6 32 8 5 14 27 3
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 16 220 6 2 19 82 49 1 49 6 38 6 2 11 35 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 11 184 1 5 15 61 45 3 56 10 31 1 4 16 20 1
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 9 192 8 2 34 76 30 3 54 17 38 3 5 6 28 2
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 22 203 6 5 20 82 24 2 68 6 52 3 5 7 43 0
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 13 191 11 2 13 100 34 1 81 11 39 3 5 3 39 1
TOTAL 119 1496 45 24 145 504 283 16 408 64 268 26 28 63 233 10
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 12 145 6 0 40 187 44 2 81 20 91 1 7 6 20 0
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 16 145 1 1 35 157 60 2 86 15 92 2 7 5 25 1
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 15 167 4 1 39 166 55 3 92 12 88 1 4 9 21 1
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 20 154 4 1 32 192 62 1 71 17 92 0 5 11 23 3
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 10 166 7 0 41 175 79 0 82 17 96 0 11 9 25 1
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 20 144 6 0 35 173 56 2 81 19 102 0 7 8 14 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 16 151 3 2 46 146 45 1 97 17 101 2 1 10 14 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 13 142 3 0 45 147 54 1 97 14 102 1 6 3 30 1
TOTAL 122 1214 34 5 313 1343 455 12 687 131 764 7 48 61 172 7
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 55 770 26 14 82 319 133 9 259 44 160 10 19 32 130 4
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 65 631 21 2 147 706 252 6 326 65 378 1 27 37 83 5
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.939 1.8%
PM 252 706 147 0.936
PM 0.953 0.5%
AM 133 319 82 0.908
PHF 0.952 0.884 AM PM
326 259 130 83
65 44 32 37
378 160 19 27
PM AM
PHF 0.823 0.817 PHF
0.921 55 770 26 AM
0.964 65 631 21 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Oak Park Blvd / El Camino Real
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1295
-120.6068
Page 1 of 3N Oak Park Blvd
N Oak Park Blvd
El Camino RealEl Camino Real
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 109
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 1001000000000001
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000000000001
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0001000000000001
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0001000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 1004000000000003
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000100010000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000100010000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000100010000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000200020000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000100000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000600050000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 0002000000000001
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000300030000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 03 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 6 AM 0002
Peds <>01 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>03
Peds <>0000AM
3000PM
Turning Movement Report
Oak Park Blvd / El Camino Real 35.1295
San Luis Obispo -120.6068
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
N Oak Park Blvd
El Camino Real El Camino Real
N Oak Park Blvd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 110
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 40223155052702101621
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 61231370041511123001
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 79621563242401123913
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 11541145628340334920
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 8971221131104803115301
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 678232850134902194821
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 61522488094702304551
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 776262652176200154931
TOTAL 589 40 15 19 23 56 35 7 70 306 1 14 112 329 15 9
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 6643166901810713438261
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 64520713111129301339021
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 53350561001310201388921
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 6245262701510101488352
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 6418085110812202589072
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 7095065902110100436960
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 68351341001110012368930
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 5764093901210201346141
TOTAL 504 35 37 4 50 44 76 1 110 828 2 11 333 653 35 8
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 294 26 7 13 10 33 21 3 49 206 0 7 75 195 10 4
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 264 17 23 3 23 16 37 0 55 424 1 5 185 331 21 4
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.949 2.9%
PM 37 16 23 0.792
PM 0.914 0.9%
AM 21 33 10 0.8
PHF 0.923 0.807 AM PM
55 49 10 21
424 206 195 331
1 0 75 185
PM AM
PHF 0.875 0.866 PHF
0.843 294 26 7 AM
0.905 264 17 23 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W. Branch St / Camino Mercado / US 101 NB Ramp
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1289
-120.6010
Page 1 of 3US 101 On & Offramp
Camino Mercado
W Branch StW Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 111
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000100000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000100000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000200000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000200000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000100000000
TOTAL 0000000700000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0001000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0005000000000000
TOTAL 0006000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000600000000
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 0001000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 06 PM0001
PM Peak Total 0 1 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>6000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
W. Branch St / Camino Mercado / US 101 NB Ramp 35.1289
San Luis Obispo -120.6010
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Camino Mercado
W Branch St W Branch St
US 101 On & Offramp Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 112
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 00001301041703030111
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 00001701102201042173
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00001604121802052353
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 00002004123302068371
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000310113123302065302
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 000040012323000042410
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000320173102501055470
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 00003006192200058431
TOTAL 00001990561341200011041226111
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000780241177102071881
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000630294216302077820
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000680362257502068740
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000690360167202062782
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000750402277402079871
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000580330227602066890
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000590320274403072660
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000570290237100053801
TOTAL 00005270259917854601505486445
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 000013304610331100302201613
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 000027001454902970802753283
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.945 2.3%
PM 145 0 270 0.902
PM 0.920 1.1%
AM 46 0 133 0.861
PHF 0.958 0.794 AM PM
90 33 161 328
297 110 220 275
00 00
PM AM
PHF 0.934 0.908 PHF
##### 0 0 0 AM
##### 0 0 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W. Branch St / Rancho Parkway
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1258
-120.5955
Page 1 of 3
Rancho Parkway
W Branch StW Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 113
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000200000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000600000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000400000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000100000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000300000000
TOTAL 00000001600000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0003000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0002000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0002000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0001000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0008000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 00000001400000000
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0007000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 014 PM0007
PM Peak Total 0 7 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>14000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
W. Branch St / Rancho Parkway 35.1258
San Luis Obispo -120.5955
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Rancho Parkway
W Branch St W Branch St
0 Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 114
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 290142000003261191200
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 480172000006331181302
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 5902230000012231322403
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 7903520000015372242800
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 5405210000021422363902
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 5303900000017472553000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 7002800000015471313301
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 7102200000014422192801
TOTAL 463022910000001032971223420709
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 116021100000391052344800
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 115017000000341095254600
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 9801800000036981344200
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 105019100000421032193501
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 114019100000341022264900
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 117016000000411031233600
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 10801800000020771143000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 10101700000032982133501
TOTAL 87401453000002787951618832102
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 256015430000068173714613003
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 4340752000001514151011217101
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.950 1.4%
PM 0 0 0 #####
PM 0.935 1.0%
AM 0 0 0 #####
PHF 0.976 0.941 AM PM
00 00
151 68 130 171
415 173 146 112
PM AM
PHF 0.812 0.863 PHF
0.899 256 0 154 AM
0.929 434 0 75 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W. Branch St / Brisco Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1248
-120.5930
Page 1 of 3Brisco Rd
W Branch StW Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 115
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000010000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000020000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000020000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000020000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000020000
TOTAL 0000000000090000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000020000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000020000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000020000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000060000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000070000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000020000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 07 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 2 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>72
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
W. Branch St / Brisco Rd 35.1248
San Luis Obispo -120.5930
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
0
W Branch St W Branch St
Brisco Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 116
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 883202039620000140101
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 1004901046410000110153
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 1176104047830000210221
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 787703054620000430302
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 876604071820000230381
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 645701092920000390352
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 10575010691010000390222
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 7286000521120000310183
TOTAL 711503016047062150000221019015
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 3791020129910000340470
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 62960101201240000261300
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 54890001181510000310350
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 6379000119220000280421
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 7599010120920000280350
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 5797000121810000350400
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 478700085500000320380
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 4477000105620000230400
TOTAL 4397150409176613000023713071
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 334275090286337000014401257
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 249364010478346000012201521
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.935 1.9%
PM 34 478 0 0.962
PM 0.956 0.6%
AM 33 286 0 0.79
PHF ##### #####AM PM
0 0 125 152
00 00
0 0 144 122
PM AM
PHF 0.909 0.913 PHF
0.846 334 275 0 AM
0.881 249 364 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Brisco Rd / US 101 NB Ramps
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1246
-120.5931
Page 1 of 3Brisco Rd
US 101 OfframpUS 101 Onramp
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 117
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000001
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000002
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000003
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000002
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000002
TOTAL 00000000000000010
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000020000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000020000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000040000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000008
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000020000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 08 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 2 AM 0000
Peds <>08 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>02
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
Brisco Rd / US 101 NB Ramps 35.1246
San Luis Obispo -120.5931
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
0
US 101 Onramp US 101 Offramp
Brisco Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 118
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 3 40 14 2 30 17 5 2 2 16 3 0 0 13 78 3
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 8 57 28 2 36 15 5 1 1 38 3 1 7 10 91 4
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 9 63 23 1 35 25 9 3 3 33 5 3 7 25 103 3
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 9 47 14 0 37 48 11 4 2 25 4 0 6 34 111 6
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 7 49 12 2 38 45 14 3 4 31 8 3 8 14 106 2
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 5 56 13 0 39 66 23 5 2 28 5 4 9 25 60 4
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 6 69 26 1 47 52 11 3 13 38 6 3 7 40 94 1
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 10 66 12 0 35 39 7 4 13 28 3 2 5 26 82 2
TOTAL 57 447 142 8 297 307 85 25 40 237 37 16 49 187 725 25
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 12 53 20 0 74 78 11 1 3 43 14 2 10 20 76 1
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 8 52 10 1 80 57 5 4 5 38 11 0 9 22 104 2
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 2 51 11 0 68 73 10 1 3 31 14 1 13 22 83 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 7 49 18 0 82 58 7 2 3 50 8 0 7 20 87 2
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 9 74 22 1 83 59 6 3 4 55 9 2 7 23 101 2
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 9 68 16 0 70 81 5 1 3 50 19 0 10 12 85 1
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 4 49 6 0 53 63 2 0 2 44 12 2 6 23 75 1
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 1497 059617 1 1361322213722
TOTAL 52 445 110 2 569 530 53 13 24 347 100 9 84 155 683 11
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 27 221 65 3 161 211 59 15 21 122 23 10 30 113 371 13
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 27 242 67 1 303 271 28 7 13 186 50 3 37 77 356 5
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.870 2.9%
PM 28 271 303 0.965
PM 0.916 1.0%
AM 59 211 161 0.842
PHF 0.865 0.728 AM PM
13 21 371 356
186 122 113 77
50 23 30 37
PM AM
PHF 0.851 0.897 PHF
0.775 27 221 65 AM
0.8 27 242 67 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
El Camino Real / Brisco Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1239
-120.5935
Page 1 of 3Brisco Rd
Brisco Rd
El Camino RealEl Camino Real
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 119
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0001000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0003000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000001000001
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000001000002
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0001000000000003
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0001000000000003
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0001000000000001
TOTAL 00070000020000010
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000100020000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000020000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000020010
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000100060010
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0002000002000009
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000100040000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 211 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 5 AM 0002
Peds <>09 AM PM
00 00
02 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>04
Peds <>0000AM
1000PM
Turning Movement Report
El Camino Real / Brisco Rd 35.1239
San Luis Obispo -120.5935
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Brisco Rd
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Brisco Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 120
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000101801060201631
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 00005016011120001421
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00008031113160002765
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 00001021024220103590
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000100410541801033203
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000100710342000021170
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 000016033022170102140
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 000030151231800028123
TOTAL 000054024621911290501957313
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 000012023015390105320
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 00006013015360106130
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 00005016014370006050
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 00003021016470003231
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 00003022019350005030
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 00005028013380003271
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 00002010016230003720
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000307017270103811
TOTAL 00003901400125282030363263
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0000370166013477030110503
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 000026073060159020206131
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.815 1.0%
PM 73 0 26 0.707
PM 0.932 0.6%
AM 166 0 37 0.627
PHF 0.869 0.733 AM PM
60 134 50 13
159 77 110 206
00 00
PM AM
PHF 0.755 0.842 PHF
##### 0 0 0 AM
##### 0 0 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W. Branch St / Rodeo Dr
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1241
-120.5911
Page 1 of 3
Rodeo Dr
W Branch StW Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 121
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000100000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000200000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000100000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000400000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000800000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0001000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0001000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0002000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0001000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0001000000000000
TOTAL 0006000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000700000000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 07 PM0002
PM Peak Total 0 2 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>7000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
W. Branch St / Rodeo Dr 35.1241
San Luis Obispo -120.5911
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Rodeo Dr
W Branch St W Branch St
0 Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 122
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 71640222100491315111111
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 95 22 2 1 7 43 12 2 52 11 28 3 1 13 3 3
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 11624040511025782722880
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 114 15 0 3 1 53 20 1 51 5 33 7 1 13 4 1
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 89 10 1 1 3 39 24 1 40 8 30 1 2 18 2 2
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 7945054319147724112413
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 85 12 0 3 4 33 15 2 58 6 28 2 0 15 2 0
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 98 13 0 1 3 48 33 2 54 16 32 3 1 12 5 2
TOTAL 747 106 12 13 25 332 143 11 408 74 217 20 9 114 26 12
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 79 10 2 3 6 70 38 3 70 18 59 2 2 20 6 2
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 76 11 0 1 6 56 36 2 66 11 58 0 4 11 8 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 79 12 1 3 7 85 27 3 58 18 47 5 8 25 8 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 68 19 1 3 2 64 29 2 58 7 52 1 1 14 3 2
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 79 19 1 2 5 82 32 2 84 11 47 2 1 10 6 2
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 59900884281891840311371
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 80 16 1 1 5 56 34 3 70 13 45 1 1 11 1 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 55911271481581043441032
TOTAL 575 105 7 14 41 568 272 17 553 106 391 18 22 114 42 9
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 414 71 3 9 11 186 66 6 200 32 118 13 6 52 17 6
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 285 59 3 8 22 315 116 8 289 54 186 11 11 62 24 5
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.945 2.9%
PM 116 315 22 0.944
PM 0.946 2.2%
AM 66 186 11 0.889
PHF 0.9 0.951 AM PM
289 200 17 24
54 32 52 62
186 118 6 11
PM AM
PHF 0.852 0.591 PHF
0.871 414 71 3 AM
0.876 285 59 3 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
El Camino Real / Halcyon Rd / US 101 SB Ramps
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1231
-120.5916
Page 1 of 3Halcyon Rd
US 101 On & Offramp
El Camino RealEl Camino Real
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 123
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0001000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000100000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0002000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0001000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0005000100000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000100000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000100000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000200000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0004000100000000
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000200000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 05 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 2 AM 0004
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>1000AM
2000PM
Turning Movement Report
El Camino Real / Halcyon Rd / US 101 SB Ramps 35.1231
San Luis Obispo -120.5916
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
US 101 On & Offramp
El Camino Real El Camino Real
Halcyon Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 124
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 4 71 12 0 13 19 9 5 25 52 1 1 4 44 29 5
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 6 8624 1 223912 2 2267 6 1 104633 5
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 7 120 24 2 18 27 12 3 22 60 2 5 7 69 34 3
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 4 8228 2 254426 4 3275 7 4 258742 4
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 8 101 28 1 24 54 24 2 23 49 3 2 11 83 39 5
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 10 93 35 1 27 51 28 1 30 92 6 8 17 83 38 4
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 14 98 29 3 28 42 37 3 45 91 7 5 20 79 35 8
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 11 92 29 3 37 40 35 5 36 80 4 7 20 96 37 4
TOTAL 64 743 209 13 194 316 183 25 235 566 36 33 114 587 287 38
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 12 67 38 0 67 107 49 6 46 129 6 2 29 117 40 2
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 14 56 33 1 51 95 33 3 49 134 5 0 40 136 34 2
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 7 64 27 0 47 94 43 1 60 145 9 6 32 112 30 2
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 21 87 43 0 65 134 44 1 43 128 8 2 33 102 39 2
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 20 54 31 1 66 112 38 1 51 163 14 3 50 133 44 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 20 41 23 0 69 115 49 1 48 141 19 1 43 146 38 3
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 23 55 26 0 64 119 39 0 60 144 18 4 32 91 40 1
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 8 46 32 0 56 108 45 3 34 129 14 2 36 118 27 2
TOTAL 125 470 253 2 485 884 340 16 391 1113 93 20 295 955 292 14
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 43 384 121 8 116 187 124 11 134 312 20 22 68 341 149 21
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 84 237 123 1 264 480 170 3 202 576 59 10 158 472 161 6
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.952 3.1%
PM 170 480 264 0.94
PM 0.962 0.7%
AM 124 187 116 0.953
PHF 0.918 0.815 AM PM
202 134 149 161
576 312 341 472
59 20 68 158
PM AM
PHF 0.912 0.871 PHF
0.972 43 384 121 AM
0.735 84 237 123 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Oak Park Blvd / E. Grand Ave
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1210
-120.6092
Page 1 of 3Oak Park Blvd
Oak Park Blvd
E Grand AveW Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 125
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0001000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0002000000000002
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000100000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0001000000030000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0004000200000003
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0002000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0005000300020002
TOTAL 00016000600050007
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0001000000020003
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0001000000020003
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0005000300040001
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0005000400010002
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0004000300000001
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0002000100030001
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0009000300060001
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0003000700030004
TOTAL 00030000210002100016
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 00012000500050005
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 0002000011000100005
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 027 PM00020
PM Peak Total 0 46 AM 00012
Peds <>55 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>510
Peds <>5000AM
11000PM
Turning Movement Report
Oak Park Blvd / E. Grand Ave 35.1210
San Luis Obispo -120.6092
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Oak Park Blvd
W Grand Ave E Grand Ave
Oak Park Blvd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 126
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 437052526730236623
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 157152121103 4977 1 4641 5
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 8310142617971469842
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 1244192132710935713034
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 15 7 12 0 15 2 11 1 9 94 4 2 8 114 5 5
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 17 4 11 1 9 4 15 1 12 129 3 6 6 114 4 4
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 8 10 5 3 23 3 17 0 10 141 4 5 11 119 6 7
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 86601951811113016512441
TOTAL 87 44 70 8 96 21 95 11 66 870 23 31 50 829 29 31
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 14 14 7 0 25 17 16 1 30 192 10 2 10 162 15 2
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 26 12 9 0 37 25 23 1 28 194 7 1 16 152 13 3
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 14 7 3 0 37 11 20 2 19 191 7 8 11 153 17 2
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 25 11 4 0 27 9 17 0 29 202 13 1 10 145 14 2
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 12 17 4 0 34 17 21 0 28 217 16 2 16 189 24 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 18 10 9 0 32 10 23 1 24 195 11 2 10 175 21 4
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 22 12 7 1 31 11 18 0 28 179 12 2 6 132 13 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 17 9 3 0 27 14 19 0 26 190 13 3 12 135 11 1
TOTAL 148 92 46 1 250 114 157 5 212 1560 89 21 91 1243 128 14
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 48 27 34 4 66 14 61 3 42 494 12 19 30 471 19 17
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 77 47 20 0 135 62 81 3 104 804 43 12 53 639 68 7
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.923 3.3%
PM 81 62 135 0.818
PM 0.896 1.0%
AM 61 14 66 0.82
PHF 0.911 0.884 AM PM
104 42 19 68
804 494 471 639
43 12 30 53
PM AM
PHF 0.956 0.83 PHF
0.801482734AM
0.766774720PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E Grand Ave / Courtland St
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1208
-120.6067
Page 1 of 3Courtland St
Courtland St
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 127
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0001000000000001
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0001000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000100000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000030002
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0100000000010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0003000000000003
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0001010100000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0003000600010000
TOTAL 0109010800050006
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0001000400000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0001000400000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0006000600000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000300020002
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0002000200010001
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0005000100050000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0002000000010001
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0002000000000001
TOTAL 000210002000090005
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 0107010700020003
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 000110001500030003
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 219 PM00011
PM Peak Total 0 32 AM 0107
Peds <>33 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>23
Peds <>7010AM
15000PM
Turning Movement Report
E Grand Ave / Courtland St 35.1208
San Luis Obispo -120.6067
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Courtland St
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
Courtland St Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 128
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 171471220007883165704
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 21293042006124145246338
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 2261040105110112114339844
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 202593910031099550148118
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 328642312041021423511557
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 38 10 68 1 6 9 12 2 4 128 10 5 32 110 19 7
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 27 10 56 0 23 13 15 0 8 139 19 6 34 107 10 11
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 262843647041262363811235
TOTAL 203 41 575 10 63 37 37 3 29 918 108 36 262 810 55 54
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 355511523051833127417122
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 324570468261794547717674
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 327430574181643848314952
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 453582222041913517815241
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 309560363081943328918351
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 414750839071814429116522
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 293490273051594927414192
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 2310430410041523727614051
TOTAL 267 45 432 3 33 34 32 3 47 1403 312 19 642 1277 39 15
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 123 30 272 6 38 27 36 2 20 495 66 19 139 444 37 30
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 148 23 232 2 18 18 18 1 27 730 150 9 341 649 16 6
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.937 3.3%
PM 18 18 18 0.675
PM 0.940 0.8%
AM 36 27 38 0.495
PHF 0.965 0.875 AM PM
27 20 37 16
730 495 444 649
150 66 139 341
PM AM
PHF 0.963 0.908 PHF
0.916 123 30 272 AM
0.84 148 23 232 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E. Grand Ave / Elm St
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1205
-120.6005
Page 1 of 3S Elm St
N Elm St
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 129
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0001000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0001000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000020000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000100010000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000200000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000200010000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000400020000
TOTAL 0003000900070000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0003000100000001
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0003000100000001
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0005000000030000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0004000200000001
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0002000100000002
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0002000100000005
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000200000001
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 000190008000300011
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
8:00 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000800040000
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 00013000400030008
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 012 PM00013
PM Peak Total 0 28 AM 0000
Peds <>80 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>43
Peds <>8000AM
4000PM
Turning Movement Report
E. Grand Ave / Elm St 35.1205
San Luis Obispo -120.6005
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
N Elm St
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
S Elm St Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 130
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 00006019341850205343
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 000020242771362306886
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00003024175152060113103
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 00003026147127060185156
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 00004039460109020115113
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 000010045472127040113236
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000505936314916090198
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000703927714319012063
TOTAL 0000400275205121028 4 38 0 857 96 38
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 00004086049185000166192
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 00007067254179050184103
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 00004087151164020155112
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 00001065057195020182193
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 00006076150196030205190
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 00004094069193020161102
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000107104715802013262
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000407005215501015172
TOTAL 000031061644291425 0 17 0 1336 101 16
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 00002201691224251211805036823
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 00001503222227748090703597
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.941 3.5%
PM 322 0 15 0.86
PM 0.939 0.9%
AM 169 0 22 0.746
PHF 0.93 0.886 AM PM
227 242 68 59
748 512 503 703
01 00
PM AM
PHF 0.714 0.85 PHF
##### 0 0 0 AM
##### 0 0 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E. Grand Ave / Brisco Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1204
-120.5995
Page 1 of 3
Brisco Rd
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 131
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0001000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000100000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000100000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000400000000
TOTAL 0002000600000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0001000400000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0001000400000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0001000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0004000100000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0001000500000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000100000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000200000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 00080001700000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:45 AM - 8:45 AM 0001000200000000
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0006000700000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 03 PM0006
PM Peak Total 0 13 AM 0001
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>2000AM
7000PM
Turning Movement Report
E. Grand Ave / Brisco Rd 35.1204
San Luis Obispo -120.5995
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Brisco Rd
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
0 Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 132
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 13 72 34 3 1 31 6 1 15 74 14 0 18 51 6 4
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 22 87 59 5 5 53 9 2 20 98 30 4 27 56 4 4
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 32 104 102 3 3 59 13 3 21 117 39 4 44 115 8 4
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 51 100 74 6 7 51 14 0 9 99 21 7 42 183 5 7
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 29 75 50 3 5 45 9 2 16 96 20 3 48 122 6 3
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 27 66 41 3 5 41 16 1 20 109 14 3 43 112 7 8
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 28 73 37 3 10 42 12 4 20 109 15 6 29 94 7 7
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 32 69 40 5 7 34 19 2 17 115 20 9 29 107 6 4
TOTAL 234 646 437 31 43 356 98 15 138 817 173 36 280 840 49 41
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 46 49 41 2 15 79 21 3 15 158 30 1 22 132 12 1
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 36 65 42 2 14 90 25 3 22 139 38 3 34 129 6 2
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 33 55 35 1 14 90 25 3 14 132 45 3 32 120 9 3
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 35 57 32 1 15 76 16 2 18 139 44 4 31 135 6 4
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 34 66 37 1 15 82 23 0 23 172 54 4 29 144 3 1
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 30 50 25 0 7 82 17 2 18 147 46 2 35 125 5 2
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 27 43 39 0 9 76 16 2 13 143 30 3 34 99 6 3
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 30 49 29 1 10 91 17 1 10 131 31 2 22 110 5 1
TOTAL 271 434 280 8 99 666 160 16 133 1161 318 22 239 994 52 17
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 139 345 267 15 20 196 52 6 66 421 94 17 177 532 26 22
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 138 243 146 5 58 338 89 8 77 582 181 14 126 528 24 10
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.889 2.6%
PM 89 338 58 0.94
PM 0.927 1.5%
AM 52 196 20 0.893
PHF 0.843 0.821 AM PM
77 66 26 24
582 421 532 528
181 94 177 126
PM AM
PHF 0.799 0.963 PHF
0.789 139 345 267 AM
0.921 138 243 146 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E. Grand Ave / Halcyon Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1187
-120.5916
Page 1 of 3Halcyon Rd
Halcyon Rd
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 133
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000100010001
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0001000100000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000400030005
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0001000000010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000400000003
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0002000000000001
TOTAL 000500010000500010
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000200020000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000200020000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000700060000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000200000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000400020000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000001
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0002000100000002
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0002000200010000
TOTAL 000600020000130003
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0003000500040005
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 000200015000100000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 017 PM0002
PM Peak Total 0 27 AM 0003
Peds <>05 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>410
Peds <>5000AM
15000PM
Turning Movement Report
E. Grand Ave / Halcyon Rd 35.1187
San Luis Obispo -120.5916
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Halcyon Rd
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
Halcyon Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 134
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 000010010710501089298
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 00009020161960501002310
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00001102111255090157285
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 00007040111750402383310
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000502011143141124304
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 00006051191600301623810
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 1000140409162271110181
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 000070207155090131184
TOTAL 1000690222911351 3 42 2 1111 217 52
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 000019017111189020161226
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0010140705195141151102
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 201015010012193020170210
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 100080909165010150262
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000903110216040129175
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 00001605111196020151160
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0020120816178041143131
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000606110142030132174
TOTAL 3040990655741474 1 22 2 1187 142 20
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 000029013252733120168112929
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 3020560431377421916327910
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.876 3.1%
PM 43 0 56 0.688
PM 0.941 1.3%
AM 13 0 29 0.808
PHF 0.951 0.739 AM PM
37 52 129 79
742 733 681 632
11 11
PM AM
PHF 0.748 0.932 PHF
##### 0 0 0 AM
0.417302PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E Grand Ave / El Camino Real
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1205
-120.5861
Page 1 of 3
El Camino Real
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 135
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0002000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0002000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0002000000000001
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0001000100000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000100000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0002000100000001
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000100000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0009000400000002
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0002000100000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0002000100000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0002000100000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000300000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000100000001
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0008000700000001
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0005000300000002
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0008000600000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 010 PM0008
PM Peak Total 0 14 AM 0005
Peds <>02 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>3000AM
6000PM
Turning Movement Report
E Grand Ave / El Camino Real 35.1205
San Luis Obispo -120.5861
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
El Camino Real
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
0 Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 136
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 00001601020715401711507
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 00002709601385861012006
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00004905401828371518805
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 000045022014257710268013
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000250122092543915306
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 000040094011551320193012
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 00005107701215971612802
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 000058011701144791713804
TOTAL 0000311065340975463421141303 0 55
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 000050022301257524017209
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 000041011301188432815803
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 000046019101199523918402
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 000046010101128723216905
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 000049011101179554113706
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 000046011101229822514902
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 00003808101168233315202
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 00005201220946922814302
TOTAL 00003680104130923685212661264 0 31
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 00001590281205312452054802036
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0000183062804743419139683019
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.868 3.7%
PM 62 0 183 0.851
PM 0.937 1.9%
AM 28 0 159 0.866
PHF 0.952 0.732 AM PM
00 00
474 531 802 683
341 245 54 139
PM AM
PHF 0.77 0.922 PHF
##### 0 0 0 AM
##### 0 0 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E. Grand Ave / US 101 SB Ramps*
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1210
-120.5847
Page 1 of 3US 101 Onramp
US 101 Offramp
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 137
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0002000200000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0002000100000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0002000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0003000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0001000200000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0001000100000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 00011000600000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000100000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000100000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0003000100000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000300000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000100000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000100000000
TOTAL 0005000800000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0006000200000000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0005000600000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 08 PM0005
PM Peak Total 0 11 AM 0006
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>2000AM
6000PM
Turning Movement Report
E. Grand Ave / US 101 SB Ramps* 35.1210
San Luis Obispo -120.5847
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
US 101 Offramp
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
US 101 Onramp Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 138
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 4701120000226101080767
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 44013600003313504090945
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 52012100001520801201461113
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 66032600002916607021610311
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 55021400002987000106912
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 6101530000341220401579514
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 420171000035135013098826
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 5402370000251490170102908
TOTAL 42101443000002221063 0 58 0 995 742 56
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 5302380000201520301551099
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 430144000023137030150913
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 630171000025139030157953
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 440122000021133030156944
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 3801210000261430201391167
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 470131000023145000129933
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 510132000015140010137884
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 480152000017129020121842
TOTAL 38701192100001701118 0 17 0 1144 770 35
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 234080140000107583023062540030
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 20306615000089561012061838919
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.829 3.3%
PM 0 0 0 #####
PM 0.940 2.4%
AM 0 0 0 #####
PHF 0.945 0.774 AM PM
89 107 400 389
561 583 625 618
00 00
PM AM
PHF 0.803 0.954 PHF
0.801 234 0 80 AM
0.841 203 0 66 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E. Grand Ave / US 101 NB Ramps
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1217
-120.5828
Page 1 of 3US 101 Offramp
US 101 Onramp
E Grand AveE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 139
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 00 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 0 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
E. Grand Ave / US 101 NB Ramps 35.1217
San Luis Obispo -120.5828
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
US 101 Onramp
E Grand Ave E Grand Ave
US 101 Offramp Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 140
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 2050311035911414677
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 406060405131164178174
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 2060102010200074243266
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 404130712118001413054113
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 2080501201789024192236
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 30409211151190652243515
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 21111709012131094161148
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 20906071141570223176323
TOTAL 21 1 53 2 40 3 53 3 87 1066 2 67 29 1625 195 62
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 2 0 11 1 12 0 29 2 10 169 0 11 5 232 34 7
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 209010114012139044216384
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 406011116014131143237203
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 106010018111135043238355
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 307011118013134013232276
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 4 0 10 0 7 0 15 0 13 132 0 0 4 201 24 3
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 3050141150171380252033710
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 3 0 11 0 9 2 14 0 10 126 0 4 9 186 25 4
TOTAL 22 0 65 1 84 6 139 3 100 1104 1 30 36 1745 240 42
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 11 0 22 1 18 2 32 2 53 588 0 29 14 964 125 40
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 9 0 32 1 43 2 77 3 47 574 1 23 15 923 127 19
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.808 3.9%
PM 77 2 43 0.744
PM 0.918 2.5%
AM 32 2 18 0.591
PHF 0.869 0.763 AM PM
47 53 125 127
574 588 964 923
1 0 14 15
PM AM
PHF 0.795 0.965 PHF
0.825 11 0 22 AM
0.788 9 0 32 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W. Branch St / E. Grand Ave
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1221
-120.5820
Page 1 of 3
W Branch St
E Branch StE Grand Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 141
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000100000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000100000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000200000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000100000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000500000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0004000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0001000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0007000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:30 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000300000000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0006000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 03 PM0006
PM Peak Total 0 6 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>3000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
W. Branch St / E. Grand Ave 35.1221
San Luis Obispo -120.5820
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
W Branch St
E Grand Ave E Branch St
0 Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 142
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 71641233035119475515
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 1332531610497425279812
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 1543760135001484954216619
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 1391136454071254732716043
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 102843210613634011411024
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 107634445016944510129110
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 8248555203102599128163
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 909519107169849111611956
TOTAL 878 49 39 29 27 56 33 2 27 753 349 43 155 918 21 42
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 11329191110051234651513515
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 109 3 6 2 10 26 11 0 5 116 54 5 18 129 3 8
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 131682517306946661213834
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 145341813604924122714316
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 133 5 4 2 11 19 12 0 1 95 56 1 30 140 1 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 93 1 4 1 20 13 4 0 3 98 54 1 26 137 2 3
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 1081526121206834723113155
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 68260914707903132312464
TOTAL 900 23 46 11 78 125 65 0 37 791 395 25 182 1077 22 35
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 528 24 19 18 7 34 16 1 14 433 178 14 110 534 8 18
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 518 17 22 7 34 75 32 0 16 397 217 14 87 550 8 18
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.810 2.7%
PM 32 75 34 0.75
PM 0.973 2.0%
AM 16 34 7 0.792
PHF 0.9 0.793 AM PM
16 14 8 8
397 433 534 550
217 178 110 87
PM AM
PHF 0.78 0.943 PHF
0.87 528 24 19 AM
0.916 518 17 22 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W. Branch St / Traffic Way
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1225
-120.5813
Page 1 of 3Traffic Way
Wesley st
E Branch StE Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 143
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000110001000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0001000210001000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0001100200002100
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000100
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 1001000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 1000000100000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000100000100
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000100001000
TOTAL 2003100820005300
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000100100
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000101000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0001100010001100
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0102000000001200
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0001000000100200
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000100
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000100000
TOTAL 0104100010403700
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 1003100410003200
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 0103100010103300
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 87 PM0013
PM Peak Total 10 3 AM 0013
Peds <>00 AM PM
11 00
00 23
10 33
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>4100AM
0010PM
Turning Movement Report
W. Branch St / Traffic Way 35.1225
San Luis Obispo -120.5813
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Wesley st
E Branch St E Branch St
Traffic Way Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 144
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 02500114036228206503
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 019000210587353212510
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0081043805149283521714
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0160133909124422122211
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 016002241456141711002
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 0 12 0 0 2 15 0 8 64 8 8 19 129 0 4
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0 1 10 0 0 3 16 0 8 81 1 10 13 123 1 2
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0 2 14 0 0 1 13 1 4 85 10 10 14 149 1 2
TOTAL 0 8 70 1 1 16 180 2 46 708 31 55 171 1140 5 18
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0 1 14 0 1 2 16 0 6 90 5 6 28 127 1 9
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0 1 13 0 0 2 20 0 8 107 4 5 24 123 2 10
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0 0 12 0 0 1 20 0 8 87 4 7 27 125 2 4
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0 1 14 0 1 1 12 0 8 94 5 2 30 136 1 8
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0 0 12 0 0 2 20 0 6 117 12 3 18 171 0 3
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0 1 15 0 1 3 18 0 5 130 2 1 34 159 0 5
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0 0 12 0 0 2 16 0 6 92 8 1 38 148 1 5
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0150021701085812912014
TOTAL 0 5 97 0 3 15 139 0 57 802 48 26 228 1109 8 48
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0 3 29 1 1 9 122 1 23 416 10 19 105 674 3 7
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 0 2 53 0 2 8 66 0 25 433 27 7 120 614 2 21
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.760 2.0%
PM 66 8 2 0.864
PM 0.918 2.1%
AM 122 9 1 0.767
PHF 0.885 0.72 AM PM
25 23 3 2
433 416 674 614
27 10 105 120
PM AM
PHF 0.773 0.953 PHF
0.8 0 3 29 AM
0.859 0 2 53 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3Bridge St
Nevada St
E Branch StE Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
W Branch / Bridge St
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1232
-120.5791
Item 9.b. - Page 145
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0001000101000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0001000200000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0002000100000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000200030100
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0001000100010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0003000000020000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0002000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0004000100020000
TOTAL 00014000801080100
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0008000500050000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0009000300020000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0004000500090000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0002000100090000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0005000200040000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 00013000000050000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0007000200020000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0004000300000000
TOTAL 0005200021000360000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0004000600040100
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 000270005000200000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 114 PM00027
PM Peak Total 0 52 AM 0004
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 10
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>420
Peds <>6000AM
5000PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Nevada St
E Branch St E Branch St
Bridge St Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
W Branch / Bridge St 35.1232
San Luis Obispo -120.5791
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Item 9.b. - Page 146
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000004804210805
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 00000000010415114006
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00000000016536120408
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 00000000012319121105
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000006635010305
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 00000000082060134010
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 000000000105210010307
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 000000000102414213102
TOTAL 000000000795145971134 0 48
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 00000000012478315403
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 00000000011334017501
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000009484216303
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 00000000011333217404
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 00000000010471515207
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000009671314803
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 00000000012541415304
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 00000000011081317702
TOTAL 0000000008794723221296 0 27
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000004588253658024
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 00000000044421197666011
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.755 4.3%
PM 0 0 0 #####
PM 0.974 2.6%
AM 0 0 0 #####
PHF 0.887 0.693 AM PM
00 00
444 458 658 666
21 8 3 7
PM AM
PHF 0.779 0.956 PHF
##### 0 0 0 AM
##### 0 0 0 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E Branch / Short St
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1240
-120.5776
Page 1 of 3Short St
E Branch StE Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 147
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0003000000000001
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0001000000020003
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000020002
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0002000000030003
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0002000000000001
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000010004
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0001000000000002
TOTAL 00090000000800016
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000500030000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000500030000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000500040000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000100010000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000500070000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000500030000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 00000003000140000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000600010000
TOTAL 000000035000360000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0006000000070009
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 000000016000110000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 022 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 27 AM 0006
Peds <>09 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>711
Peds <>0000AM
16000PM
Turning Movement Report
E Branch / Short St 35.1240
San Luis Obispo -120.5776
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
0
E Branch St E Branch St
Short St Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 148
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 110311 110110 1480 8 6970 2
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 6 13 45 2 2 23 18 1 10 91 3 6 18 123 6 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 5 17 102 1 3 27 24 1 8 149 2 8 30 177 4 0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 1 17 84 1 2 11 13 0 6 118 5 4 21 191 6 1
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 317331298126424129412
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 3 8 37 0 2 12 20 3 4 73 3 6 9 117 0 5
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 253321156019812969712
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 10 23 22 0 3 7 11 0 12 86 1 13 12 109 6 5
TOTAL 31 110 387 8 16 114 111 6 62 710 18 58 114 1005 24 17
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 6 14 39 0 3 13 16 0 17 104 3 6 27 140 0 6
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 5 16 44 1 5 12 18 1 13 97 4 6 15 152 0 4
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 517593 218160 9844 6331470 1
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 11 29 45 0 2 27 13 1 13 98 4 1 38 154 5 7
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 6 9 45 1 8 18 17 0 6 91 8 2 43 131 1 4
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 8 13 38 0 5 19 12 0 17 72 8 1 50 134 2 2
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 10 19 36 1 3 19 20 0 16 104 6 1 43 122 4 5
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 317301 5109 013917 1381742 3
TOTAL 54 134 336 7 33 136 121 2 104 741 44 24 287 1154 14 32
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 15 64 264 5 9 70 63 3 26 422 12 22 81 585 17 3
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 35 70 164 2 18 83 62 1 52 365 26 5 174 541 12 18
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.743 2.0%
PM 62 83 18 0.948
PM 0.912 1.6%
AM 63 70 9 0.657
PHF 0.879 0.723 AM PM
52 26 17 12
365 422 585 541
26 12 81 174
PM AM
PHF 0.783 0.923 PHF
0.692 15 64 264 AM
0.791 35 70 164 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3S Mason St
N Mason St
E Branch StE Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E Branch / S Mason St
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1244
-120.5767
Item 9.b. - Page 149
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000201011002
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000301011001
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0101000700030008
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0100000400020005
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000100000003
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000200010001
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0001010500010002
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0002000600010101
TOTAL 0204010300201021023
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0101000100020002
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0101000100020002
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0011000300010001
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0102000200040003
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0005000000010004
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0003000300030001
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0004000100070002
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0006000200041001
TOTAL 03123000130002410016
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 020100015010610017
4:45 PM - 5:45 PM 0101400060001500010
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 439 PM00014
PM Peak Total 1 45 AM 0001
Peds <>10 17 AM PM
00 00
01 00
00 10
PM AM
Peds <>615
Peds <>15020AM
6010PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
N Mason St
E Branch St E Branch St
S Mason St Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
E Branch / S Mason St 35.1244
San Luis Obispo -120.5767
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Item 9.b. - Page 150
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 62156033227233304881
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 400150433294872169162
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 4220100562424764480183
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 2021210463648137062281
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 30005128148552307772
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 00003030233422907262
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 200117025143568607285
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 40016034238411610274265
TOTAL 25 4 5 9 73 1 295 16 324 393 47 44 7 554 117 21
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 50001115483379522100213
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 61001505203964850104160
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 1101081461317352393121
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 800014067337672207790
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 501090721418230071111
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 200018162236671006241
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 4020120592236030179100
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 20009051031571016862
TOTAL 43 1 4 0 96 3 463 17 271 549 28 11 7 654 89 8
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 13 2 4 2 41 1 173 9 183 231 18 16 5 288 69 8
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 30 1 1 0 48 2 219 12 140 283 20 11 5 374 58 4
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.832 3.4%
PM 219 2 48 0.83
PM 0.949 2.3%
AM 173 1 41 0.802
PHF 0.947 0.73 AM PM
140 183 69 58
283 231 288 374
20 18 5 5
PM AM
PHF 0.887 0.888 PHF
0.594 13 2 4 AM
0.667 30 1 1 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
E. Branch St / Huasna Rd / Corbett Canyon Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1273
-120.5700
Page 1 of 3Stanley Ave
Corbett Canyon Rd
Huasna RdE Branch St
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 151
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000100000010
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0001000100020000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000200000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000020
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0001000100000000
TOTAL 0002000500020030
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000200000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000100000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000200100000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0001000400020010
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0000200000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 17 PM0020
PM Peak Total 2 0 AM 0001
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 10
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>20
Peds <>4000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
E. Branch St / Huasna Rd / Corbett Canyon Rd 35.1273
San Luis Obispo -120.5700
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Corbett Canyon Rd
E Branch St Huasna Rd
Stanley Ave Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 152
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 051020650200001020
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 01123268002000020150
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0132055780300002091
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0133154740400002080
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 097133500000000060
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 079014420000001080
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0661256101000020101
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 085141500100002040
TOTAL 0755724285000130000120622
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 079017880100001020
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0930461060200001050
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0871271230200001030
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 09012121050000000070
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0892141190000000030
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0872091010000003070
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 091209980000000050
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 048207830200002080
TOTAL 066410106182307000080400
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 04745151828209000060381
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 0359492945304000020180
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.910 3.0%
PM 0 453 29 0.927
PM 0.974 1.5%
AM 0 282 18 0.872
PHF ##### #####AM PM
0 0 38 18
00 00
00 62
PM AM
PHF 0.647 0.714 PHF
0.894 0 474 5 AM
0.976 0 359 4 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Traffic Way / US 101 NB Ramps
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1174
-120.5745
Page 1 of 3US 101 Ramps
Traffic Way
S Traffic Way
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 153
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 00 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 0 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
Traffic Way / US 101 NB Ramps 35.1174
San Luis Obispo -120.5745
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Traffic Way
0 S Traffic Way
US 101 Ramps Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 154
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 32 40 0 4 0 32 25 2 62 0 32 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 64 63 0 3 0 52 57 0 134 0 33 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 79 94 0 4 0 51 110 3 150 0 31 3 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 55 95 0 5 0 42 37 5 171 0 43 7 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 41 72 0 3 0 29 20 4 70 0 26 4 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 49 65 0 4 0 31 23 6 73 0 31 5 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 29 56 0 1 0 33 22 4 70 0 59 3 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 43 83 0 4 0 25 17 3 64 0 36 3 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 392 568 0 28 0 295 311 27 794 0 291 25 0 0 0 0
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 47 61 0 2 0 67 41 2 97 0 49 5 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 57 60 0 4 0 95 39 1 54 0 42 5 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 63 59 0 3 0 75 34 1 96 0 47 2 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 54 65 0 2 0 89 43 2 95 0 44 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 52 62 0 2 0 80 61 1 84 0 48 1 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 64 61 0 1 0 55 63 1 106 0 51 2 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 43 67 0 0 0 82 35 0 65 0 41 1 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 33 38 0 0 0 50 32 1 53 0 54 1 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 413 473 0 14 0 593 348 9 650 0 376 17 0 0 0 0
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 239 324 0 15 0 174 224 12 525 0 133 14 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 233 247 0 8 0 299 201 5 381 0 190 5 0 0 0 0
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.786 2.5%
PM 201 299 0 0.887
PM 0.969 1.2%
AM 224 174 0 0.618
PHF 0.909 0.769 AM PM
381 525 0 0
0 0 0 0
190 133 0 0
PM AM
PHF ##########PHF
0.814 239 324 0 AM
0.96 233 247 0 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3Traffic Way
Traffic Way
Fair Oaks Ave
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Fair Oaks Ave / Traffic Way
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1197
-120.5764
Item 9.b. - Page 155
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 4
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
Bikes Peds Peds <>
AM Peak Total 0 22 PM 0 0 0 0
PM Peak Total 0 6 AM 0 0 0 0
Peds <>0 1 AM PM
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
PM AM
Peds <>1 3
Peds <>20 0 0 0 AM
3 0 0 0 PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Traffic Way
Fair Oaks Ave 0
Traffic Way Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
Fair Oaks Ave / Traffic Way 35.1197
San Luis Obispo -120.5764
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Item 9.b. - Page 156
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 5 0 14 0 12 13 25 3 0 80 4 3 9 40 0 3
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0 0 24 1 12 17 56 4 0 123 5 3 21 97 0 4
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 17 0 46 1 4 36 46 2 0 125 4 2 46 122 0 1
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 24 0 65 2 11 27 35 2 0 164 3 5 34 99 0 3
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 3 0 8 1 6 5 36 2 0 84 7 5 9 56 0 2
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 5 0 21 1 13 5 35 4 0 86 5 3 5 55 0 0
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 2 0 9 0 13 5 21 2 0 94 4 7 4 48 0 2
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 5 0 7 0 19 5 16 3 0 110 3 4 7 71 0 3
TOTAL 61 0 194 6 90 113 270 22 0 866 35 32 135 588 0 18
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 7 0 17 0 17 7 36 3 0 111 8 5 10 111 0 2
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 10 0 16 0 15 6 39 1 0 83 5 1 10 88 0 1
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 8 0 23 0 23 1 45 1 0 111 7 1 6 113 0 1
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 8 0 6 0 19 10 53 4 0 98 5 0 12 115 0 2
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 6 0 15 0 22 15 41 0 0 103 7 2 16 109 0 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 17 0 17 1 16 8 51 0 0 124 4 2 7 115 0 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 4 0 8 0 16 9 41 0 0 87 7 1 9 80 0 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 5 0 9 0 23 5 44 0 0 96 9 0 10 84 0 1
TOTAL 65 0 111 1 151 61 350 9 0 813 52 12 80 815 0 7
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 44 0 143 5 33 85 173 10 0 496 19 15 110 374 0 10
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 39 0 61 1 80 34 190 5 0 436 23 5 41 452 0 3
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.799 2.7%
PM 190 34 80 0.927
PM 0.944 1.0%
AM 173 85 33 0.846
PHF 0.896 0.771 AM PM
0 0 0 0
436 496 374 452
23 19 110 41
PM AM
PHF 0.72 0.97 PHF
0.525 44 0 143 AM
0.735 39 0 61 PM
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Page 1 of 3Orchard St
US 101 Offramp
Fair Oaks AveFair Oaks Ave
Northbound Westbound
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Fair Oaks Ave / US 101 Sb Off Ramp/ Orchard St*
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1187
-120.5785
Item 9.b. - Page 157
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 84 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 17 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 78 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Bikes Peds Peds <>
AM Peak Total 2 79 PM 0 0 0 0
PM Peak Total 4 3 AM 0 0 0 1
Peds <>0 0 AM PM
0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0
PM AM
Peds <>0 0
Peds <>78 0 0 0 AM
3 0 0 2 PM
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
US 101 Offramp
Fair Oaks Ave Fair Oaks Ave
Orchard St Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Turning Movement Report
Fair Oaks Ave / US 101 Sb Off Ramp/ Orchard St*35.1187
San Luis Obispo -120.5785
Thursday, November 21, 2019 Clear
Item 9.b. - Page 158
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 1703010000060131232902
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 45045500000113450375203
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 123079000000146782395304
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 94072100000744425110204
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 220535000002871264905
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 2606120000037103225602
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 1605540000049171433607
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 1606120000038111492606
TOTAL 3590456200000054522511290403033
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 2104620000042221658903
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 2003760000049181617304
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 1605910000072283539501
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 1705000000081361699403
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 2404500000066455738602
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 170490000007041410111501
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 1204100000054242809201
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 1203500000052152425703
TOTAL 139036290000048622919544701018
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 284024911000003611745153256016
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 7402031000002891501329639007
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.713 2.2%
PM 0 0 0 #####
PM 0.892 1.5%
AM 0 0 0 #####
PHF 0.938 0.597 AM PM
00 00
289 361 256 390
150 174 153 296
PM AM
PHF 0.668 0.794 PHF
0.66 284 0 249 AM
0.923 74 0 203 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Fair Oaks Ave / Valley Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1163
-120.5827
Page 1 of 3Valley Rd
Fair Oaks AveFair Oaks Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 159
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0006000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 00017000000020000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 00028000000050001
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 00011000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0002000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0003000000000000
TOTAL 00067000000070001
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000004
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000004
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000001
TOTAL 0000000000000009
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 00056000000070001
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000008
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 064 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 8 AM 00056
Peds <>81 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>70
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
Fair Oaks Ave / Valley Rd 35.1163
San Luis Obispo -120.5827
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
0
Fair Oaks Ave Fair Oaks Ave
Valley Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 160
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 2 93 37 2 15 47 2 1 10 27 1 1 15 14 17 1
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 1 144 72 6 52 40 1 1 5 66 2 0 26 31 30 0
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 414163 1 6274 5 6 1677 6 2 634686 1
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 2 129 36 6 22 61 12 1 16 25 5 2 53 65 75 3
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 12 109 14 2 15 61 20 3 21 11 15 1 22 28 21 4
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 5 86 13 1 16 68 23 0 44 32 13 2 25 36 23 2
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 4 90 28 2 20 51 8 7 17 23 6 2 16 14 26 4
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 1 107 22 4 19 42 5 1 8 12 3 1 22 18 26 3
TOTAL 31 899 285 24 221 444 76 20 137 273 51 11 242 252 304 18
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 4 8429 2 1310411 4 1622 7 1 554029 2
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 3 81 26 3 21 111 12 1 9 20 5 1 43 39 35 0
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 6 68 47 4 28 114 16 2 6 25 4 0 46 41 37 1
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 6 9150 1 2810512 2 1133 4 1 475021 1
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 3 64 28 2 31 142 10 2 8 38 4 2 47 52 21 1
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 3 63 47 2 30 126 7 4 3 28 5 0 65 38 19 0
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 5 61 30 1 15 107 8 2 3 30 5 1 42 37 26 0
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 6 50 29 2 12 117 5 0 3 30 1 1 22 18 23 1
TOTAL 36 562 286 17 178 926 81 17 59 226 35 7 367 315 211 6
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 19 523 185 15 151 236 38 11 58 179 28 5 164 170 212 8
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 18 286 172 9 117 487 45 10 28 124 17 3 205 181 98 3
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.763 2.0%
PM 45 487 117 0.887
PM 0.971 1.4%
AM 38 236 151 0.754
PHF 0.845 0.669 AM PM
28 58 212 98
124 179 170 181
17 28 164 205
PM AM
PHF 0.7 0.976 PHF
0.838 19 523 185 AM
0.81 18 286 172 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
Fair Oaks Ave / Halcyon Rd
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1127
-120.5916
Page 1 of 3Halcyon Rd
Halcyon Rd
Fair Oaks AveFair Oaks Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 161
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0006000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0005000200010000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0001000200000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0004000200010001
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 00014000400050001
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0003100013000280008
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 00018001000010005
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0002000000010002
TOTAL 00081001230003700017
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0001000200030000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0001000200030000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0003000300000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0001000100000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000600020000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000200000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0001000000000000
TOTAL 00070001600080000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 000240001000070002
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 00040001200020000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 043 PM0004
PM Peak Total 0 18 AM 00024
Peds <>02 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>72
Peds <>10000AM
12000PM
Turning Movement Report
Fair Oaks Ave / Halcyon Rd 35.1127
San Luis Obispo -120.5916
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Halcyon Rd
Fair Oaks Ave Fair Oaks Ave
Halcyon Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 162
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 112603054121150300210
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 31800305982360210010
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 3163050120215480510010
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 716205187283150510000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 1011002077215150400000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 198802074341150400000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 19702061126170310000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 2114030581211601300100
TOTAL 46 1040 0 25 1 590 148 24 177 0 39 40330
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 792061131297200810101
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 591020124342140700000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 3950101412322811320000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 7114110122301290700000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 5760101513621811100000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 585012167253230900000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 573011126251240510000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 156021118211200500000
TOTAL 38 682 1 15 5 1080 223 19 176 2 65 40101
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 236150151343781511401630020
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 2037014258111489824020000
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.825 2.8%
PM 114 581 2 0.898
PM 0.972 1.1%
AM 78 343 1 0.748
PHF 0.833 0.613 AM PM
98 114 2 0
20 00
40 16 0 0
PM AM
PHF 0.5 ##### PHF
0.872 23 615 0 AM
0.801 20 370 1 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
S Halcyon Rd / Farroll Ave
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1107
-120.5916
Page 1 of 3S Halcyon Rd
S Halcyon Rd
Farroll AveFaroll Ave
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 163
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000001
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000001
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000001
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000010000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000020003
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000030000
TOTAL 0000000000060006
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000010001
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000010000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000001000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000001000020001
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000010003
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM 0000001000020001
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 04 PM1000
PM Peak Total 1 3 AM 0000
Peds <>13 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>12
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
S Halcyon Rd / Farroll Ave 35.1107
San Luis Obispo -120.5916
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
S Halcyon Rd
Faroll Ave Farroll Ave
S Halcyon Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 164
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 67101040170460720000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 990030342216202010020
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 1385012694746202500100
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 10109040484324211530000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 138204048264280700000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 327401146291180810110
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 956000421952501110020
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 1069020451723501610130
TOTAL 102636016337222019318110990380
Time Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 1663011744053202850100
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 1569132933322202110222
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 1161021805103302300010
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 1673002753723501600120
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 1348110994311811601000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 448000984903103100010
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 1355022744501701800010
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 641010813601302000000
TOTAL 94458210867433410201117361472
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks Left Thru Right Trucks
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 4536601221991381119416740120
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 58266166322161912208860452
PHF Trucks PHF
AM 0.835 2.7%
PM 161 322 6 0.926
PM 0.989 2.2%
AM 138 199 2 0.718
PHF 0.875 0.753 AM PM
122 194 2 5
01 14
88 67 0 0
PM AM
PHF 0.375 0.563 PHF
0.863 45 366 0 AM
0.913 58 266 1 PM
Turning Movement Report
Southbound
S Halcyon Rd / The Pike
San Luis Obispo
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
Eastbound
35.1064
-120.5917
Page 1 of 3S Halcyon Rd
S Halcyon Rd
The PikeThe Pike
Northbound Westbound
Southbound
Southbound Eastbound
Northbound Westbound
Eastbound WestboundNorthbound
Item 9.b. - Page 165
Metro Traffic Data Inc.
310 N. Irwin Street - Suite 20
Hanford, CA 93230 Prepared For:
GHD
800-975-6938 Phone/Fax 943 Reserve Drive
www.metrotrafficdata.com Roseville, CA 95678
LOCATION LATITUDE
COUNTY LONGITUDE
COLLECTION DATE WEATHER
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:00 AM - 7:15 AM 0000000000000000
7:15 AM - 7:30 AM 0000000000000000
7:30 AM - 7:45 AM 0000000000000000
7:45 AM - 8:00 AM 0000000000000000
8:00 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
8:15 AM - 8:30 AM 0000000000000000
8:30 AM - 8:45 AM 0000000000000000
8:45 AM - 9:00 AM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000000000
Time Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
4:00 PM - 4:15 PM 0000000000000000
4:15 PM - 4:30 PM 0000000000000000
4:30 PM - 4:45 PM 0000000000000000
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 0000000000000000
5:15 PM - 5:30 PM 0000000000000000
5:30 PM - 5:45 PM 0000000000000000
5:45 PM - 6:00 PM 0000000000000000
TOTAL 0000000000000000
PEAK HOUR Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right
7:15 AM - 8:15 AM 0000000000000000
4:00 PM - 5:00 PM 0000000000000000
Bikes Peds
Peds <>
AM Peak Total 00 PM0000
PM Peak Total 0 0 AM 0000
Peds <>00 AM PM
00 00
00 00
00 00
PM AM
Peds <>00
Peds <>0000AM
0000PM
Turning Movement Report
S Halcyon Rd / The Pike 35.1064
San Luis Obispo -120.5917
Thursday, November 14, 2019 Clear
E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes E.Leg
Peds
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes S.Leg
Peds
Eastbound Bikes
Westbound Bikes W.Leg
Peds
S Halcyon Rd
The Pike The Pike
S Halcyon Rd Page 2 of 3
Northbound Bikes N.Leg
Peds
Southbound Bikes
Item 9.b. - Page 166
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix B
Synchro Reports
Item 9.b. - Page 167
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
1: Oak Park Blvd & James Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 44 43 114 125 100 44 496 225 105 32 285 71Future Volume (veh/h) 44 43 114 125 100 44 496 225 105 32 285 71Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 54 52 17 152 122 38 605 274 82 39 348 61Peak Hour Factor 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 67 138 117 196 199 62 622 1345 394 47 526 91Arrive On Green 0.04 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.15 0.15 0.35 0.50 0.50 0.03 0.17 0.17Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1579 1781 1367 426 1781 2709 794 1781 3026 525Grp Volume(v), veh/h 54 52 17 152 0 160 605 178 178 39 203 206Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1579 1781 0 1793 1781 1777 1726 1781 1777 1774Q Serve(g_s), s 1.7 1.5 0.6 4.8 0.0 4.8 19.2 3.2 3.3 1.2 6.1 6.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.7 1.5 0.6 4.8 0.0 4.8 19.2 3.2 3.3 1.2 6.1 6.2Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.24 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.30Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 67 138 117 196 0 262 622 882 857 47 309 309V/C Ratio(X) 0.80 0.38 0.15 0.78 0.00 0.61 0.97 0.20 0.21 0.83 0.66 0.67Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 622 816 689 622 0 782 622 1085 1055 622 1085 1084HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.3 25.3 24.8 24.8 0.0 22.9 18.4 8.1 8.1 27.8 22.1 22.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.9 0.6 0.2 2.5 0.0 0.9 29.2 0.0 0.0 12.7 0.9 0.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.8 0.6 0.2 2.0 0.0 1.9 11.5 0.9 0.9 0.7 2.4 2.5Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 35.2 25.9 25.1 27.3 0.0 23.8 47.5 8.1 8.1 40.5 23.0 23.1LnGrp LOS DCCCACDAADCCApproach Vol, veh/h 123 312 961 448Approach Delay, s/veh 29.9 25.5 32.9 24.5Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.0 33.4 9.8 9.1 23.5 14.9 5.7 13.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 5.3 6.8 3.5 21.2 8.2 3.7 6.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.5
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 29.4HCM 6th LOS C
Item 9.b. - Page 168
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
2: Rodeo Dr & James Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.3Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 76 31 29 119 0 31 08004Future Vol, veh/h 2 76 31 29 119 0 31 08004Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 2 92 37 35 143 0 37 0 10 0 0 5Number of Lanes 110110010010
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 2 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 1 2 2Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 2HCM Control Delay 8.2 8.5 8 7.1HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1Vol Left, %79% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, %0% 0% 71% 0% 100% 0%Vol Right, %21% 0% 29% 0% 0% 100%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 39 2 107 29 119 4LT Vol 31 2 0 29 0 0Through Vol 0 0 76 0 119 0RT Vol 8 0 31 0 0 4Lane Flow Rate 47 2 129 35 143 5Geometry Grp 277772Degree of Util (X) 0.061 0.003 0.162 0.05 0.187 0.006Departure Headway (Hd) 4.702 5.217 4.512 5.191 4.691 4.119Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap766 678 784 684 758 873Service Time 2.703 3.009 2.305 2.963 2.462 2.122HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.061 0.003 0.165 0.051 0.189 0.006HCM Control Delay 8 8 8.2 8.2 8.6 7.1HCM Lane LOS AAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 0 0.6 0.2 0.7 0
Item 9.b. - Page 169
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
3: Tally Ho Rd & James Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.6Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 52 73 40 65 85 117Future Vol, veh/h 52 73 40 65 85 117Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 63 88 48 78 102 141Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 1 1Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0Conflicting Approach RightNB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.5 8.7HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, %38% 42% 0%Vol Thru, %62% 0% 42%Vol Right, %0% 58% 58%Sign Control Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 105 125 202LT Vol 40 52 0Through Vol 65 0 85RT Vol 0 73 117Lane Flow Rate 127 151 243Geometry Grp 1 1 1Degree of Util (X) 0.162 0.187 0.276Departure Headway (Hd) 4.607 4.465 4.081Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes YesCap779 804 881Service Time 2.631 2.49 2.101HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.163 0.188 0.276HCM Control Delay 8.5 8.5 8.7HCM Lane LOS A A AHCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.7 1.1
Item 9.b. - Page 170
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
4: Oak Park Blvd & US 101 NB On Ramp/W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 198 36 347 385 578 191 71 334 168Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 198 36 347 385 578 191 71 334 168Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 247 0 39 423 635 170 78 367 78Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 222222Cap, veh/h 472 0 210 755 1134 303 484 682 143Arrive On Green 0.13 0.00 0.13 0.22 0.41 0.41 0.05 0.23 0.23Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1585 1781 2773 741 1781 2922 614Grp Volume(v), veh/h 247 0 39 423 407 398 78 222 223Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1585 1781 1777 1737 1781 1777 1760Q Serve(g_s), s 1.9 0.0 0.7 4.4 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.3 3.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.9 0.0 0.7 4.4 5.3 5.3 1.0 3.3 3.3Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.43 1.00 0.35Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 472 0 210 755 727 711 484 414 410V/C Ratio(X)0.52 0.00 0.19 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.16 0.53 0.54Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2386 0 1062 1245 1480 1447 1288 1480 1466HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.1 0.0 11.6 5.3 6.8 6.8 8.1 10.1 10.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.4Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.6 1.1 1.1 0.2 0.8 0.8Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 12.5 0.0 11.7 5.6 7.0 7.1 8.2 10.5 10.5LnGrp LOS B A B AAAABBApproach Vol, veh/h 286 1228 523Approach Delay, s/veh 12.4 6.5 10.2Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s5.0 16.7 10.2 11.4 8.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 15.0 25.0 20.1Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.0 7.3 6.4 5.3 3.9Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.3 0.5 1.5 0.4
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.3HCM 6th LOS A
NotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 171
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
5: Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 259 44 160 19 32 130 55 770 26 82 319 133Future Volume (veh/h) 259 44 160 19 32 130 55 770 26 82 319 133Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 310 0 22 20 34 4 59 819 25 87 339 50Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 510 0 226 32 55 75 528 1191 36 362 1262 560Arrive On Green 0.14 0.00 0.14 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.03 0.34 0.34 0.05 0.36 0.36Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1582 680 1156 1576 1781 3520 107 1781 3554 1578Grp Volume(v), veh/h 310 0 22 54 0 4 59 413 431 87 339 50Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1582 1836 0 1576 1781 1777 1851 1781 1777 1578Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 0.0 0.5 1.1 0.0 0.1 0.9 8.0 8.0 1.2 2.7 0.8Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 0.0 0.5 1.1 0.0 0.1 0.9 8.0 8.0 1.2 2.7 0.8Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.37 1.00 1.00 0.06 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 510 0 226 87 0 75 528 601 626 362 1262 560V/C Ratio(X) 0.61 0.00 0.10 0.62 0.00 0.05 0.11 0.69 0.69 0.24 0.27 0.09Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1789 0 794 692 0 593 1137 1115 1162 942 2231 991HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.0 0.0 14.8 18.6 0.0 18.1 8.1 11.4 11.4 8.7 9.2 8.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.1 2.6 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.1 0.0 0.1 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.6 2.7 0.4 0.8 0.2Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.4 0.0 14.9 21.2 0.0 18.2 8.2 11.9 11.9 8.8 9.2 8.6LnGrp LOS B A B C A B ABBAAAApproach Vol, veh/h 332 58 903 476Approach Delay, s/veh 16.3 21.0 11.6 9.1Approach LOS B C B A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s5.5 17.9 10.1 4.9 18.5 6.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 25.0 15.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.2 10.0 5.3 2.9 4.7 3.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.4 0.5 0.0 1.5 0.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.1HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 172
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
6: US 101 NB Ramps/Camino Mercado & W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 49 206 0 75 195 10 294 26 7 10 33 21Future Volume (veh/h) 49 206 0 75 195 10 294 26 7 10 33 21Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1870 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 52 217 0 79 205 9 309 27 0 11 35 1Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, %333333233333Cap, veh/h 81 616 0 110 337 15 429 447 75 76 2Arrive On Green 0.05 0.17 0.00 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3618 0 1767 1764 77 1781 1856 1572 1767 1795 51Grp Volume(v), veh/h 52 217 0 79 0 214 309 27 0 11 0 36Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 0 1767 0 1842 1781 1856 1572 1767 0 1846Q Serve(g_s), s 1.0 1.8 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.5 5.3 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.0 1.8 0.0 1.5 0.0 3.5 5.3 0.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.6Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 81 616 0 110 0 352 429 447 75 0 78V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.35 0.00 0.72 0.00 0.61 0.72 0.06 0.15 0.00 0.46Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 318 1691 0 530 0 1104 1709 1780 848 0 886HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.6 12.1 0.0 15.4 0.0 12.3 11.6 9.7 0.0 15.4 0.0 15.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 8.2 0.3 0.0 8.4 0.0 1.7 2.3 0.1 0.0 0.9 0.0 4.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 1.2 1.9 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.3Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 23.8 12.4 0.0 23.8 0.0 14.0 13.9 9.8 0.0 16.3 0.0 19.8LnGrp LOS C B A C A B B A B A BApproach Vol, veh/h 269 293 336 A 47Approach Delay, s/veh 14.6 16.7 13.6 19.0Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s5.5 10.4 12.0 6.1 9.8 5.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s6.0 20.0 32.0 10.0 16.0 16.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.0 5.5 7.3 3.5 3.8 2.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.9 1.1 0.1 0.9 0.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.1HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUnsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
Item 9.b. - Page 173
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
7: W Branch St & Rancho Pkwy Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 33 110 220 161 133 46Future Volume (veh/h) 33 110 220 161 133 46Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 35 116 232 73 148 0Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, %222220Cap, veh/h 78 1820 815 250 487 220Arrive On Green 0.04 0.51 0.30 0.30 0.14 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 2771 822 3563 1610Grp Volume(v), veh/h 35 116 152 153 148 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1777 1722 1781 1610Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.8 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.8 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.48 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 78 1820 541 524 487 220V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.06 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 2501 6654 3327 3225 5003 2261HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.0 2.6 5.7 5.7 8.3 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.5 0.0 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.1 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.4 2.7 6.1 6.2 8.4 0.0LnGrp LOS BAAAAAApproach Vol, veh/h 151 305 148Approach Delay, s/veh 4.7 6.2 8.4Approach LOS A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.4 10.5 6.4 14.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s30.0 40.0 30.0 40.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s2.4 3.4 2.8 2.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 0.1 1.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 6.4HCM 6th LOS A
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 174
Timings Arroyo Grande
8: Brisco Rd & W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL Ø5 Ø6Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)68 173 146 130 256Future Volume (vph) 68 173 146 130 256Turn Type NA Perm pm+pt NA ProtProtected Phases 4 3 8 6 5 5 6Permitted Phases 4 8Detector Phase 44386 5Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 7.0Minimum Split (s)11.9 11.9 7.5 9.9 8.5 10.8Total Split (s)18.9 18.9 11.5 30.9 17.5 31.6Total Split (%)23.6% 23.6% 14.4% 38.6%22% 40%Yellow Time (s)3.9 3.9 3.0 3.9 3.0 3.0All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.8Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s)4.9 4.9 3.5 4.9Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None None C-MinAct Effct Green (s)8.7 8.7 25.2 23.8 47.5Actuated g/C Ratio 0.11 0.11 0.32 0.30 0.59v/c Ratio 0.35 0.54 0.37 0.25 0.22Control Delay 37.1 11.8 22.9 22.1 0.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.3Total Delay 37.1 12.5 22.9 22.1 0.5LOSD B C C AApproach Delay 19.5 22.5 0.5Approach LOS B C A
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:NBL, Start of YellowNatural Cycle: 45Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.65Intersection Signal Delay: 12.0 Intersection LOS: BIntersection Capacity Utilization 34.7%ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 8: Brisco Rd & W Branch St
Item 9.b. - Page 175
Timings Arroyo Grande
9: Brisco Rd & US 101 NB On/US 101 NB Off Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group WBT WBR NBL NBT SBT Ø3 Ø4 Ø8Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)0 125 334 275 286Future Volume (vph)0 125 334 275 286Turn Type NA Perm Split NA NAProtected Phases 5 6 6 3 4 8 3 4 8Permitted Phases 5Detector Phase 55663 4 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 5.0Minimum Split (s)8.5 8.5 10.8 10.8 7.5 11.9 9.9Total Split (s)17.5 17.5 31.6 31.6 11.5 18.9 30.9Total Split (%)21.9% 21.9% 39.5% 39.5%14% 24% 39%Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 3.9All-Red Time (s)0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.5 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.8 3.8Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None C-Min C-Min None None NoneAct Effct Green (s)10.6 10.6 33.3 33.3 25.2Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.42 0.42 0.32v/c Ratio 0.65 0.41 0.48 0.38 0.58Control Delay 45.6 9.9 26.3 24.2 14.6Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 1.7 1.1 64.6Total Delay 45.6 9.9 28.0 25.3 79.2LOSD A C C EApproach Delay 29.0 26.8 79.2Approach LOS C C E
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:NBL, Start of YellowNatural Cycle: 45Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.65Intersection Signal Delay: 41.2 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 53.6%ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 9: Brisco Rd & US 101 NB On/US 101 NB Off
Item 9.b. - Page 176
Timings Arroyo Grande
10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)21 122 30 113 371 221 65 211Future Volume (vph) 21 122 30 113 371 221 65 211Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+ov NA Perm NAProtected Phases 8 4 2 1 2Permitted Phases 8441Detector Phase 88442112Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Minimum Split (s)9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 7.5 8.1 8.1 7.5Total Split (s)18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 37.6 24.1 24.1 37.6Total Split (%)22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 47.0% 30.1% 30.1% 47.0%Yellow Time (s)4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.0 3.6 3.6 3.0All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s)5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None Min Min C-Min None None C-MinAct Effct Green (s)10.3 10.3 10.3 10.3 53.1 15.8 15.8 41.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.66 0.20 0.20 0.51v/c Ratio 0.15 0.69 0.27 0.55 0.23 0.79 0.20 0.54Control Delay 31.8 46.3 35.6 41.0 5.0 46.1 7.3 26.2Queue Delay 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0Total Delay 31.9 46.3 35.6 41.0 5.0 46.1 7.3 82.3LOSCDDDADAFApproach Delay 44.5 14.7 38.0 82.3Approach LOS D B D F
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:SBTL, Start of Yellow, Master IntersectionNatural Cycle: 50Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.79Intersection Signal Delay: 43.8 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 63.6%ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real
Item 9.b. - Page 177
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
11: W Branch St & Rodeo Dr Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 6
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 134 77 110 50 37 166Future Vol, veh/h 134 77 110 50 37 166Conflicting Peds, #/hr 000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 125 - - - 0 -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 82 82 82 82 82 82Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 163 94 134 61 45 202
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 195 0 - 0 585 165 Stage 1 ----165- Stage 2 ----420-Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1378 - - - 473 879 Stage 1 ----864- Stage 2 ----663-Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1378 - - - 417 879Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----512- Stage 1 ----762- Stage 2 ----663-
Approach EB WB SBHCM Control Delay, s 5.1 0 11.8HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)1378 - - - 777HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.119 - - - 0.319HCM Control Delay (s) 8 - - - 11.8HCM Lane LOS A - - - BHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.4 - - - 1.4
Item 9.b. - Page 178
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
12: Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 200 32 118 6 52 17 414 71 3 11 186 66Future Volume (veh/h) 200 32 118 6 52 17 414 71 3 11 186 66Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 211 34 35 6 55 7 492 0 0 12 196 11Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333Cap, veh/h 287 143 147 252 243 31 729 383 17 284 256Arrive On Green 0.16 0.17 0.17 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.16 0.16Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 836 861 1767 1611 205 3534 1856 0 107 1743 1572Grp Volume(v), veh/h 211 0 69 6 0 62 492 0 0 208 0 11Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 0 1698 1767 0 1816 1767 1856 0 1850 0 1572Q Serve(g_s), s 5.4 0.0 1.7 0.1 0.0 1.4 6.1 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.4 0.0 1.7 0.1 0.0 1.4 6.1 0.0 0.0 5.1 0.0 0.3Prop In Lane 1.00 0.51 1.00 0.11 1.00 0.00 0.06 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 287 0 289 252 0 274 729 383 301 0 256V/C Ratio(X)0.74 0.00 0.24 0.02 0.00 0.23 0.67 0.00 0.69 0.00 0.04Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 850 0 568 296 0 342 2217 1164 1547 0 1315HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 0.0 17.2 17.6 0.0 17.8 17.5 0.0 0.0 18.9 0.0 16.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.7 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.4 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.8 0.0 0.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.2 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.6 2.2 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.0 0.1Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.7 0.0 17.6 17.7 0.0 18.3 18.6 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.0 16.9LnGrp LOS C ABBABBA CABApproach Vol, veh/h 280 68 492 A 219Approach Delay, s/veh 21.5 18.2 18.6 21.5Approach LOS C B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 11.3 11.3 14.0 10.3 12.3 11.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5 4.1 3.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.0 9.0 30.0 8.0 16.0 40.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.4 3.4 8.1 2.1 3.7 7.1Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 0.1 1.7 0.0 0.2 1.2
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 19.9HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
Item 9.b. - Page 179
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
13: Oak Park Blvd & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 134 312 20 68 341 149 43 384 121 116 187 124Future Volume (veh/h) 134 312 20 68 341 149 43 384 121 116 187 124Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 141 328 17 72 359 30 45 404 25 122 197 31Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333Cap, veh/h 184 886 46 90 728 319 53 796 353 224 797 123Arrive On Green 0.10 0.26 0.26 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.03 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.26 0.26Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3409 176 1767 3526 1545 1767 3526 1562 3428 3057 473Grp Volume(v), veh/h 141 169 176 72 359 30 45 404 25 122 112 116Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1823 1767 1763 1545 1767 1763 1562 1714 1763 1767Q Serve(g_s), s 3.3 3.3 3.4 1.7 3.8 0.7 1.1 4.3 0.5 1.5 2.1 2.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.3 3.3 3.4 1.7 3.8 0.7 1.1 4.3 0.5 1.5 2.1 2.2Prop In Lane 1.00 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.27Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 184 458 473 90 728 319 53 796 353 224 460 461V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.37 0.37 0.80 0.49 0.09 0.84 0.51 0.07 0.55 0.24 0.25Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 828 1239 1281 828 2065 905 828 2065 915 1607 1033 1035HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.6 12.9 12.9 20.0 15.0 13.7 20.6 14.4 13.0 19.3 12.5 12.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.5 0.5 0.5 6.1 0.5 0.1 12.4 0.5 0.1 0.8 0.3 0.3Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.3 1.2 1.2 0.8 1.3 0.2 0.6 1.5 0.2 0.5 0.7 0.8Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.1 13.4 13.4 26.1 15.5 13.8 33.0 14.9 13.1 20.1 12.7 12.8LnGrp LOS C B B C B B C B B C B BApproach Vol, veh/h 486 461 474 350Approach Delay, s/veh 15.7 17.0 16.6 15.3Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.9 14.3 4.8 15.6 5.7 16.6 6.3 14.1Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 25.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 25.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s5.3 5.8 3.1 4.2 3.7 5.4 3.5 6.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.2 0.0 1.2 0.1 2.0 0.2 2.6
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.2HCM 6th LOS B
Item 9.b. - Page 180
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
14: Courtland St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 42 494 12 30 471 19 48 27 34 66 14 61Future Volume (veh/h) 42 494 12 30 471 19 48 27 34 66 14 61Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 46 537 11 33 512 18 52 29 1 72 15 3Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333Cap, veh/h 53 988 20 175 1211 43 485 334 12 476 280 56Arrive On Green 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.10 0.35 0.35 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3532 72 1767 3473 122 1377 1782 61 1365 1496 299Grp Volume(v), veh/h 46 268 280 33 260 270 52 0 30 72 0 18Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1841 1767 1763 1832 1377 0 1843 1365 0 1795Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 3.9 3.9 0.5 3.4 3.4 1.0 0.0 0.4 1.4 0.0 0.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 3.9 3.9 0.5 3.4 3.4 1.2 0.0 0.4 1.8 0.0 0.2Prop In Lane 1.00 0.04 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.17Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 53 493 515 175 615 639 485 0 345 476 0 336V/C Ratio(X) 0.87 0.54 0.54 0.19 0.42 0.42 0.11 0.00 0.09 0.15 0.00 0.05Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1171 2336 2441 1171 2336 2428 1140 0 1222 1125 0 1190HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.6 9.2 9.2 12.5 7.5 7.5 10.6 0.0 10.1 10.9 0.0 10.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.8 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 1.0 1.0 0.2 0.7 0.8 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.1Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.4 9.6 9.6 12.7 7.7 7.7 10.6 0.0 10.2 10.9 0.0 10.1LnGrp LOS C AABAABABBABApproach Vol, veh/h 594 563 82 90Approach Delay, s/veh 11.1 8.0 10.4 10.8Approach LOS B A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.9 15.4 9.9 7.0 13.3 9.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s2.8 5.4 3.2 2.5 5.9 3.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.0 0.1 0.0 2.1 0.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.7HCM 6th LOS A
NotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 181
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
15: Elm St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 20 495 66 139 444 37 123 30 272 38 27 36Future Volume (veh/h) 20 495 66 139 444 37 123 30 272 38 27 36Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 21 527 57 148 472 33 131 32 50 40 29 16Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333Cap, veh/h 139 948 102 391 1107 77 463 278 233 262 105 44Arrive On Green 0.08 0.30 0.30 0.11 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3205 346 3428 3343 233 1350 1856 1560 564 703 294Grp Volume(v), veh/h 21 289 295 148 248 257 131 32 50 85 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 1788 1714 1763 1814 1350 1856 1560 1560 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 4.1 4.1 1.2 3.3 3.3 0.9 0.4 0.8 0.4 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 4.1 4.1 1.2 3.3 3.3 2.3 0.4 0.8 1.3 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.19 1.00 0.13 1.00 1.00 0.47 0.19Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 139 521 529 391 584 601 463 278 233 411 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.55 0.56 0.38 0.43 0.43 0.28 0.12 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1189 2372 2406 2307 2372 2440 1169 1248 1049 1196 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.8 8.8 8.8 12.2 7.7 7.7 11.6 10.9 11.1 11.3 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.1 1.0 1.0 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.0 9.2 9.2 12.4 7.9 7.9 11.8 11.0 11.3 11.4 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS BAABAABBBBAAApproach Vol, veh/h 605 653 213 85Approach Delay, s/veh 9.3 8.9 11.5 11.4Approach LOS A A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.4 13.7 8.6 6.3 14.7 8.6Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.2 6.1 4.3 2.3 5.3 3.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.3 0.3 0.0 1.9 0.2
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.6HCM 6th LOS A
NotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 182
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
16: Grand Ave & Brisco Rd Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 3.3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 242 512 503 68 22 169Future Vol, veh/h 242 512 503 68 22 169Conflicting Peds, #/hr 100111Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 130 - - 130 30 -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94Heavy Vehicles, %444444Mvmt Flow 257 545 535 72 23 180
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 608 0 - 0 1324 270 Stage 1 ----536- Stage 2 ----788-Critical Hdwy 4.18 - - - 6.88 6.98Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.88 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.88 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.24 - - - 3.54 3.34Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 953 - - - 145 722 Stage 1 ----545- Stage 2 ----403-Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 952 - - - 106 721Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----231- Stage 1 ----397- Stage 2 ----403-
Approach EB WB SBHCM Control Delay, s 3.3 0 12.8HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2Capacity (veh/h)952 - - - 231 721HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.27 - - - 0.101 0.249HCM Control Delay (s) 10.2 - - - 22.3 11.6HCM Lane LOS B - - - C BHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.1 - - - 0.3 1
Item 9.b. - Page 183
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
17: Halcyon Rd/Halcyon Road & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 66 421 94 177 532 26 139 345 267 20 196 52Future Volume (veh/h) 66 421 94 177 532 26 139 345 267 20 196 52Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 74 473 13 199 598 26 156 388 61 22 220 39Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333Cap, veh/h 95 691 306 247 971 42 455 477 403 36 370 68Arrive On Green 0.05 0.20 0.20 0.14 0.28 0.28 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.13 0.13Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3526 1560 1767 3441 149 1767 1856 1565 272 2807 518Grp Volume(v), veh/h 74 473 13 199 306 318 156 388 61 149 0 132Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1763 1560 1767 1763 1828 1767 1856 1565 1842 0 1755Q Serve(g_s), s 2.6 7.8 0.4 6.8 9.4 9.5 4.5 12.3 1.9 4.8 0.0 4.4Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.6 7.8 0.4 6.8 9.4 9.5 4.5 12.3 1.9 4.8 0.0 4.4Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.15 0.30Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 95 691 306 247 497 516 455 477 403 243 0 232V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.68 0.04 0.81 0.62 0.62 0.34 0.81 0.15 0.61 0.00 0.57Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 1972 873 565 986 1022 847 890 750 883 0 842HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.2 23.4 20.4 26.1 19.5 19.5 18.9 21.8 18.0 25.6 0.0 25.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 5.1 0.5 0.0 2.4 0.5 0.4 0.2 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.8Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.2 3.0 0.1 2.8 3.5 3.7 1.7 5.0 0.6 2.0 0.0 1.8Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.3 23.8 20.4 28.4 20.0 20.0 19.1 23.1 18.0 26.6 0.0 26.3LnGrp LOS CCCCBBBCBCACApproach Vol, veh/h 560 823 605 281Approach Delay, s/veh 25.1 22.0 21.6 26.5Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 12.2 16.5 13.0 6.9 21.9 20.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 * 4.7 3.5 * 4.2 4.8Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 * 35 * 30 20.0 * 35 30.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.8 9.8 6.8 4.6 11.5 14.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.1 1.0 0.1 2.3 1.6
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.2HCM 6th LOS C
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 184
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
18: Grand Ave & El Camino Real Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 1.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 52 733 1 1 681 129 0 0 0 29 0 13Future Vol, veh/h 52 733 1 1 681 129 0 0 0 29 0 13Conflicting Peds, #/hr 503305303505Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 100 - -------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88 88Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333Mvmt Flow 59 833 1 1 774 147 0 0 0 33 0 15
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 926 0 0 837 0 0 1349 1883 425 1395 1810 471 Stage 1 ------955955-855855- Stage 2 ------394928-540955-Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - 4.16 - - 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.23 - - 2.23 - - 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 728 - - 786 - - 108 69 575 100 77 536 Stage 1 ------276333-317371- Stage 2 ------600343-491333-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 725 - - 784 - - 98 63 571 93 70 532Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------9863-9370- Stage 1 ------253305-290369- Stage 2 ------580341-449305-
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.7 0 0 50.6HCM LOS A F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)- 725 - - 784 - - 125HCM Lane V/C Ratio - 0.082 - - 0.001 - - 0.382HCM Control Delay (s) 0 10.4 - - 9.6 - - 50.6HCM Lane LOS A B - - A - - FHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - 0.3 - - 0 - - 1.6
Item 9.b. - Page 185
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
19: Grand Ave & US 101 SB Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 0 531 245 54 802 0000159028Future Volume (veh/h) 0 531 245 54 802 0000159028Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1841 1841 1841 1841 0 1841 1841 1841Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 610 282 62 922 0 183 0 3Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87Percent Heavy Veh, %044440 444Cap, veh/h 0 840 388 89 1774 0 259 0 231Arrive On Green 0.00 0.36 0.36 0.05 0.51 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.15Sat Flow, veh/h 0 2413 1072 1753 3589 0 1753 0 1560Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 460 432 62 922 0 183 0 3Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1749 1644 1753 1749 0 1753 0 1560Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 8.4 8.5 1.3 6.5 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 8.4 8.5 1.3 6.5 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.1Prop In Lane 0.00 0.65 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 633 595 89 1774 0 259 0 231V/C Ratio(X)0.00 0.73 0.73 0.69 0.52 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.01Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 2167 2037 945 4711 0 1228 0 1093HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.2 10.3 17.3 6.1 0.0 15.0 0.0 13.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.6 0.6 3.6 0.1 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 2.3 2.1 0.5 1.3 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 10.8 10.9 20.9 6.2 0.0 17.7 0.0 13.5LnGrp LOS A B B C A A B A BApproach Vol, veh/h 892 984 186Approach Delay, s/veh 10.9 7.1 17.6Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.4 22.0 9.7 27.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 8.6 * 4.2 * 8.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 * 46 * 26 * 50Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 10.5 5.7 8.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.9 0.8 3.6
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 9.7HCM 6th LOS A
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 186
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
20: US 101 NB & Grand Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 107 583 0 0 625 400 234 0 80 0 0 0Future Volume (veh/h) 107 583 0 0 625 400 234 0 80 0 0 0Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 0 0 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 129 702 0 0 753 374 282 0 8Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83Percent Heavy Veh, %330033333Cap, veh/h 199 2209 0 0 1014 502 366 0 326Arrive On Green 0.11 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.44 0.44 0.21 0.00 0.21Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3618 0 0 2376 1132 1767 0 1572Grp Volume(v), veh/h 129 702 0 0 581 546 282 0 8Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1763 0 0 1763 1652 1767 0 1572Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 4.6 0.0 0.0 13.6 13.7 7.5 0.0 0.2Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.5 4.6 0.0 0.0 13.6 13.7 7.5 0.0 0.2Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 199 2209 0 0 783 734 366 0 326V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.74 0.74 0.77 0.00 0.02Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 708 3532 0 0 1766 1655 1062 0 945HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 21.2 4.3 0.0 0.0 11.5 11.5 18.7 0.0 15.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.4 0.9 0.0 0.0 4.5 4.2 2.8 0.0 0.1Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 22.5 4.4 0.0 0.0 12.0 12.1 20.0 0.0 15.8LnGrp LOS C AAABBBABApproach Vol, veh/h 831 1127 290Approach Delay, s/veh 7.2 12.1 19.9Approach LOS A B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 35.9 9.1 26.8 14.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 3.5 4.6 3.7Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 50.0 20.0 50.0 30.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 5.5 15.7 9.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.4 0.1 6.5 1.0
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.3HCM 6th LOS B
Item 9.b. - Page 187
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
21: Grand Ave/E Branch St & W Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 53 588 0 14 964 125 11 0 22 18 2 32Future Vol, veh/h 53 588 0 14 964 125 11 0 22 18 2 32Conflicting Peds, #/hr 003000000000Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 90 - - 65 - -------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 81Heavy Vehicles, %444444444444Mvmt Flow 65 726 0 17 1190 154 14 0 27 22 2 40
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 1344 0 0 729 0 0 1489 2237 366 1794 2160 672 Stage 1 ------859859-1301 1301 - Stage 2 ------6301378 - 493 859 -Critical Hdwy 4.18 - - 4.18 - - 7.58 6.58 6.98 7.58 6.58 6.98Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.58 5.58 - 6.58 5.58 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.24 - - 2.24 - - 3.54 4.04 3.34 3.54 4.04 3.34Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 498 - - 857 - - 84 41 625 50 46 394 Stage 1 ------313367-167226- Stage 2 ------431207-521367-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 498 - - 855 - - 64 35 623 42 39 394Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------6435-4239- Stage 1 ------271318-145221- Stage 2 ------376203-433318-
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 1.1 0.1 35.3 104HCM LOS E F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)159 498 - - 855 - - 93HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.256 0.131 - - 0.02 - - 0.69HCM Control Delay (s) 35.3 13.3 - - 9.3 - - 104HCM Lane LOS E B - - A - - FHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1 0.5 - - 0.1 - - 3.4
Item 9.b. - Page 188
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
22: Traffic Way/Wesley St & E Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 14 433 178 110 534 8 528 24 19 7 34 16Future Volume (veh/h) 14 433 178 110 534 8 528 24 19 7 34 16Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 17 535 0 136 659 9 673 0 0 9 42 4Peak Hour Factor 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81 0.81Percent Heavy Veh, %333333333333Cap, veh/h 399 671 357 1432 20 892 0 12 56 5Arrive On Green 0.04 0.36 0.00 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.04Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 1856 1572 1767 3559 49 3534 0 1572 297 1387 132Grp Volume(v), veh/h 17 535 0 136 326 342 673 0 0 55 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1856 1572 1767 1763 1845 1767 0 1572 1817 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 15.0 0.0 2.6 7.9 7.9 10.2 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 15.0 0.0 2.6 7.9 7.9 10.2 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 0.16 0.07Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 399 671 357 709 742 892 0 74 0 0V/C Ratio(X)0.04 0.80 0.38 0.46 0.46 0.75 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 633 1379 610 1310 1371 1894 0 471 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 10.7 16.6 0.0 11.8 12.7 12.7 20.0 0.0 0.0 27.5 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.2 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.4 1.3 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 6.1 0.0 0.9 2.9 3.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.7 18.8 0.0 12.1 13.2 13.1 21.3 0.0 0.0 33.0 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS B B B B B C A C A AApproach Vol, veh/h 552 A 804 673 A 55Approach Delay, s/veh 18.6 13.0 21.3 33.0Approach LOS B B C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 8.4 25.1 6.0 6.0 27.5 18.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.7 * 4.2 3.7 3.7 * 4.2 3.7Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 * 43 15.0 10.0 * 43 31.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.6 17.0 3.7 2.3 9.9 12.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.9 0.1 0.0 4.9 2.4
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.7HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
Item 9.b. - Page 189
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
23: Bridge St/Nevada St & E Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 5.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 23 416 10 105 674 3 0 3 29 0 9 122Future Vol, veh/h 23 416 10 105 674 3 0 3 29 0 9 122Conflicting Peds, #/hr 8 0 6 10 0 8 6 0 10 4 0 4Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 60 - - 50 - -------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76 76Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 30 547 13 138 887 4 0 4 38 0 12 161
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 899 0 0 570 0 0 - 1799 574 - 1803 901 Stage 1 -------624--1173 - Stage 2 -------1175 - - 630 -Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22 - 6.52 6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - - 4.018 3.318 - 4.018 3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 756 - - 1002 - - 0 80 518 0 79 337 Stage 1 ------0478-0266- Stage 2 ------0265-0475-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 751 - - 994 - - - 65 509 - 64 334Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------65--64- Stage 1 -------455--227- Stage 2 -------227--452-
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.5 1.2 18.4 42.8HCM LOS C E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)310 751 - - 994 - - 259HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.136 0.04 - - 0.139 - - 0.666HCM Control Delay (s) 18.4 10 - - 9.2 - - 42.8HCM Lane LOS C A - - A - - EHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 0.1 - - 0.5 - - 4.3
Item 9.b. - Page 190
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
25: Mason St & E Branch St Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 26 422 12 81 585 17 15 64 264 9 70 63Future Volume (veh/h) 26 422 12 81 585 17 15 64 264 9 70 63Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.96 0.99 0.95Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 35 570 15 109 791 22 20 86 129 12 95 49Peak Hour Factor 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 43 859 23 141 958 27 132 266 377 104 183 89Arrive On Green 0.02 0.47 0.47 0.08 0.53 0.53 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1812 48 1781 1811 50 179 1601 1518 65 1101 534Grp Volume(v), veh/h 35 0 585 109 0 813 106 0 129 156 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1860 1781 0 1861 1780 0 1518 1700 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.8 0.0 10.1 2.5 0.0 15.2 0.0 0.0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.8 0.0 10.1 2.5 0.0 15.2 2.1 0.0 2.9 3.4 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.03 1.00 0.03 0.19 1.00 0.08 0.31Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 43 0 882 141 0 985 398 0 377 375 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.82 0.00 0.66 0.77 0.00 0.83 0.27 0.00 0.34 0.42 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 641 0 2677 641 0 2679 1133 0 1036 1097 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.3 0.0 8.4 18.8 0.0 8.2 15.4 0.0 13.0 15.9 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 13.2 0.0 0.3 3.4 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 3.0 1.1 0.0 4.2 0.8 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 33.4 0.0 8.7 22.2 0.0 8.9 15.5 0.0 13.2 16.2 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C A A C A A BABBAAApproach Vol, veh/h 620 922 235 156Approach Delay, s/veh 10.1 10.5 14.2 16.2Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.5 26.3 10.9 6.8 24.0 10.9Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 4.0 3.5 * 4.2 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 * 60 25.0 15.0 * 60 25.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s2.8 17.2 5.4 4.5 12.1 4.9Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.5 0.1 3.0 0.6
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.3HCM 6th LOS B
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 191
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
26: Stanley Str/Corbett Canyon Rd & E Branch St/Huasna Rd Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh21.2Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 183 231 18 5 288 69 13 2 4 41 1 173Future Vol, veh/h 183 231 18 5 288 69 13 2 4 41 1 173Peak Hour Factor 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333Mvmt Flow 220 278 22 6 347 83 16 2 5 49 1 208Number of Lanes 010011010010
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 2 1 1 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1HCM Control Delay 29.5 16.3 10.7 13.7HCM LOS D C B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1Vol Left, %68% 42% 2% 0% 19%Vol Thru, %11% 53% 98% 0% 0%Vol Right, %21% 4% 0% 100% 80%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 19 432 293 69 215LT Vol 13 183 5 0 41Through Vol 2 231 288 0 1RT Vol 4 18 0 69 173Lane Flow Rate 23 520 353 83 259Geometry Grp 25772Degree of Util (X) 0.047 0.82 0.604 0.126 0.433Departure Headway (Hd) 7.339 5.674 6.157 5.437 6.017Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap491 635 582 655 593Service Time 5.339 3.738 3.927 3.206 4.099HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.047 0.819 0.607 0.127 0.437HCM Control Delay 10.7 29.5 18 9 13.7HCM Lane LOS B D C A BHCM 95th-tile Q 0.1 8.5 4 0.4 2.2
Item 9.b. - Page 192
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
27: US 101 Ramps/Traffic Way & S Traffic Way Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh11.2Intersection LOS B
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 6 38 474 5 18 282Future Vol, veh/h 6 38 474 5 18 282Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91Heavy Vehicles, %333333Mvmt Flow 7 42 521 5 20 310Number of Lanes 102011
Approach WB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 2 2Conflicting Approach Left NB WBConflicting Lanes Left 2 0 1Conflicting Approach RightSB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 2 1 0HCM Control Delay 8.7 11.1 11.7HCM LOS A B B
Lane NBLn1NBLn2WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, %0% 0% 14% 100% 0%Vol Thru, %100% 97% 0% 0% 100%Vol Right, %0% 3% 86% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 316 163 44 18 282LT Vol 0 0 6 18 0Through Vol 316 158 0 0 282RT Vol 0 5 38 0 0Lane Flow Rate 347 179 48 20 310Geometry Grp 77277Degree of Util (X) 0.477 0.245 0.071 0.031 0.443Departure Headway (Hd) 4.945 4.924 5.265 5.644 5.141Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap729 729 678 635 700Service Time 2.674 2.652 3.318 3.376 2.873HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.476 0.246 0.071 0.031 0.443HCM Control Delay 12.1 9.3 8.7 8.6 11.9HCM Lane LOS BAAABHCM 95th-tile Q 2.6 1 0.2 0.1 2.3
Item 9.b. - Page 193
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
28: Traffic Way & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 525 133 239 324 174 224Future Volume (veh/h) 525 133 239 324 174 224Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1900 1856 1856 1856 1856Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 799 0 303 410 220 0Peak Hour Factor 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79 0.79Percent Heavy Veh, %303333Cap, veh/h 1014 462 375 921 353 299Arrive On Green 0.29 0.00 0.21 0.50 0.19 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 3534 1610 1767 1856 1856 1572Grp Volume(v), veh/h 799 0 303 410 220 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1767 1610 1767 1856 1856 1572Q Serve(g_s), s 8.8 0.0 6.9 6.1 4.6 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 8.8 0.0 6.9 6.1 4.6 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1014 462 375 921 353 299V/C Ratio(X) 0.79 0.00 0.81 0.44 0.62 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1698 773 874 1984 1984 1681HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.0 0.0 15.9 6.9 15.8 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.0 1.6 0.1 0.7 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.8 0.0 2.4 1.5 1.7 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.5 0.0 17.5 7.0 16.5 0.0LnGrp LOS BABABAApproach Vol, veh/h 799 713 220Approach Delay, s/veh 14.5 11.5 16.5Approach LOS B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.7 16.8 13.0 12.7Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 45.4 20.4 21.0 45.4Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.1 10.8 8.9 6.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.6 1.3 0.4 0.8
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.5HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 194
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
29: Orchard Ave/US 101 SB & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh39.8Intersection LOS E
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 496 19 110 374 0 44 0 143 33 85 173Future Vol, veh/h 0 496 19 110 374 0 44 0 143 33 85 173Peak Hour Factor 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80 0.80Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333Mvmt Flow 0 620 24 138 468 0 55 0 179 41 106 216Number of Lanes 020020010110
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 2 2 2 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 2Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 2 2 2HCM Control Delay 54 33.6 25.7 34HCM LOS F D D D
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, %24% 0% 0% 47% 0% 100% 0%Vol Thru, %0% 100% 90% 53% 100% 0% 33%Vol Right, %76% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 67%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 187 331 184 235 249 33 258LT Vol 44 0 0 110 0 33 0Through Vol 0 331 165 125 249 0 85RT Vol 143 0 19 0 0 0 173Lane Flow Rate 234 413 230 293 312 41 322Geometry Grp 6777777Degree of Util (X) 0.604 0.993 0.549 0.733 0.757 0.112 0.782Departure Headway (Hd) 9.309 8.648 8.573 8.991 8.746 9.736 8.727Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap388 422 422 402 415 368 416Service Time 7.367 6.403 6.328 6.748 6.503 7.488 6.478HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.603 0.979 0.545 0.729 0.752 0.111 0.774HCM Control Delay 25.7 72.2 21.3 32.9 34.2 13.7 36.6HCM Lane LOS D F C D D B EHCM 95th-tile Q 3.8 12.2 3.2 5.7 6.2 0.4 6.7
Item 9.b. - Page 195
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
30: Valley Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 0 361 174 153 256 0 284 0 249 0 0 0Future Volume (veh/h) 0 361 174 153 256 0 284 0 249 0 0 0Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 508 190 215 361 0 409 0 20 0 0 0Peak Hour Factor 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71 0.71Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 155 1049 390 285 2308 0 632 0 279 0 4 0Arrive On Green 0.00 0.41 0.41 0.16 0.65 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 1021 2534 943 1781 3647 0 3553 0 1566 0 1870 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 355 343 215 361 0 409 0 20 0 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1021 1777 1701 1781 1777 0 1776 0 1566 0 1870 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 6.8 6.9 5.3 1.8 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 6.8 6.9 5.3 1.8 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.55 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 155 736 704 285 2308 0 632 0 279 0 4 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.48 0.49 0.75 0.16 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.07 0.00 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 514 1360 1302 1018 2720 0 2796 0 1233 0 665 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.0 10.0 18.6 3.2 0.0 17.7 0.0 15.9 0.0 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.9 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.0 2.3 2.3 2.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 10.8 10.9 20.1 3.2 0.0 18.1 0.0 15.9 0.0 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS A B B C A A BABAAAApproach Vol, veh/h 698 576 429 0Approach Delay, s/veh 10.8 9.5 18.0 0.0Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.9 23.7 0.0 34.6 11.8Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s26.5 35.5 16.5 35.5 36.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s7.3 8.9 0.0 3.8 7.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 8.2 0.0 3.4 0.8
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 196
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 58 179 28 164 170 212 19 523 185 151 236 38Future Volume (veh/h) 58 179 28 164 170 212 19 523 185 151 236 38Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 236 25 216 224 190 25 688 175 199 311 26Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 98 395 42 167 255 216 34 883 224 167 1295 108Arrive On Green 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.09 0.28 0.28 0.02 0.32 0.32 0.09 0.39 0.39Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1660 176 1781 922 782 1781 2798 711 1781 3321 276Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 0 261 216 0 414 25 437 426 199 166 171Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1836 1781 0 1705 1781 1777 1733 1781 1777 1820Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 0.0 8.8 6.5 0.0 16.1 1.0 15.5 15.5 6.5 4.3 4.4Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 0.0 8.8 6.5 0.0 16.1 1.0 15.5 15.5 6.5 4.3 4.4Prop In Lane 1.00 0.10 1.00 0.46 1.00 0.41 1.00 0.15Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 98 0 436 167 0 471 34 560 547 167 693 709V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.60 1.29 0.00 0.88 0.73 0.78 0.78 1.19 0.24 0.24Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 270 0 596 167 0 553 90 730 712 167 807 826HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 32.3 0.0 23.5 31.4 0.0 24.0 33.8 21.5 21.6 31.4 14.2 14.3Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 12.0 0.0 1.3 169.4 0.0 13.5 25.1 4.0 4.2 130.7 0.2 0.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.5 0.0 3.7 10.5 0.0 7.8 0.7 6.7 6.6 8.7 1.7 1.7Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 44.4 0.0 24.8 200.8 0.0 37.5 58.9 25.6 25.7 162.2 14.4 14.4LnGrp LOS D A C F A D E C C F B BApproach Vol, veh/h 337 630 888 536Approach Delay, s/veh 29.2 93.5 26.6 69.3Approach LOS C F C E
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s11.0 26.4 8.3 23.7 5.8 31.5 11.0 21.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s6.5 28.5 10.5 22.5 3.5 31.5 6.5 22.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s8.5 17.5 4.9 18.1 3.0 6.4 8.5 10.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.4 0.1 1.1 0.0 2.0 0.0 1.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 54.2HCM 6th LOS D
Item 9.b. - Page 197
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
32: Halcyon Rd & Farroll Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 12.1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 114 0 16 0 0 2 23 615 0 1 343 78Future Vol, veh/h 114 0 16 0 0 2 23 615 0 1 343 78Conflicting Peds, #/hr 303101301103Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length ------50--50-140Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83 83Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333Mvmt Flow 137 0 19 0 0 2 28 741 0 1 413 94
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1219 1216 419 1273 1310 745 510 0 0 742 0 0 Stage 1 418 418 - 798 798 ------- Stage 2 801 798 - 475 512 -------Critical Hdwy 7.13 6.53 6.23 7.13 6.53 6.23 4.13 - - 4.13 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.13 5.53 - 6.13 5.53 -------Follow-up Hdwy 3.527 4.027 3.327 3.527 4.027 3.327 2.227 - - 2.227 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 156 180 632 144 158 412 1050 - - 861 - - Stage 1 610 589 - 378 397 ------- Stage 2 377 397 - 569 535 -------Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 151 174 628 136 153 411 1047 - - 860 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 151 174 - 136 153 ------- Stage 1 592 587 - 367 386 ------- Stage 2 364 386 - 549 533 -------
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 109 13.8 0.3 0HCM LOS F B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h)1047 - - 167 411 860 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.026 - - 0.938 0.006 0.001 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 8.5 - - 109 13.8 9.2 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - F B A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 7 0 0 - -
Item 9.b. - Page 198
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
33: Halcyon Rd & The Pike Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 22.3Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 194 1 67 0 1 2 45 366 0 2 199 138Future Vol, veh/h 194 1 67 0 1 2 45 366 0 2 199 138Peak Hour Factor 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333Mvmt Flow 231 1 80 0 1 2 54 436 0 2 237 164Number of Lanes 110010010011
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 2 2 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 2HCM Control Delay 15.3 10.8 35 12.5HCM LOS C B D B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, %11% 100% 0% 0% 1% 0%Vol Thru, %89% 0% 1% 33% 99% 0%Vol Right, %0% 0% 99% 67% 0% 100%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 411 194 68 3 201 138LT Vol 451940020Through Vol 366 0 1 1 199 0RT Vol 0 0 67 2 0 138Lane Flow Rate 489 231 81 4 239 164Geometry Grp 677677Degree of Util (X) 0.849 0.481 0.141 0.008 0.427 0.26Departure Headway (Hd)6.244 7.495 6.28 7.689 6.418 5.7Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap577 480 568 468 558 626Service Time 4.301 5.263 4.048 5.689 4.188 3.469HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.847 0.481 0.143 0.009 0.428 0.262HCM Control Delay 35 17.1 10.1 10.8 13.9 10.5HCM Lane LOS D C BBBBHCM 95th-tile Q 9.1 2.6 0.5 0 2.1 1
Item 9.b. - Page 199
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
1: Oak Park Blvd & James Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 70 129 265 138 68 32 219 174 144 49 441 52Future Volume (veh/h) 70 129 265 138 68 32 219 174 144 49 441 52Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 80 147 48 157 77 20 249 198 54 56 501 50Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 102 240 200 204 266 69 312 1013 270 69 747 74Arrive On Green 0.06 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.37 0.37 0.04 0.23 0.23Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1560 1781 1432 372 1781 2776 738 1781 3264 325Grp Volume(v), veh/h 80 147 48 157 0 97 249 125 127 56 272 279Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1560 1781 0 1803 1781 1777 1737 1781 1777 1812Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 3.5 1.3 4.1 0.0 2.2 6.4 2.3 2.4 1.5 6.6 6.7Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 3.5 1.3 4.1 0.0 2.2 6.4 2.3 2.4 1.5 6.6 6.7Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.21 1.00 0.42 1.00 0.18Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 102 240 200 204 0 335 312 649 634 69 407 415V/C Ratio(X) 0.78 0.61 0.24 0.77 0.00 0.29 0.80 0.19 0.20 0.81 0.67 0.67Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 749 983 820 749 0 948 749 1308 1279 749 1308 1333HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.1 19.6 18.6 20.4 0.0 16.7 18.8 10.3 10.3 22.7 16.7 16.7Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.9 0.9 0.2 2.3 0.0 0.2 1.8 0.1 0.1 8.2 0.7 0.7Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.9 1.4 0.4 1.6 0.0 0.8 2.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 2.4 2.5Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.0 20.6 18.9 22.7 0.0 16.8 20.6 10.4 10.4 30.8 17.4 17.4LnGrp LOS C C B C A B C B B C B BApproach Vol, veh/h 275 254 501 607Approach Delay, s/veh 22.1 20.5 15.5 18.7Approach LOS C C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 5.3 22.3 9.0 11.0 11.8 15.8 6.2 13.7Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 35.0 20.0 25.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.5 4.4 6.1 5.5 8.4 8.7 4.1 4.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.5 0.3 2.2 0.1 0.3
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.6HCM 6th LOS B
Item 9.b. - Page 200
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
2: Rodeo Dr & James Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 9.1Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 178 39 11 154 0 30 0 21 0 0 2Future Vol, veh/h 2 178 39 11 154 0 30 0 21 0 0 2Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 2 189 41 12 164 0 32 0 22 0 0 2Number of Lanes 110110010010
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 2 2 1 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 1 2 2Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 2HCM Control Delay 9.4 8.9 8.2 7.4HCM LOS A A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1Vol Left, %59% 100% 0% 100% 0% 0%Vol Thru, %0% 0% 82% 0% 100% 0%Vol Right, %41% 0% 18% 0% 0% 100%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 51 2 217 11 154 2LT Vol 30 2 0 11 0 0Through Vol 0 0 178 0 154 0RT Vol 21 0 39 0 0 2Lane Flow Rate 54 2 231 12 164 2Geometry Grp 277772Degree of Util (X) 0.072 0.003 0.295 0.017 0.221 0.003Departure Headway (Hd) 4.771 5.324 4.697 5.358 4.856 4.371Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap754 676 771 672 744 821Service Time 2.78 3.024 2.397 3.058 2.556 2.385HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.072 0.003 0.3 0.018 0.22 0.002HCM Control Delay 8.2 8 9.4 8.2 8.9 7.4HCM Lane LOS AAAAAAHCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 0 1.2 0.1 0.8 0
Item 9.b. - Page 201
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
3: Tally Ho Rd & James Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 8.8Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 109 86 56 58 76 104Future Vol, veh/h 109 86 56 58 76 104Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 117 92 60 62 82 112Number of Lanes 100110
Approach EB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 1 1Conflicting Approach Left SB EB Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0Conflicting Approach RightNB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1HCM Control Delay 9.1 8.7 8.5HCM LOS A A A
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1Vol Left, %49% 56% 0%Vol Thru, %51% 0% 42%Vol Right, %0% 44% 58%Sign Control Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 114 195 180LT Vol 56 109 0Through Vol 58 0 76RT Vol 0 86 104Lane Flow Rate 123 210 194Geometry Grp 1 1 1Degree of Util (X) 0.161 0.261 0.227Departure Headway (Hd) 4.733 4.486 4.226Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes YesCap758 801 850Service Time 2.762 2.513 2.252HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.162 0.262 0.228HCM Control Delay 8.7 9.1 8.5HCM Lane LOS A A AHCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 1 0.9
Item 9.b. - Page 202
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
4: Oak Park Blvd & US 101 NB On Ramp/W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 372 44 195 265 464 334 149 725 159Future Volume (veh/h) 0 0 0 372 44 195 265 464 334 149 725 159Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 430 0 35 282 494 196 159 771 142Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, %2 2 2 222222Cap, veh/h 649 0 289 523 1019 402 543 1067 197Arrive On Green 0.18 0.00 0.18 0.14 0.41 0.41 0.09 0.36 0.36Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1585 1781 2485 980 1781 2995 552Grp Volume(v), veh/h 430 0 35 282 352 338 159 457 456Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1585 1781 1777 1688 1781 1777 1770Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 0.0 0.7 3.5 5.6 5.7 2.1 8.6 8.6Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 0.0 0.7 3.5 5.6 5.7 2.1 8.6 8.6Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.58 1.00 0.31Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 649 0 289 523 728 692 543 633 631V/C Ratio(X)0.66 0.00 0.12 0.54 0.48 0.49 0.29 0.72 0.72Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1851 0 824 958 1148 1091 1074 1148 1144HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 14.7 0.0 13.2 7.3 8.4 8.4 6.7 10.8 10.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.6Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.2 0.8 1.6 1.5 0.5 2.3 2.3Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.1 0.0 13.3 7.7 8.6 8.6 6.8 11.4 11.4LnGrp LOS B A B AAAABBApproach Vol, veh/h 465 972 1072Approach Delay, s/veh 15.0 8.3 10.7Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.0 20.3 9.1 18.2 11.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 15.0 25.0 20.1Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.1 7.7 5.5 10.6 6.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.7 0.3 3.1 0.8
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 10.6HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 203
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
5: Oak Park Blvd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 326 65 378 27 37 83 65 631 21 147 706 252Future Volume (veh/h) 326 65 378 27 37 83 65 631 21 147 706 252Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 392 0 72 28 39 4 68 664 19 155 743 176Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 614 0 272 41 57 85 341 995 28 423 1181 527Arrive On Green 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.04 0.28 0.28 0.09 0.33 0.33Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 0 1577 766 1066 1585 1781 3528 101 1781 3554 1585Grp Volume(v), veh/h 392 0 72 67 0 4 68 334 349 155 743 176Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1577 1832 0 1585 1781 1777 1852 1781 1777 1585Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 0.0 1.7 1.5 0.0 0.1 1.1 6.9 7.0 2.4 7.4 3.5Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 0.0 1.7 1.5 0.0 0.1 1.1 6.9 7.0 2.4 7.4 3.5Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 0.42 1.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 614 0 272 98 0 85 341 501 522 423 1181 527V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.00 0.26 0.68 0.00 0.05 0.20 0.67 0.67 0.37 0.63 0.33Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1707 0 756 659 0 570 908 1064 1109 900 2129 950HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.1 0.0 15.0 19.4 0.0 18.7 10.3 13.2 13.2 9.4 11.8 10.5Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.0 0.2 3.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.4 0.0 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.4 2.4 2.5 0.7 2.3 1.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.5 0.0 15.2 22.4 0.0 18.8 10.4 13.8 13.8 9.6 12.0 10.6LnGrp LOS B A B C A B BBBABBApproach Vol, veh/h 464 71 751 1074Approach Delay, s/veh 16.3 22.2 13.5 11.4Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.3 16.2 11.6 5.2 18.3 6.6Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.4 4.4 3.5 4.4 4.4Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 25.0 15.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.4 9.0 6.3 3.1 9.4 3.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.7 0.7 0.0 3.5 0.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.4HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 204
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
6: US 101 NB Ramps/Camino Mercado & W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 55 424 1 185 331 21 264 17 23 23 16 37Future Volume (veh/h) 55 424 1 185 331 21 264 17 23 23 16 37Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 60 466 1 203 364 21 290 19 0 25 18 0Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 86 757 2 261 536 31 388 408 67 71 0Arrive On Green 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.15 0.31 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.04 0.04 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3638 8 1781 1751 101 1781 1870 1585 1781 1870 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 60 228 239 203 0 385 290 19 0 25 18 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1869 1781 0 1852 1781 1870 1585 1781 1870 0Q Serve(g_s), s 1.4 4.8 4.8 4.5 0.0 7.5 6.2 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.4 4.8 4.8 4.5 0.0 7.5 6.2 0.3 0.0 0.6 0.4 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.05 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 86 370 389 261 0 567 388 408 67 71 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.70 0.62 0.62 0.78 0.00 0.68 0.75 0.05 0.37 0.25 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 260 692 728 434 0 902 1388 1457 694 729 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 14.8 14.8 16.9 0.0 12.5 15.0 12.7 0.0 19.3 19.2 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.7 1.7 1.6 4.9 0.0 1.4 2.9 0.0 0.0 3.4 1.9 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.7 1.7 1.7 1.8 0.0 2.4 2.5 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.0 16.4 16.4 21.8 0.0 13.9 17.9 12.7 0.0 22.7 21.1 0.0LnGrp LOS C B B C A B B B C C AApproach Vol, veh/h 527 588 309 A 43Approach Delay, s/veh 17.8 16.6 17.6 22.0Approach LOS B B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s6.0 16.6 13.0 10.0 12.5 5.6Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s6.0 20.0 32.0 10.0 16.0 16.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.4 9.5 8.2 6.5 6.8 2.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 1.6 1.0 0.2 1.7 0.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.4HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUnsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
Item 9.b. - Page 205
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
7: W Branch St & Rancho Pkwy Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 90 297 275 328 270 145Future Volume (veh/h) 90 297 275 328 270 145Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1900Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 98 323 299 155 185 193Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92Percent Heavy Veh, %222220Cap, veh/h 168 2003 795 402 318 287Arrive On Green 0.09 0.56 0.35 0.35 0.18 0.18Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 2371 1150 1781 1610Grp Volume(v), veh/h 98 323 232 222 185 193Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1777 1650 1781 1610Q Serve(g_s), s 1.5 1.3 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.5 1.3 2.8 2.9 2.8 3.3Prop In Lane 1.00 0.70 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 168 2003 621 576 318 287V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.16 0.37 0.39 0.58 0.67Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1838 4889 2444 2269 1838 1661HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 12.6 3.0 7.1 7.1 11.0 11.2Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.2 0.1 0.6 0.7 0.6 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.5 0.0 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.9Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 13.8 3.1 7.7 7.8 11.6 12.2LnGrp LOS BAAABBApproach Vol, veh/h 421 454 378Approach Delay, s/veh 5.6 7.8 11.9Approach LOS A A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s6.2 14.2 8.7 20.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.0 3.5 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s30.0 40.0 30.0 40.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.5 4.9 5.3 3.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 4.8 0.2 3.5
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.3HCM 6th LOS A
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 206
Timings Arroyo Grande
8: Brisco Rd & W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL Ø5 Ø6Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 151 415 112 171 434Future Volume (vph) 151 415 112 171 434Turn Type NA Perm pm+pt NA ProtProtected Phases 4 3 8 6 5 5 6Permitted Phases 4 8Detector Phase 44386 5Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 7.0 7.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 7.0Minimum Split (s)11.9 11.9 7.5 9.9 8.5 10.8Total Split (s)18.9 18.9 11.5 30.9 17.5 31.6Total Split (%)23.6% 23.6% 14.4% 38.6%22% 40%Yellow Time (s)3.9 3.9 3.0 3.9 3.0 3.0All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.8Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s)4.9 4.9 3.5 4.9Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None None None None C-MinAct Effct Green (s)11.7 11.7 30.3 28.9 42.4Actuated g/C Ratio 0.15 0.15 0.38 0.36 0.53v/c Ratio 0.59 0.73 0.25 0.27 0.30Control Delay 40.6 11.0 18.1 19.4 2.1Queue Delay 0.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.3Total Delay 40.6 44.3 18.1 19.4 2.4LOSD D B B AApproach Delay 43.3 18.9 2.4Approach LOS D B A
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:NBL, Start of YellowNatural Cycle: 45Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.76Intersection Signal Delay: 22.9 Intersection LOS: CIntersection Capacity Utilization 39.7%ICU Level of Service AAnalysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 8: Brisco Rd & W Branch St
Item 9.b. - Page 207
Timings Arroyo Grande
9: Brisco Rd & US 101 NB On/US 101 NB Off Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group WBT WBR NBL NBT SBT Ø3 Ø4 Ø8Lane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)0 152 249 364 478Future Volume (vph)0 152 249 364 478Turn Type NA Perm Split NA NAProtected Phases 5 6 6 3 4 8 3 4 8Permitted Phases 5Detector Phase 55663 4 8Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 7.0 7.0 4.0 7.0 5.0Minimum Split (s)8.5 8.5 10.8 10.8 7.5 11.9 9.9Total Split (s)17.5 17.5 31.6 31.6 11.5 18.9 30.9Total Split (%)21.9% 21.9% 39.5% 39.5%14% 24% 39%Yellow Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.9 3.9All-Red Time (s)0.5 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.5 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s)3.5 3.5 3.8 3.8Lead/Lag Lag Lag Lead Lead Lead LagLead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None C-Min C-Min None None NoneAct Effct Green (s)10.0 10.0 28.9 28.9 30.3Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.36 0.36 0.38v/c Ratio 0.58 0.47 0.41 0.56 0.76Control Delay 42.7 10.4 27.1 30.3 23.2Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.4 68.6Total Delay 42.7 10.4 27.7 31.7 91.8LOSD B C C FApproach Delay 24.8 30.1 91.8Approach LOS C C F
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 6:NBL, Start of YellowNatural Cycle: 45Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.76Intersection Signal Delay: 51.6 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 57.8%ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 9: Brisco Rd & US 101 NB On/US 101 NB Off
Item 9.b. - Page 208
Timings Arroyo Grande
10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Lane Group EBL EBT WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph)13 186 37 77 356 242 67 271Future Volume (vph) 13 186 37 77 356 242 67 271Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA pm+ov NA Perm NAProtected Phases 8 4 2 1 2Permitted Phases 8441Detector Phase 88442112Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Minimum Split (s)9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 7.5 8.1 8.1 7.5Total Split (s)18.3 18.3 18.3 18.3 37.6 24.1 24.1 37.6Total Split (%)22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 22.9% 47.0% 30.1% 30.1% 47.0%Yellow Time (s)4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.0 3.6 3.6 3.0All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s)5.3 5.3 5.3 5.3 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag LeadLead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes YesRecall Mode None None Min Min C-Min None None C-MinAct Effct Green (s)13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 56.5 15.9 15.9 37.9Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.71 0.20 0.20 0.47v/c Ratio 0.06 0.83 0.38 0.27 0.20 0.79 0.20 0.76Control Delay 28.7 53.6 40.7 31.3 4.8 46.1 7.1 35.6Queue Delay 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 54.6Total Delay 28.8 53.6 40.7 31.3 4.8 46.1 7.1 90.2LOSCDDCADAFApproach Delay 52.3 12.0 38.3 90.2Approach LOS D B D F
Intersection SummaryCycle Length: 80Actuated Cycle Length: 80Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:SBTL, Start of Yellow, Master IntersectionNatural Cycle: 65Control Type: Actuated-CoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.83Intersection Signal Delay: 51.8 Intersection LOS: DIntersection Capacity Utilization 79.2%ICU Level of Service DAnalysis Period (min) 15
Splits and Phases: 10: Brisco Rd & El Camino Real
Item 9.b. - Page 209
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
11: W Branch St & Rodeo Dr Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.9
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 60 159 206 13 26 73Future Vol, veh/h 60 159 206 13 26 73Conflicting Peds, #/hr 200222Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 125 - - - 0 -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 93 93 93 93 93 93Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 65 171 222 14 28 78
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 238 0 - 0 534 233 Stage 1 ----231- Stage 2 ----303-Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - - 6.42 6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - - 3.518 3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1329 - - - 507 806 Stage 1 ----807- Stage 2 ----749-Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1327 - - - 480 803Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----564- Stage 1 ----766- Stage 2 ----748-
Approach EB WB SBHCM Control Delay, s 2.2 0 10.8HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)1327 - - - 723HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.049 - - - 0.147HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - - 10.8HCM Lane LOS A - - - BHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - - 0.5
Item 9.b. - Page 210
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
12: Halcyon Rd/US 101 SB Ramps & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 289 54 186 11 62 24 285 59 3 22 315 116Future Volume (veh/h) 289 54 186 11 62 24 285 59 3 22 315 116Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 304 57 152 12 65 19 347 0 0 23 332 60Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 364 99 264 214 190 55 504 265 31 448 407Arrive On Green 0.20 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.26 0.26 0.26Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 449 1199 1781 1391 407 3563 1870 0 121 1744 1585Grp Volume(v), veh/h 304 0 209 12 0 84 347 0 0 355 0 60Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1648 1781 0 1797 1781 1870 0 1864 0 1585Q Serve(g_s), s 9.5 0.0 6.6 0.3 0.0 2.5 5.4 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 1.7Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.5 0.0 6.6 0.3 0.0 2.5 5.4 0.0 0.0 10.2 0.0 1.7Prop In Lane 1.00 0.73 1.00 0.23 1.00 0.00 0.06 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 364 0 363 214 0 245 504 265 479 0 407V/C Ratio(X)0.84 0.00 0.58 0.06 0.00 0.34 0.69 0.00 0.74 0.00 0.15Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 704 0 453 245 0 278 1836 964 4068 0 3459HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.2 0.0 20.3 22.7 0.0 22.8 23.8 0.0 0.0 19.9 0.0 16.7Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.6 1.3 0.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 3.8 0.0 2.4 0.1 0.0 1.0 2.2 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 0.6Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.2 0.0 21.7 22.7 0.0 23.4 25.0 0.0 0.0 22.1 0.0 16.9LnGrp LOS C A C C A C C A C A BApproach Vol, veh/h 513 96 347 A 415Approach Delay, s/veh 23.2 23.3 25.0 21.4Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.4 12.0 12.3 10.5 16.9 18.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.5 4.1 3.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 23.0 9.0 30.0 8.0 16.0 127.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.5 4.5 7.4 2.3 8.6 12.2Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 0.1 0.9 0.0 0.6 2.8
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.1HCM 6th LOS C
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.Unsignalized Delay for [NBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
Item 9.b. - Page 211
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
13: Oak Park Blvd & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 202 576 59 158 472 161 84 237 123 264 480 170Future Volume (veh/h) 202 576 59 158 472 161 84 237 123 264 480 170Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 210 600 54 165 492 36 88 247 25 275 500 147Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 261 884 79 210 853 371 114 776 341 399 730 213Arrive On Green 0.15 0.27 0.27 0.12 0.24 0.24 0.06 0.22 0.22 0.12 0.27 0.27Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3294 296 1781 3554 1545 1781 3554 1563 3456 2708 792Grp Volume(v), veh/h 210 323 331 165 492 36 88 247 25 275 327 320Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1813 1781 1777 1545 1781 1777 1563 1728 1777 1723Q Serve(g_s), s 6.9 9.9 9.9 5.5 7.4 1.1 3.0 3.5 0.8 4.6 10.0 10.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.9 9.9 9.9 5.5 7.4 1.1 3.0 3.5 0.8 4.6 10.0 10.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.16 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.46Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 261 477 487 210 853 371 114 776 341 399 479 464V/C Ratio(X) 0.81 0.68 0.68 0.79 0.58 0.10 0.77 0.32 0.07 0.69 0.68 0.69Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 587 878 895 587 1463 636 587 1463 643 1138 731 709HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 25.1 19.9 19.9 26.0 20.4 18.0 28.0 19.9 18.9 25.8 19.9 19.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.2 1.7 1.7 2.5 0.6 0.1 4.1 0.2 0.1 0.8 1.7 1.8Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln2.9 4.0 4.1 2.3 2.8 0.4 1.3 1.4 0.3 1.8 4.0 3.9Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.3 21.6 21.6 28.5 21.0 18.1 32.1 20.2 18.9 26.6 21.6 21.7LnGrp LOS CCCCCBCCBCCCApproach Vol, veh/h 864 693 360 922Approach Delay, s/veh 23.0 22.6 23.0 23.1Approach LOS C C C C
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s12.4 20.1 7.4 20.9 10.7 21.8 10.5 17.8Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.5 3.5 4.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 25.0 20.0 25.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 25.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s8.9 9.4 5.0 12.1 7.5 11.9 6.6 5.5Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.2 2.9 0.1 3.3 0.2 3.9 0.4 1.5
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.9HCM 6th LOS C
Item 9.b. - Page 212
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
14: Courtland St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 104 804 43 53 639 68 77 47 20 135 62 81Future Volume (veh/h) 104 804 43 53 639 68 77 47 20 135 62 81Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 116 893 44 59 710 66 86 52 4 150 69 36Peak Hour Factor 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 150 1343 66 71 1135 105 397 347 27 440 234 122Arrive On Green 0.08 0.39 0.39 0.04 0.35 0.35 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3443 170 1781 3282 305 1285 1714 132 1342 1156 603Grp Volume(v), veh/h 116 461 476 59 384 392 86 0 56 150 0 105Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1836 1781 1777 1810 1285 0 1846 1342 0 1759Q Serve(g_s), s 2.3 7.6 7.6 1.2 6.4 6.4 2.2 0.0 0.9 3.7 0.0 1.8Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.3 7.6 7.6 1.2 6.4 6.4 4.0 0.0 0.9 4.6 0.0 1.8Prop In Lane 1.00 0.09 1.00 0.17 1.00 0.07 1.00 0.34Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 150 693 716 71 615 626 397 0 374 440 0 356V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.67 0.67 0.83 0.63 0.63 0.22 0.00 0.15 0.34 0.00 0.29Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 999 1993 2060 999 1993 2030 858 0 1035 921 0 987HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.0 9.0 9.0 17.0 9.7 9.7 13.7 0.0 11.7 13.6 0.0 12.1Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.2 0.4 0.4 8.8 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.2Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.9 1.9 2.0 0.6 1.7 1.8 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.0 0.6Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.2 9.4 9.4 25.8 10.1 10.1 13.8 0.0 11.8 13.7 0.0 12.2LnGrp LOS B A A C B B BABBABApproach Vol, veh/h 1053 835 142 255Approach Delay, s/veh 10.4 11.2 13.0 13.1Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.0 17.2 11.4 5.4 18.8 11.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.3 8.4 6.0 3.2 9.6 6.6Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 3.2 0.3 0.0 4.0 0.5
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.2HCM 6th LOS B
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 213
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
15: Elm St & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 27 730 150 341 649 16 148 23 232 18 18 18Future Volume (veh/h) 27 730 150 341 649 16 148 23 232 18 18 18Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1.00 0.99Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 777 139 363 690 16 157 24 34 19 19 3Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 111 1108 198 550 1651 38 405 314 265 209 169 20Arrive On Green 0.06 0.37 0.37 0.16 0.47 0.47 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3009 538 3456 3549 82 1371 1870 1577 516 1006 120Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 459 457 363 345 361 157 24 34 41 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 1770 1728 1777 1855 1371 1870 1577 1642 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 9.5 9.5 4.2 5.6 5.6 3.6 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 9.5 9.5 4.2 5.6 5.6 4.4 0.5 0.8 0.8 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.30 1.00 0.04 1.00 1.00 0.46 0.07Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 111 654 652 550 826 863 405 314 265 398 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.26 0.70 0.70 0.66 0.42 0.42 0.39 0.08 0.13 0.10 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 828 1652 1645 1606 1652 1724 812 869 733 861 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 11.6 11.6 17.0 7.6 7.6 16.6 15.1 15.2 15.2 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.3 2.8 2.8 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 19.7 12.1 12.1 17.5 7.8 7.8 16.9 15.1 15.3 15.3 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS BBBBAABBBBAAApproach Vol, veh/h 945 1069 215 41Approach Delay, s/veh 12.3 11.1 16.4 15.3Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s10.9 20.8 11.4 6.7 24.9 11.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.9 * 4.2 4.0 4.9 * 4.2Max Green Setting (Gmax), s20.0 40.0 * 20 20.0 40.0 * 20Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s6.2 11.5 6.4 2.7 7.6 2.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 3.9 0.3 0.0 3.0 0.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.2HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 214
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
16: Grand Ave & Brisco Rd Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 4.3
Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 227 748 703 59 15 322Future Vol, veh/h 227 748 703 59 15 322Conflicting Peds, #/hr 600666Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop StopRT Channelized - None - None - NoneStorage Length 130 - - 130 30 -Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 0 - 1 -Grade, % - 0 0 - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 241 796 748 63 16 343
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 817 0 - 0 1640 386 Stage 1 ----754- Stage 2 ----886-Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - - 6.84 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.84 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.84 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - - 3.52 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 807 - - - 91 612 Stage 1 ----425- Stage 2 ----363-Platoon blocked, % - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 803 - - - 63 606Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----177- Stage 1 ----296- Stage 2 ----361-
Approach EB WB SBHCM Control Delay, s 2.7 0 18.8HCM LOS C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 SBLn2Capacity (veh/h)803 - - - 177 606HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.301 - - - 0.09 0.565HCM Control Delay (s) 11.4 - - - 27.3 18.4HCM Lane LOS B - - - D CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 1.3 - - - 0.3 3.5
Item 9.b. - Page 215
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
17: Halcyon Rd/Halcyon Road & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 77 582 181 126 528 24 138 243 146 58 338 89Future Volume (veh/h) 77 582 181 126 528 24 138 243 146 58 338 89Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 83 626 79 135 568 24 148 261 23 62 363 80Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 108 868 380 174 977 41 344 361 302 84 508 117Arrive On Green 0.06 0.24 0.24 0.10 0.28 0.28 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3554 1556 1781 3474 147 1781 1870 1560 426 2588 598Grp Volume(v), veh/h 83 626 79 135 290 302 148 261 23 269 0 236Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1777 1556 1781 1777 1843 1781 1870 1560 1849 0 1763Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 10.3 2.6 4.7 9.0 9.0 4.7 8.4 0.8 8.8 0.0 7.9Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 10.3 2.6 4.7 9.0 9.0 4.7 8.4 0.8 8.8 0.0 7.9Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.08 1.00 1.00 0.23 0.34Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 108 868 380 174 500 519 344 361 302 363 0 346V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.72 0.21 0.78 0.58 0.58 0.43 0.72 0.08 0.74 0.00 0.68Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 557 1944 851 557 972 1008 835 877 732 867 0 826HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 29.6 22.2 19.3 28.2 19.8 19.8 22.7 24.2 21.1 24.2 0.0 23.9Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.4 0.4 0.1 2.8 0.4 0.4 0.3 1.0 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.9Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.3 4.0 0.9 2.0 3.4 3.5 1.8 3.5 0.3 3.6 0.0 3.1Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.0 22.6 19.4 31.0 20.2 20.2 23.0 25.2 21.2 25.3 0.0 24.8LnGrp LOS C C B CCCCCCCACApproach Vol, veh/h 788 727 432 505Approach Delay, s/veh 23.5 22.2 24.3 25.1Approach LOS CCCC
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.7 19.8 17.3 7.4 22.2 17.2Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 * 4.7 3.5 * 4.2 4.8Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 20.0 * 35 * 30 20.0 * 35 30.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.7 12.3 10.8 4.9 11.0 10.4Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.9 1.8 0.1 2.2 1.1
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 23.6HCM 6th LOS C
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 216
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
18: Grand Ave & El Camino Real Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 37 742 1 1 632 79 3 0 2 56 0 43Future Vol, veh/h 37 742 1 1 632 79 3 0 2 56 0 43Conflicting Peds, #/hr 806608606808Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 100 - - 100 - -------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 39 789 1 1 672 84 3 0 2 60 0 46
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 764 0 0 796 0 0 1220 1640 409 1205 1598 394 Stage 1 ------874874-724724- Stage 2 ------346766-481874-Critical Hdwy 4.14 - - 4.14 - - 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.22 - - 2.22 - - 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 845 - - 822 - - 136 99 592 140 105 605 Stage 1 ------311365-383429- Stage 2 ------643410-535365-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 839 - - 818 - - 120 93 585 133 99 597Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------12093-13399- Stage 1 ------295346-363426- Stage 2 ------589407-505346-
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.5 0 26.1 41.1HCM LOS D E
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)176 839 - - 818 - - 201HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.03 0.047 - - 0.001 - - 0.524HCM Control Delay (s) 26.1 9.5 - - 9.4 - - 41.1HCM Lane LOS D A - - A - - EHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 0.1 - - 0 - - 2.7
Item 9.b. - Page 217
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
19: Grand Ave & US 101 SB Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 0 474 341 139 683 0000183062Future Volume (veh/h) 0 474 341 139 683 0000183062Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000 000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 0 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 504 363 148 727 0 195 0 7Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, %022220 222Cap, veh/h 0 1046 752 185 2434 0 240 0 214Arrive On Green 0.00 0.53 0.53 0.10 0.68 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.13Sat Flow, veh/h 0 2061 1415 1781 3647 0 1781 0 1585Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 455 412 148 727 0 195 0 7Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 0 1777 1606 1781 1777 0 1781 0 1585Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 11.4 11.5 5.8 5.8 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 11.4 11.5 5.8 5.8 0.0 7.6 0.0 0.3Prop In Lane 0.00 0.88 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 0 945 854 185 2434 0 240 0 214V/C Ratio(X)0.00 0.48 0.48 0.80 0.30 0.00 0.81 0.00 0.03Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 0 945 854 427 2434 0 401 0 357HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)0.00 1.00 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 10.5 10.5 31.1 4.4 0.0 29.8 0.0 26.7Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 1.8 1.9 2.5 0.3 0.0 2.5 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 4.2 3.9 2.5 1.5 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.1Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 12.2 12.4 33.6 4.7 0.0 32.4 0.0 26.7LnGrp LOS A B B C A A C A CApproach Vol, veh/h 867 875 202Approach Delay, s/veh 12.3 9.6 32.2Approach LOS B A C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 10.9 46.3 13.8 57.2Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 8.6 * 4.2 * 8.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 17.0 * 15 * 16 * 46Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.8 13.5 9.6 7.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.3 0.2 1.0
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 13.2HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green.* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 218
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
20: US 101 NB & Grand Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 89 561 0 0 618 389 203 0 66 0 0 0Future Volume (veh/h) 89 561 0 0 618 389 203 0 66 0 0 0Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 0 0 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 95 597 0 0 657 326 216 0 8Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Percent Heavy Veh, %220022222Cap, veh/h 648 2656 0 0 749 372 263 0 234Arrive On Green 0.36 0.75 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.33 0.15 0.00 0.15Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 3647 0 0 2394 1141 1781 0 1585Grp Volume(v), veh/h 95 597 0 0 507 476 216 0 8Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1777 0 0 1777 1665 1781 0 1585Q Serve(g_s), s 2.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 21.3 9.3 0.0 0.3Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.8 4.0 0.0 0.0 21.3 21.3 9.3 0.0 0.3Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 648 2656 0 0 579 542 263 0 234V/C Ratio(X) 0.15 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.88 0.82 0.00 0.03Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 648 2656 0 0 652 611 428 0 381HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.83 0.83 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.9 3.0 0.0 0.0 25.1 25.1 32.7 0.0 28.8Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 17.0 17.9 2.7 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.1 0.9 0.0 0.0 11.3 10.8 4.0 0.0 0.1Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 16.9 3.2 0.0 0.0 42.1 43.0 35.4 0.0 28.9LnGrp LOS BAAADDDACApproach Vol, veh/h 692 983 224Approach Delay, s/veh 5.1 42.6 35.1Approach LOS A D D
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 63.6 33.3 30.3 15.4Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 * 4.6 3.7Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 52.0 17.0 * 29 19.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.0 4.8 23.3 11.3Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.8 0.1 2.4 0.4
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 28.0HCM 6th LOS C
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 219
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
21: Grand Ave/E Branch St & W Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 8.2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 47 574 1 15 923 127 9 0 32 43 2 77Future Vol, veh/h 47 574 1 15 923 127 9 0 32 43 2 77Conflicting Peds, #/hr 600006000606Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 90 - - 65 - -------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, %333333333333Mvmt Flow 51 624 1 16 1003 138 10 0 35 47 2 84
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 1147 0 0 625 0 0 1268 1906 319 1530 1837 583 Stage 1 ------727727-1110 1110 - Stage 2 ------5411179 - 420 727 -Critical Hdwy 4.16 - - 4.16 - - 7.56 6.56 6.96 7.56 6.56 6.96Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------6.56 5.56 - 6.56 5.56 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.23 - - 2.23 - - 3.53 4.03 3.33 3.53 4.03 3.33Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 599 - - 946 - - 124 67 674 79 74 453 Stage 1 ------379425-221281- Stage 2 ------490260-579425-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 596 - - 946 - - 90 60 671 68 66 448Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------9060-6866- Stage 1 ------346388-201275- Stage 2 ------387254-499388-
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.9 0.1 20.4 111.5HCM LOS C F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)278 596 - - 946 - - 146HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.16 0.086 - - 0.017 - - 0.908HCM Control Delay (s) 20.4 11.6 - - 8.9 - - 111.5HCM Lane LOS C B - - A - - FHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.6 0.3 - - 0.1 - - 6.3
Item 9.b. - Page 220
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
22: Traffic Way/Wesley St & E Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 16 397 217 87 550 8 518 17 22 34 75 32Future Volume (veh/h) 16 397 217 87 550 8 518 17 22 34 75 32Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 16 409 0 90 567 7 547 0 0 35 77 24Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 392 553 374 1164 14 787 0 47 103 32Arrive On Green 0.05 0.30 0.00 0.07 0.32 0.32 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.10Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 1585 1781 3593 44 3563 0 1585 461 1014 316Grp Volume(v), veh/h 16 409 0 90 280 294 547 0 0 136 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 1585 1781 1777 1861 1781 0 1585 1790 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.3 9.8 0.0 1.7 6.3 6.3 7.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 9.8 0.0 1.7 6.3 6.3 7.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 0.26 0.18Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 392 553 374 576 603 787 0 181 0 0V/C Ratio(X)0.04 0.74 0.24 0.49 0.49 0.70 0.00 0.75 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 668 1618 707 1537 1610 2221 0 540 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 11.1 15.8 0.0 11.4 13.5 13.5 17.8 0.0 0.0 21.7 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.1 0.6 0.6 1.1 0.0 0.0 2.4 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 4.0 0.0 0.6 2.3 2.4 2.6 0.0 0.0 1.5 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 11.1 17.7 0.0 11.6 14.1 14.1 18.9 0.0 0.0 24.1 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS B B BBBBA CAAApproach Vol, veh/h 425 A 664 547 A 136Approach Delay, s/veh 17.5 13.8 18.9 24.1Approach LOS B B B C
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.4 18.9 8.7 6.0 20.3 14.7Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.7 * 4.2 3.7 3.7 * 4.2 3.7Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 13.0 * 43 15.0 10.0 * 43 31.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.7 11.8 5.7 2.3 8.3 9.0Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 2.9 0.3 0.0 4.1 2.0
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.1HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.Unsignalized Delay for [NBR, EBR] is excluded from calculations of the approach delay and intersection delay.
Item 9.b. - Page 221
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
23: Bridge St/Nevada St & E Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 2.8
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 25 433 27 120 614 2 0 2 53 0 8 66Future Vol, veh/h 25 433 27 120 614 2 0 2 53 0 8 66Conflicting Peds, #/hr 47 0 5 25 0 27 5 0 25 0 0 47Sign Control Free Free Free Free Free Free Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length 60 - - 50 - -------Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 27 471 29 130 667 2 0 2 58 0 9 72
Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Minor2Conflicting Flow All 716 0 0 525 0 0 - 1541 536 - 1554 762 Stage 1 -------565--975- Stage 2 -------976--579-Critical Hdwy 4.12 - - 4.12 - - - 6.52 6.22 - 6.52 6.22Critical Hdwy Stg 1 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -Critical Hdwy Stg 2 -------5.52 - - 5.52 -Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 - - 2.218 - - - 4.018 3.318 - 4.018 3.318Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 885 - - 1042 - - 0 115 545 0 113 405 Stage 1 ------0508-0330- Stage 2 ------0329-0501-Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 850 - - 1020 - - - 91 523 - 90 374Mov Cap-2 Maneuver -------91--90- Stage 1 -------482--277- Stage 2 -------276--475-
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 0.5 1.5 14.3 23HCM LOS B C
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBRSBLn1Capacity (veh/h)446 850 - - 1020 - - 279HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.134 0.032 - - 0.128 - - 0.288HCM Control Delay (s) 14.3 9.4 - - 9 - - 23HCM Lane LOS B A - - A - - CHCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.5 0.1 - - 0.4 - - 1.2
Item 9.b. - Page 222
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
25: Mason St & E Branch St Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 52 365 26 174 541 12 35 70 164 18 83 62Future Volume (veh/h) 52 365 26 174 541 12 35 70 164 18 83 62Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.98 0.94 0.97 0.97Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 57 401 26 191 595 12 38 77 62 20 91 46Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 68 569 37 250 785 16 210 243 490 145 194 89Arrive On Green 0.04 0.33 0.33 0.14 0.43 0.43 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.18Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1736 113 1781 1826 37 365 1349 1486 125 1075 497Grp Volume(v), veh/h 57 0 427 191 0 607 115 0 62 157 0 0Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1849 1781 0 1863 1714 0 1486 1697 0 0Q Serve(g_s), s 1.1 0.0 6.7 3.4 0.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.2 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.1 0.0 6.7 3.4 0.0 9.2 1.8 0.0 1.0 2.7 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.06 1.00 0.02 0.33 1.00 0.13 0.29Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 68 0 606 250 0 801 453 0 490 428 0 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.84 0.00 0.70 0.77 0.00 0.76 0.25 0.00 0.13 0.37 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 804 0 3338 804 0 3364 1366 0 1340 1374 0 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.9 0.0 9.8 13.8 0.0 8.0 11.9 0.0 8.0 12.3 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 9.8 0.0 0.6 1.9 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.6 0.0 2.1 1.3 0.0 2.5 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 25.7 0.0 10.3 15.6 0.0 8.6 12.0 0.0 8.1 12.5 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS C ABBAABAABAAApproach Vol, veh/h 484 798 177 157Approach Delay, s/veh 12.1 10.3 10.6 12.5Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s4.8 18.5 10.0 8.2 15.1 10.0Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 * 4.2 4.0 3.5 * 4.2 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s15.0 * 60 25.0 15.0 * 60 25.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s3.1 11.2 4.7 5.4 8.7 3.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.1 0.5 0.2 2.0 0.5
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 11.1HCM 6th LOS B
Notes* HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier.
Item 9.b. - Page 223
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
26: Stanley Str/Corbett Canyon Rd & E Branch St/Huasna Rd Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh20.3Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 140 283 20 5 374 58 30 1 1 48 2 219Future Vol, veh/h 140 283 20 5 374 58 30 1 1 48 2 219Peak Hour Factor 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 147 298 21 5 394 61 32 1 1 51 2 231Number of Lanes 010011010010
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 2 1 1 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 2Conflicting Approach RightNB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 1 2 1HCM Control Delay 24.8 20.1 11.1 14.5HCM LOS C C B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1Vol Left, %94% 32% 1% 0% 18%Vol Thru, %3% 64% 99% 0% 1%Vol Right, %3% 5% 0% 100% 81%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 32 443 379 58 269LT Vol 30 140 5 0 48Through Vol 1 283 374 0 2RT Vol 1 20 0 58 219Lane Flow Rate 34 466 399 61 283Geometry Grp 25772Degree of Util (X) 0.071 0.755 0.689 0.093 0.473Departure Headway (Hd) 7.562 5.829 6.22 5.501 6.018Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap477 616 578 645 592Service Time 5.562 3.911 4.004 3.284 4.116HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.071 0.756 0.69 0.095 0.478HCM Control Delay 11.1 24.8 21.8 8.9 14.5HCM Lane LOS B C C A BHCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 6.8 5.4 0.3 2.5
Item 9.b. - Page 224
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
27: US 101 Ramps/Traffic Way & S Traffic Way Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh12.8Intersection LOS B
Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBTLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 2 18 359 4 29 453Future Vol, veh/h 2 18 359 4 29 453Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Heavy Vehicles, %222222Mvmt Flow 2 19 370 4 30 467Number of Lanes 102011
Approach WB NB SBOpposing Approach SB NBOpposing Lanes 0 2 2Conflicting Approach Left NB WBConflicting Lanes Left 2 0 1Conflicting Approach RightSB WB Conflicting Lanes Right 2 1 0HCM Control Delay 8.5 9.7 15.4HCM LOS A A C
Lane NBLn1NBLn2WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, %0% 0% 10% 100% 0%Vol Thru, %100% 97% 0% 0% 100%Vol Right, %0% 3% 90% 0% 0%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 239 124 20 29 453LT Vol 0 0 2 29 0Through Vol 239 120 0 0 453RT Vol 0 4 18 0 0Lane Flow Rate 247 127 21 30 467Geometry Grp 77277Degree of Util (X) 0.34 0.175 0.03 0.045 0.635Departure Headway (Hd) 4.964 4.942 5.295 5.396 4.895Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap725 728 675 666 738Service Time 2.682 2.66 3.339 3.113 2.612HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.341 0.174 0.031 0.045 0.633HCM Control Delay 10.2 8.7 8.5 8.4 15.8HCM Lane LOS BAAACHCM 95th-tile Q 1.5 0.6 0.1 0.1 4.6
Item 9.b. - Page 225
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
28: Traffic Way & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 381 190 233 247 299 201Future Volume (veh/h) 381 190 233 247 299 201Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 263 272 240 255 308 52Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, %202222Cap, veh/h 406 367 343 995 439 372Arrive On Green 0.23 0.23 0.19 0.53 0.23 0.23Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1610 1781 1870 1870 1585Grp Volume(v), veh/h 263 272 240 255 308 52Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 1610 1781 1870 1870 1585Q Serve(g_s), s 5.1 6.0 4.8 2.8 5.8 1.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.1 6.0 4.8 2.8 5.8 1.0Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 406 367 343 995 439 372V/C Ratio(X) 0.65 0.74 0.70 0.26 0.70 0.14Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 949 857 976 2216 2216 1878HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 13.4 13.7 14.4 4.9 13.4 11.6Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 1.1 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.1Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln1.6 0.1 1.6 0.6 2.0 0.3Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 14.0 14.9 15.4 4.9 14.2 11.7LnGrp LOS BBBABBApproach Vol, veh/h 535 495 360Approach Delay, s/veh 14.5 10.0 13.8Approach LOS B A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 25.0 13.3 11.4 13.6Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.6 4.6 4.0 4.6Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 45.4 20.4 21.0 45.4Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.8 8.0 6.8 7.8Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.9 0.7 0.3 1.2
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 12.7HCM 6th LOS B
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 226
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
29: Orchard Ave/US 101 SB & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh16.9Intersection LOS C
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 0 436 23 41 452 0 39 0 61 80 34 190Future Vol, veh/h 0 436 23 41 452 0 39 0 61 80 34 190Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 0 464 24 44 481 0 41 0 65 85 36 202Number of Lanes 020020010110
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 2 2 2 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 2Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 2 2 2HCM Control Delay 17.5 18.2 13.4 15HCM LOS C C B B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, %39% 0% 0% 21% 0% 100% 0%Vol Thru, %0% 100% 86% 79% 100% 0% 15%Vol Right, %61% 0% 14% 0% 0% 0% 85%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 100 291 168 192 301 80 224LT Vol 39 0 0 41 0 80 0Through Vol 0 291 145 151 301 0 34RT Vol 61 0 23 0 0 0 190Lane Flow Rate 106 309 179 204 321 85 238Geometry Grp 6777777Degree of Util (X) 0.234 0.604 0.345 0.401 0.621 0.193 0.465Departure Headway (Hd) 7.917 7.036 6.938 7.087 6.977 8.144 7.023Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap453 513 518 508 516 441 512Service Time 5.976 4.784 4.685 4.833 4.724 5.889 4.767HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.234 0.602 0.346 0.402 0.622 0.193 0.465HCM Control Delay 13.4 20 13.3 14.5 20.5 12.8 15.8HCM Lane LOS B C B B C B CHCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 4 1.5 1.9 4.2 0.7 2.4
Item 9.b. - Page 227
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
30: Valley Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 0 289 150 296 390 0 74 0 203 0 0 0Future Volume (veh/h) 0 289 150 296 390 0 74 0 203 0 0 0Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 325 113 333 438 0 86 06000Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 223 821 280 428 2362 0 302 0 138 0 6 0Arrive On Green 0.00 0.32 0.32 0.24 0.66 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00Sat Flow, veh/h 951 2600 888 1781 3647 0 3471 0 1585 0 1870 0Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 220 218 333 438 0 86 06000Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 951 1777 1711 1781 1777 0 1735 0 1585 0 1870 0Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 3.1 3.2 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 3.1 3.2 5.6 1.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0Prop In Lane 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 223 561 540 428 2362 0 302 0 138 0 6 0V/C Ratio(X) 0.00 0.39 0.40 0.78 0.19 0.00 0.28 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 970 1957 1884 1464 3914 0 3930 0 1795 0 957 0HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 8.6 8.6 11.4 2.1 0.0 13.8 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.0Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.8 0.8 1.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.0 1.0 1.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 0.0 9.4 9.5 12.6 2.1 0.0 14.0 0.0 13.5 0.0 0.0 0.0LnGrp LOS AAABAABABAAAApproach Vol, veh/h 438 771 92 0Approach Delay, s/veh 9.4 6.6 13.9 0.0Approach LOS A A B
Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 6 8Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s11.2 14.7 0.0 25.9 6.3Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5Max Green Setting (Gmax), s26.5 35.5 16.5 35.5 36.5Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s7.6 5.2 0.0 3.5 2.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 5.0 0.0 4.3 0.2
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 8.1HCM 6th LOS A
NotesUser approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement.
Item 9.b. - Page 228
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Arroyo Grande
31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (veh/h) 28 124 17 205 181 98 18 286 172 117 487 45Future Volume (veh/h) 28 124 17 205 181 98 18 286 172 117 487 45Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Work Zone On Approach No No No NoAdj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 128 11 211 187 77 19 295 42 121 502 37Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222Cap, veh/h 49 267 23 266 351 145 34 623 88 155 898 66Arrive On Green 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.15 0.28 0.28 0.02 0.20 0.20 0.09 0.27 0.27Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1695 146 1781 1257 518 1781 3125 440 1781 3356 247Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 0 139 211 0 264 19 166 171 121 265 274Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln1781 0 1840 1781 0 1775 1781 1777 1789 1781 1777 1826Q Serve(g_s), s 0.6 0.0 2.7 4.5 0.0 5.0 0.4 3.3 3.3 2.6 5.1 5.1Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.6 0.0 2.7 4.5 0.0 5.0 0.4 3.3 3.3 2.6 5.1 5.1Prop In Lane 1.00 0.08 1.00 0.29 1.00 0.25 1.00 0.14Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 49 0 290 266 0 496 34 354 357 155 475 488V/C Ratio(X) 0.59 0.00 0.48 0.79 0.00 0.53 0.56 0.47 0.48 0.78 0.56 0.56Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 498 0 1075 317 0 1037 181 1309 1317 317 1444 1484HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.9 0.0 15.1 16.2 0.0 12.0 19.1 13.9 13.9 17.6 12.4 12.4Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 10.7 0.0 1.2 11.0 0.0 0.9 13.6 1.0 1.0 8.2 1.0 1.0Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln0.4 0.0 1.0 2.4 0.0 1.7 0.3 1.2 1.3 1.3 1.7 1.8Unsig. Movement Delay, s/vehLnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 29.7 0.0 16.3 27.2 0.0 12.9 32.8 14.9 14.9 25.8 13.4 13.4LnGrp LOS C A B C A B C B B C B BApproach Vol, veh/h 168 475 356 660Approach Delay, s/veh 18.6 19.2 15.9 15.7Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s7.4 11.9 5.1 15.0 4.8 14.5 9.9 10.2Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0Max Green Setting (Gmax), s7.0 29.0 11.0 23.0 4.0 32.0 7.0 23.0Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s4.6 5.3 2.6 7.0 2.4 7.1 6.5 4.7Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.1 2.1 0.0 1.4 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.6
Intersection SummaryHCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.0HCM 6th LOS B
Item 9.b. - Page 229
HCM 6th TWSC Arroyo Grande
32: Halcyon Rd & Farroll Ave Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionInt Delay, s/veh 4.5
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 98 2 40 0 0 0 20 370 1 2 581 114Future Vol, veh/h 98 2 40 0 0 0 20 370 1 2 581 114Conflicting Peds, #/hr 301202102201Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free FreeRT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - NoneStorage Length ------50--50-140Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 101 2 41 0 0 0 21 381 1 2 599 118
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2Conflicting Flow All 1031 1030 602 1112 1148 387 718 0 0 384 0 0 Stage 1 604 604 - 426 426 ------- Stage 2 427 426 - 686 722 -------Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - -Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 -------Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - -Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 211 233 500 186 199 661 883 - - 1174 - - Stage 1 485 488 - 606 586 ------- Stage 2 606 586 - 438 431 -------Platoon blocked, % - - - -Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 206 226 498 166 193 658 882 - - 1172 - -Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 206 226 - 166 193 ------- Stage 1 473 487 - 591 571 ------- Stage 2 590 571 - 398 430 -------
Approach EB WB NB SBHCM Control Delay, s 37.9 0 0.5 0HCM LOS E A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBRCapacity (veh/h)882 - - 248 - 1172 - -HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.023 - - 0.582 - 0.002 - -HCM Control Delay (s) 9.2 - - 37.9 0 8.1 - -HCM Lane LOS A - - E A A - -HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 3.3 - 0 - -
Item 9.b. - Page 230
HCM 6th AWSC Arroyo Grande
33: Halcyon Rd & The Pike Existing Conditions - PM Peak Hour
GHD Synchro 10 Report
IntersectionIntersection Delay, s/veh 13.3Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Vol, veh/h 122 0 88 0 4 5 58 266 1 6 322 161Future Vol, veh/h 122 0 88 0 4 5 58 266 1 6 322 161Peak Hour Factor 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99Heavy Vehicles, %222222222222Mvmt Flow 123 0 89 0 4 5 59 269 1 6 325 163Number of Lanes 110010010011
Approach EB WB NB SBOpposing Approach WB EB SB NBOpposing Lanes 1 2 2 1Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WBConflicting Lanes Left 2 1 2 1Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EBConflicting Lanes Right 1 2 1 2HCM Control Delay 11.2 10 15.6 12.7HCM LOS B A C B
Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2Vol Left, %18% 100% 0% 0% 2% 0%Vol Thru, %82% 0% 0% 44% 98% 0%Vol Right, %0% 0% 100% 56% 0% 100%Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop StopTraffic Vol by Lane 325 122 88 9 328 161LT Vol 581220060Through Vol 266 0 0 4 322 0RT Vol 1 0 88 5 0 161Lane Flow Rate 328 123 89 9 331 163Geometry Grp 677677Degree of Util (X) 0.538 0.244 0.146 0.017 0.524 0.225Departure Headway (Hd)5.898 7.141 5.92 6.803 5.694 4.976Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes YesCap614 504 605 525 633 722Service Time 3.925 4.877 3.656 4.857 3.42 2.703HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.534 0.244 0.147 0.017 0.523 0.226HCM Control Delay 15.6 12.2 9.7 10 14.5 9.1HCM Lane LOS C BAABAHCM 95th-tile Q 3.2 0.9 0.5 0.1 3.1 0.9
Item 9.b. - Page 231
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix C
Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Item 9.b. - Page 232
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
500 420 500 505 500 N/A
600 360 600 460 600 590
700 325 700 420 700 540
800 285 800 360 800 475
900 245 900 325 900 425
1000 200 1000 285 1000 370
1100 175 1100 250 1100 340
1200 150 1200 220 1200 285
1300 130 1300 190 1300 250
1400 120 1400 155 1400 220
1500 100 1500 145 1500 180
1600 100 1600 120 1600 170
1700 100 1700 100 1650 150
1800 100 1800 100 1800 150
* Note: Values in Table are approximate, actual curves based upon 2nd order polynomial equation
NOTE:
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
SCENARIO (AM/PM)Existing Conditions 2019
INTERSECTION #18 Number of Lanes
Major Approach Grand Avenue 2
Minor Approach El Camino Real 1
AM Peak PM Peak
Major St. Volume:1,597 1,492
Minor St. Volume:42 99
Warrant Met?:No No
Both 1 Lane Approaches 2 or more Lane and One Lane Approaches Both 2 or more Lane Approaches
*Major street greater AM and PM left turn volumes of 52
37 vehicles respectively does not meet warrant using
left turn with minor street option.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800Minor Street (Higher Volume Approach) - VPH
Major Street (Total of Both Approaches) - VPH
Peak Hour Volume (Warrant 3) Urban Areas
AM Peak PM Peak
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE
1 LANE & 1 LANE
Item 9.b. - Page 233
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
500 420 500 505 500 N/A
600 360 600 460 600 590
700 325 700 420 700 540
800 285 800 360 800 475
900 245 900 325 900 425
1000 200 1000 285 1000 370
1100 175 1100 250 1100 340
1200 150 1200 220 1200 285
1300 130 1300 190 1300 250
1400 120 1400 155 1400 220
1500 100 1500 145 1500 180
1600 100 1600 120 1600 170
1700 100 1700 100 1650 150
1800 100 1800 100 1800 150
* Note: Values in Table are approximate, actual curves based upon 2nd order polynomial equation
NOTE:
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
SCENARIO (AM/PM)Existing Conditions 2019
INTERSECTION #21 Number of Lanes
Major Approach E Grand Ave / E Branch St 2
Minor Approach W Branch Ave 1
AM Peak PM Peak
Major St. Volume:1,691 1,640
Minor St. Volume:105 169
Warrant Met?:Yes Yes
Both 1 Lane Approaches 2 or more Lane and One Lane Approaches Both 2 or more Lane Approaches
"At an intersection with a high volume of left-turn traffic from the major street, the
signal warrant analysis may be performed in a manner that considers the higher
volume of the major-street left-turn volumes plus the higher volume minor-street
approach as the “minor street” volume and both approaches of the major street
minus the higher of the major-street left-turn volume as “major street” volume."
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800Minor Street (Higher Volume Approach) - VPH
Major Street (Total of Both Approaches) - VPH
Peak Hour Volume (Warrant 3) Urban Areas
AM Peak PM Peak
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE
1 LANE & 1 LANE
Item 9.b. - Page 234
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
500 420 500 505 500 N/A
600 360 600 460 600 590
700 325 700 420 700 540
800 285 800 360 800 475
900 245 900 325 900 425
1000 200 1000 285 1000 370
1100 175 1100 250 1100 340
1200 150 1200 220 1200 285
1300 130 1300 190 1300 250
1400 120 1400 155 1400 220
1500 100 1500 145 1500 180
1600 100 1600 120 1600 170
1700 100 1700 100 1650 150
1800 100 1800 100 1800 150
* Note: Values in Table are approximate, actual curves based upon 2nd order polynomial equation
NOTE:
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
SCENARIO (AM/PM)Existing Conditions 2019
INTERSECTION #23 Number of Lanes
Major Approach E Branch St 1
Minor Approach Nevada St / Bridge St 1
AM Peak PM Peak
Major St. Volume:1,126 1,101
Minor St. Volume:236 194
Warrant Met?:Yes Yes
Both 1 Lane Approaches 2 or more Lane and One Lane Approaches Both 2 or more Lane Approaches
"At an intersection with a high volume of left-turn traffic from the major street, the
signal warrant analysis may be performed in a manner that considers the higher
volume of the major-street left-turn volumes plus the higher volume minor-street
approach as the “minor street” volume and both approaches of the major street
minus the higher of the major-street left-turn volume as “major street” volume."
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800Minor Street (Higher Volume Approach) - VPH
Major Street (Total of Both Approaches) - VPH
Peak Hour Volume (Warrant 3) Urban Areas
AM Peak PM Peak
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE
1 LANE & 1 LANE
Item 9.b. - Page 235
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
500 420 500 505 500 N/A
600 360 600 460 600 590
700 325 700 420 700 540
800 285 800 360 800 475
900 245 900 325 900 425
1000 200 1000 285 1000 370
1100 175 1100 250 1100 340
1200 150 1200 220 1200 285
1300 130 1300 190 1300 250
1400 120 1400 155 1400 220
1500 100 1500 145 1500 180
1600 100 1600 120 1600 170
1700 100 1700 100 1650 150
1800 100 1800 100 1800 150
* Note: Values in Table are approximate, actual curves based upon 2nd order polynomial equation
NOTE:
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
SCENARIO (AM/PM)Existing Conditions 2019
INTERSECTION #29 Number of Lanes
Major Approach Fair Oaks Ave 2
Minor Approach US 101 SB / Orchard Ave 1
AM Peak PM Peak
Major St. Volume:889 911
Minor St. Volume:401 345
Warrant Met?:Yes Yes
Both 1 Lane Approaches 2 or more Lane and One Lane Approaches Both 2 or more Lane Approaches
"At an intersection with a high volume of left-turn traffic from the major street, the
signal warrant analysis may be performed in a manner that considers the higher
volume of the major-street left-turn volumes plus the higher volume minor-street
approach as the “minor street” volume and both approaches of the major street
minus the higher of the major-street left-turn volume as “major street” volume."
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800Minor Street (Higher Volume Approach) - VPH
Major Street (Total of Both Approaches) - VPH
Peak Hour Volume (Warrant 3) Urban Areas
AM Peak PM Peak
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE
1 LANE & 1 LANE
Item 9.b. - Page 236
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
Major Street Total of
Both Approaches
Minor Street High
Volume Approach
500 420 500 505 500 N/A
600 360 600 460 600 590
700 325 700 420 700 540
800 285 800 360 800 475
900 245 900 325 900 425
1000 200 1000 285 1000 370
1100 175 1100 250 1100 340
1200 150 1200 220 1200 285
1300 130 1300 190 1300 250
1400 120 1400 155 1400 220
1500 100 1500 145 1500 180
1600 100 1600 120 1600 170
1700 100 1700 100 1650 150
1800 100 1800 100 1800 150
* Note: Values in Table are approximate, actual curves based upon 2nd order polynomial equation
NOTE:
150 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR MINOR STREET
APPROACH WITH TWO OR MORE LANES AND 100 VPH APPLIES AS THE LOWER
THRESHOLD VOLUME FOR A MINOR STREET APPROACHING WITH ONE LANE.
SCENARIO (AM/PM)Existing Conditions 2019
INTERSECTION #32 Number of Lanes
Major Approach Halcyon Road 1
Minor Approach Farroll Avenue 1
AM Peak PM Peak
Major St. Volume:1,060 1,088
Minor St. Volume:130 140
Warrant Met?:No No
Both 1 Lane Approaches 2 or more Lane and One Lane Approaches Both 2 or more Lane Approaches
*Major street greater AM and PM left turn volumes of 23
and 20 vehicles respectively does not meet warrant
using left turn with minor street option.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800Minor Street (Higher Volume Approach) - VPH
Major Street (Total of Both Approaches) - VPH
Peak Hour Volume (Warrant 3) Urban Areas
AM Peak PM Peak
2 OR MORE LANES & 2 OR MORE LANES
2 OR MORE LANES & 1 LANE
1 LANE & 1 LANE
Item 9.b. - Page 237
Draft Document – For Discussion Only – Final Version May Differ From Draft
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Appendix D
Bicycle LTS Analysis Worksheets
Item 9.b. - Page 238
Table A-1: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) AnalysisSegment ID Roadway ClassificationBike Lane (Class 2 or 3)1Bike Lane Width2ParkingLanes (Total)Lanes (Directional)Speed Limit3Narrow Bike Lane (Y/N)4Faded Bike Lane (either direction)Directional GapDirectional Gap - Bike Lane Only5Bike Lane Blockage (Y/N)6High Access Point Density (Y/N)Residential (Y/N)Raised Median (Y/N)Centerline (Y/N) VolumeRolling Terrain (Y/N)LTS Criteria Table # Type of SegmentSpeed ScoreBlockage ScoreStreet Width ScoreBike Lane ScoreBike Lane Segment ScoreMixed Traffic ScoreMixed Traffic Score - Effective9Calculated LTS ScoreAdjustment (Volume)10Adjustment (Rolling Terrain)111 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a42303 Mixed Traffic4442 Collector2 >=521402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 4443 Residential Collectorn/a21353 Mixed Traffic44444 Collector2 >=521404,6102 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 4445 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 4446 Residential Collectorn/a 2 21353 Mixed Traffic44447 2-Lane Arterial2 Effectively 0 1 214011 Bike Lane + Parking 4144 448 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 2 42351 Bike Lane + Parking 33 2 3339 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 3 n/a42353 Mixed Traffic344410 2-Lane Arterialn/a 2 21303 Mixed Traffic33311 2-Lane Arterialn/a21353 Mixed Traffic444412 2-Lane Arterial3 n/a21403 Mixed Traffic444413 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 44414 2-Lane Arterial2 Effectively 0 1 21351SB1 Bike Lane + Parking 3134 4415 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 31 2 33316 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=542402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 43 2 44417 2-Lane Arterialn/a21453 Mixed Traffic444418 2-Lane Arterialn/a21453 Mixed Traffic444419 2-Lane Arterialn/a21403 Mixed Traffic444420 Residential Collectorn/a21453 Mixed Traffic444421 Residential Collectorn/a 1 21303 Mixed Traffic33322 Residential Collectorn/a2125YN3 Mixed Traffic11123 Residential Collectorn/a2125YN3 Mixed Traffic11124 Residential Collectorn/a21403 Mixed Traffic444425 Residential Collector 2 >=521302 Bike Lane (No Parking)1 2 22226 2-Lane Arterialn/a 1 423514,3603 Mixed Traffic444427 Collector2 >=5 2 21351 Bike Lane + Parking 31 2 33328 Residential Collectorn/a 2 21303 Mixed Traffic33329 Collectorn/a 1 21253 Mixed Traffic22230 Residential Collector 2 <5 2 2130 Y1 Bike Lane + Parking1 3 33331 Residential Collectorn/a 2 21303 Mixed Traffic33332 2-Lane Arterial2 <52140 Y2Bike Lane (No Parking)413 44433 2-Lane Arterial2 >=5 2 21351 Bike Lane + Parking 31 2 33334 Residential Collectorn/a 1 2125YY3 Mixed Traffic11 2235 2-Lane Arterialn/a 2 21403 Mixed Traffic444436 2-Lane Arterialn/a 1 21353 Mixed Traffic444437 2-Lane Arterialn/a21359,7403 Mixed Traffic444438 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a 2 423510,2503 Mixed Traffic444439 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 423511NB1 Bike Lane + Parking 3334 4440 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 423511 Bike Lane + Parking 3334 4441 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 0 1 42351NB1 Bike Lane + Parking 3334 4442 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a42403 Mixed Traffic444443 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=542402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 43 2 44444 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a42403 Mixed Traffic444445 2-Lane Arterial2 Effectively 02140113,5402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4144 4446 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 44447 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 44448 Collector2 >=521352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 31 2 33349 Collector2 >=521352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 31 2 33350 Collector2 >=521352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 31 2 33351 2-Lane Arterialn/a21353 Mixed Traffic444452 2-Lane Arterialn/a 2 2125Y 13,7003 Mixed Traffic223353 2-Lane Arterial2 <52130 Y2 Bike Lane (No Parking)1 3 33354 2-Lane Arterial2 <5 1 2135 Y1 Bike Lane + Parking 31 3 33355 2-Lane Arterial2 >=5 1 21351 Bike Lane + Parking 31 2 33356 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=542352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 33 2 33357 2-Lane Arterialn/a 1 423512,9203 Mixed Traffic444458 2-Lane Arterialn/a 1 21353 Mixed Traffic444459 2-Lane Arterial2 >=5 2 21301 Bike Lane + Parking1 2 22260 2-Lane Arterial2 >=5 2 21251 Bike Lane + Parking1 2 22261 Residential Collector 2 >=521302 Bike Lane (No Parking)1 2 22262 2-Lane Arterial2 >=5 3 2135Y1 Bike Lane + Parking 3 3 1 2 33363 2-Lane Arterial3 n/a 1 21353 Mixed Traffic344464 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a42353 Mixed Traffic444465 Residential Collectorn/a21353Mixed Traffic4444664-Lane (Primary) Arterial2 >=5 2 42351 Bike Lane + Parking 33 2 33367 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 >=5 2 42351 Bike Lane + Parking 33 2 33368 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a42353 Mixed Traffic444469 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521452 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 44470 Residential Collectorn/a21303 Mixed Traffic33371 2-Lane Arterial3 n/a21303 Mixed Traffic33372 Collectorn/a 2 21303 Mixed Traffic333Roadway InputsBike Lane InputsAdjustmentsIndividual Criteria ScoresFinal12LTS ScoreSegment TypeBike Lane Roadway7Criteria FactorsAdjustmentsLTS Results8Overall Segment ScoresItem 9.b. - Page 239
Segment ID Roadway ClassificationBike Lane (Class 2 or 3)1Bike Lane Width2ParkingLanes (Total)Lanes (Directional)Speed Limit3Narrow Bike Lane (Y/N)4Faded Bike Lane (either direction)Directional GapDirectional Gap - Bike Lane Only5Bike Lane Blockage (Y/N)6High Access Point Density (Y/N)Residential (Y/N)Raised Median (Y/N)Centerline (Y/N) VolumeRolling Terrain (Y/N)LTS Criteria Table # Type of SegmentSpeed ScoreBlockage ScoreStreet Width ScoreBike Lane ScoreBike Lane Segment ScoreMixed Traffic ScoreMixed Traffic Score - Effective9Calculated LTS ScoreAdjustment (Volume)10Adjustment (Rolling Terrain)11Roadway InputsBike Lane InputsAdjustments Individual Criteria ScoresFinal12LTS ScoreSegment TypeBike Lane Roadway7Criteria FactorsAdjustmentsLTS Results8Overall Segment Scores73 Collector2 Effectively 0 2 213511 Bike Lane + Parking 3134 4474 Collector2 >=5 2 21401 Bike Lane + Parking 41 2 44475 2-Lane Arterialn/a21353 Mixed Traffic444476 Residential Collector 2 >=521352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 31 2 33377 2-Lane Arterialn/a21353 Mixed Traffic444478 Residential Collectorn/a 1 2125YY3 Mixed Traffic22279 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521452 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 44480 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 <54225 YY2 Bike Lane (No Parking)3 3 334481 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a 1 42353 Mixed Traffic444482 2-Lane Arterialn/a21403 Mixed Traffic444483 2-Lane Arterial2 <52140 Y2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 3 44484 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a 2 42353 Mixed Traffic444485 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 042351 WB2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3334 4486 2-Lane Arterial2 >=5 1 21351 Bike Lane + Parking 31 2 33387 2-Lane Arterialn/a 2 21303 Mixed Traffic33388 4-Lane (Primary) Arterialn/a42303 Mixed Traffic44489 2-Lane Arterial2 Effectively 0214011NB2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 4144 4490 Collector2 >=5 1 21401 Bike Lane + Parking 41 2 44491 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521352 Bike Lane (No Parking) 31 2 33392 2-Lane Arterial2 >=521402 Bike Lane (No Parking) 41 2 44493 4-Lane (Primary) Arterial 2 Effectively 042351EB2 Bike Lane (No Parking) 3334 44Notes:1No width reported for Class III bike routes; considered "Mixed Traffic" segments.2If bike lane is faded along any portion of the segment, or if there is a directional gap, then width is "Effectively 0", and the roadway is analyzed as a "Mixed Traffic" segment.3 Source: 2018 Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey (E&TS), Pavement Engineering Inc., November 2018.4Narrow bike lane is considered to be < 5', resulting in a Bike Lane Score of LTS 3.5 Directional Gap means that there is a bike lane on only one side of the roadway (if "SB", there is only a bike lane in the Southbound direction). LTS score is based on the side without a bike lane. 6 Blockage refers to bike lanes that are often blocked by vehicles entering/existing driveways, or other constraints (such as diagonal parking stalls, etc.).7 Values only provided if it would effect the LTS score, re: Mineta Tables 2.1 and 2.2. 8 Based on Mineta Transportation Institute "Low‐Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity" (May 2012) criteria tables.9For roadways with faded bike lanes or directional gaps in bike lane facilities (effectively no bike lane), the roadway is analyzed as a "Mixed Traffic" segment.10 Adjustment made based on ODOT 'Analysis Procedures Manual Version 2' 4/2020 Exhibit 14‐5 and 14‐6.11 Adjustment made based on field observations.12 Considered to be the maximum segment LTS score based on individual criteria scores and adjustments. Item 9.b. - Page 240
Fair Oaks
Avenue
James Way
R o deo D riveEl C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike ValleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill R o adFarroll Avenue
Brisco
Road Rancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h S treetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest
B
r
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t232
4
7
63
4
9
2
4
49
1208
31
1233
13
3
263816
69
73
30
46
28 211945
4
0
83377953361027 1852483925644262
2950
76937441817280 35 2354
70
47
1171
9161
7
7
5985 876088442
2
92
63
8
2
755
5
14
17
1
5438
6£¤101
5 6567
90
5666
577
8
8
9
8468 5158APPENDIXFIGURE
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/01/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California II FIPS 0402 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: N:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\DeliverablesCreated by: Makinzie Clark
Legend
Major Roads
US 101
City Limits
Roads
MAJOR ROADS SEGMENT IDS
Item 9.b. - Page 241
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California
MAY 2021
PREPARED FOR
City of Arroyo Grande
PREPARED BY
SWCA Environmental Consultants
EXHIBIT B
Item 9.b. - Page 242
Item 9.b. - Page 243
INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
FOR THE
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE GENERAL PLAN
CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE,
ARROYO GRANDE, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY,
CALIFORNIA
Prepared for
City of Arroyo Grande
Community Development Department
300 East Branch Street
Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
Attn: Robin Dickerson, City Engineer
Prepared by
Jacqueline Markley, M.S., AICP, Environmental Planner
SWCA Environmental Consultants
1422 Monterey Street, Suite C200
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 543-7095
www.swca.com
SWCA Project No. 55896
May 2021
Item 9.b. - Page 244
Item 9.b. - Page 245
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
i
CONTENTS
1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Project Location ........................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................... 1
1.3 Proposed Improvements .......................................................................................................... 15
1.4 Required Discretionary Approvals .......................................................................................... 27
2 Environmental Checklist and Environmental Evaluation .............................................................. 31
I. Aesthetics ................................................................................................................................ 32
II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources ........................................................................................ 35
III. Air Quality ............................................................................................................................... 38
IV. Biological Resources ............................................................................................................... 46
V. Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................. 57
VI. Energy ..................................................................................................................................... 62
VII. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................... 63
VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ..................................................................................................... 69
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................... 73
X. Hydrology and Water Quality ................................................................................................. 77
XI. Land Use and Planning ............................................................................................................ 80
XII. Mineral Resources ................................................................................................................... 82
XIII. Noise ........................................................................................................................................ 83
XIV. Population and Housing .......................................................................................................... 90
XV. Public Services ........................................................................................................................ 91
XVI. Recreation ................................................................................................................................ 93
XVII. Transportation ......................................................................................................................... 94
XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................................ 98
XIX. Utilities and Service Systems ................................................................................................ 101
XX. Wildfire ................................................................................................................................. 103
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance ..................................................................................... 106
3 Literature Cited ................................................................................................................................ 108
Appendices
Appendix A. Circulation Element Update Existing Conditions Background Report
Appendix B. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy Consistency Tables
Appendix C. Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis and TAZ Modelling Output Files
Appendix D. Species Lists
Item 9.b. - Page 246
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
ii
Figures
Figure 1. Project vicinity map. ...................................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2. Existing roadway functional classification map. ........................................................................... 4
Figure 3. Proposed intersections and roadway improvements. ................................................................... 28
Figure 4. Proposed bicycle facility improvements. ..................................................................................... 29
Figure 5. Proposed pedestrian and transit facility improvements. .............................................................. 30
Figure 6. City of Arroyo Grande 2005 GHG emissions inventory by sector. ............................................. 71
Tables
Table 1. Existing Conditions Intersection Operations .................................................................................. 6
Table 2. Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ...................................................................................... 8
Table 3. Agency Permits/Authorizations .................................................................................................... 27
Table 4. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Designations ................................ 39
Table 5. APCD Thresholds of Significance for Construction Operations .................................................. 41
Table 6. Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled ....................................................................................................... 42
Table 7. General Plan Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Near Transportation Noise Sources ............... 84
Table 8. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure Standards for
Transportation Noise Sources ...................................................................................................... 84
Table 9. Damage Potential to Buildings at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels .................................. 85
Table 10. Annoyance Potential to People at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels ............................... 86
Table 11. Construction Equipment Noise Levels ....................................................................................... 86
Table 12. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment ....................................... 88
Item 9.b. - Page 247
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
1
1 INTRODUCTION
The City of Arroyo Grande (City) is proposing a comprehensive update of the City of Arroyo Grande
General Plan Circulation Element to adequately anticipate and plan transportation infrastructure to meet
future needs of the City. The Circulation Element—one of eight mandatory elements of the City of
Arroyo Grande General Plan—identifies the general location and extent of existing and proposed major
roads, transit routes, terminals, and public utilities and facilities, and seeks to make policies governing
circulation consistent with the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Element (LUE). The City’s
Circulation Element sets standards for developing streets and highways, levels of service, multi-modal
circulation, and transportation systems. It also coordinates land use and circulation and provides the basis
for planning and prioritizing transportation improvement projects and funding.
Significant work has been completed over the past several years, as time and resources permitted, that
inform the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update (GPCEU), including
preparation of existing transportation conditions, corridor and operational studies, transportation model
updates, and initial draft policies. On May 14, 2019, the City Council authorized a consultant services
agreement with GHD to update the City’s Circulation Element. The process of updating the Circulation
Element began with obtaining updated traffic counts at various locations throughout the City in
September and October 2019. This process also included review of existing Circulation Element
programs, an evaluation of existing conditions, and development of a report reflecting current facilities
that have been constructed since the Circulation Element was last updated in 2012. GHD, in conjunction
with City staff, then prepared the Final Existing Conditions and Background Report (Appendix A) that
would be incorporated into the GPCEU. The Circulation Element policies and maps are also being
updated. The GPCEU effort also includes updates to the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Report
Guidelines. Additionally, the City is in the process of updating the City’s Capital Improvement Program
and Impact Fee Program.
Following receipt of feedback from the City Planning Commission and the public during this study
session, the Draft GPCEU will be finalized. The final document would return to the Planning
Commission seeking a recommendation for adoption by the City Council. The process would conclude
with a City Council meeting to consider adoption of the Circulation Element.
1.1 Project Location
The project location includes the entire incorporated City of Arroyo Grande (also referred to as the study
area) in San Luis Obispo County, California (Figure 1).
1.2 Existing Conditions
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San
Luis Obispo County. The City is approximately 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area and 150
miles north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of approximately
114 feet above mean sea level. Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San
Luis Obispo, along the U.S. Route 101 (US 101) coastal corridor. The City is contiguous with the
incorporated areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
Item 9.b. - Page 248
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
2
Figure 1. Project vicinity map.
Item 9.b. - Page 249
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
3
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast direction. US 101 is the
primary state highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San Luis Obispo
County and the state. State Route (SR) 227 also provides more localized access to and from the City to
surrounding local communities.
1.2.1 Roadway System
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses throughout
the City and beyond. A route’s design, including the number of lanes needed, is determined by its
functional classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient movement at the
development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element” (City of Arroyo Grande 2021b). The study
area and existing roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 2 and described in further
detail below.
STATE FREEWAYS
Controlled access facilities with junctions free of at-grade crossing with other roads, railways, or
pedestrian pathways, and served by interchanges are classified as freeways. Freeways can either be toll or
non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 miles per hour (mph). The following
freeway services the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101 is a major north–south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101 serves as
the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo County (and other
portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and the Los Angeles urban
basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major connection between and
through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo County, US 101 represents a
major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general four-lane divided freeway cross-
section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo Grande, US 101 forms full-access
interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon Road, and Grand Avenue/Branch Street, as
well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way and Fair Oaks Avenue.
STATE HIGHWAYS
Controlled access facilities with junctions with cross streets characterized by at-grade intersections rather
than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or undivided roadways, with
speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highway services the surrounding Arroyo
Grande community.
State Route (SR) 227 is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north–south direction
connecting the cities of San Luis Obispo and Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a general two-lane highway-
type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a significant parallel commuter route to US
101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City of Arroyo Grande.
ARTERIAL STREETS
Arterial streets serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily to
distribute cross-town traffic from freeways and highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Specifications and Engineering Standards define two categories: primary arterials and arterials. Primary
arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane. Within the
City of Arroyo Grande, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds
ranging from 30 to 45 mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent land
uses. The following arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
Item 9.b. - Page 250
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
4
Figure 2. Existing roadway functional classification map.
Item 9.b. - Page 251
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
5
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown
commercial thoroughfare, as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The duality of
purpose of this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking creates safety and capacity concerns. The
high volume of traffic (18,500 average daily trips [ADT]) at times conflicts with the community’s desire
to have a pedestrian-friendly downtown.
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north–south between SR 1 in the south and
Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between Ash Street and
Grand Avenue.
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east–west connectivity
across US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm Street in
the west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design standards.
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east–west primary arterial through and within the City (two travel
lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the City). West of
the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and extends farther west
to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand Avenue becomes East Branch
Street, which extends farther east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR 227. Grand Avenue represents one of
the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north–south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the City of
Arroyo Grande and SR 1 in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City, with the southernmost
terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue, Halcyon Road is a four-lane
primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road and El Camino Real, forms a full-
access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand Avenue interchange.
Oak Park Boulevard is a two-to-five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern City
limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjacent cities of Grover Beach and Pismo Beach.
Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101 and extends south of US 101 as a four-
lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south beyond The Pike at 22nd Street.
North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old Oak Park Road, which extends
north into county lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a northeasterly direction to connect with SR
227.
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends from
East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to the south.
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to SR 1
south of the City limits.
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road and frontage road east of US 101 with both commercial
and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street and provides
important circulation and commercial accessibility east of US 101.
COLLECTORS
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to residential,
commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards
define two categories: collectors and residential collectors. Collectors feature turn lanes at intersections
and may feature a two-way left-turn lane, while residential collectors do not have turn lanes.
Item 9.b. - Page 252
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
6
James Way is a predominantly east–west two-lane road serving as a residential collector between Oak
Park Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
Printz Road is a predominantly east–west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s northern
limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for several small local
roads.
The Pike is a two-lane east–west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion of
The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City limits.
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north–south collector that runs between West Branch Street and James
Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along West Branch Street, including
the Walmart and residential areas north.
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino
Mercado, Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo Drive, and
Tally Ho Road are other important roadways serving Residential Collector functions within the City
(residential collectors are hereafter referred to as local collectors in the GPCEU and in this document).
LOCAL STREETS
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications Map (see Figure 2) as freeways, highways, arterials,
or collectors are designated as local streets.
1.2.2 Existing Traffic Operations
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour turning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019, and Thursday, November 21, 2019. These
counts were collected while school was in session. The AM peak hour is defined as the one continuous
hour of peak traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and the PM peak hour is defined as the
one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM under typical weekday
conditions.
EXISTING CONDITIONS INTERSECTION OPERATIONS AND DEFICIENCIES
Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations were quantified using existing
traffic volumes, lane geometrics, and intersection controls. Table 1 presents a summary of the level of
service (LOS) and delay (in seconds per vehicle) at each study intersection under existing conditions.
Table 1. Existing Conditions Intersection Operations
# Intersection
Control
Type
Target
LOS
AM Peak PM Peak
Warrant
3 Met? Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 James Way & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 29.4 C 18.6 B -
2 James Way & Rodeo Dr AWSC C 8.3 A 9.1 A -
3 James Way & Tally Ho Rd AWSC C 8.6 A 8.8 A -
4 W Branch St / US 101 NB Ramp & Oak Park
Ave
Signal C 8.3 A 10.6 B -
Item 9.b. - Page 253
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
7
# Intersection
Control
Type
Target
LOS
AM Peak PM Peak
Warrant
3 Met? Delay LOS Delay LOS
5 El Camino Real & Oak Park Ave Signal C 12.1 B 13.4 B -
6 W Branch St & Camino Mercado / US 101 NB
Ramps
Signal C 15.1 B 17.4 B -
7 W Branch St & Rancho Parkway Signal C 6.4 A 8.3 A -
8 W Branch St & Brisco Rd Signal C 12.0 B 22.9 C -
9 US 101 NB Ramps & Brisco Rd Signal C 41.2 D 51.6 D -
10 El Camino Real & Brisco Rd Signal C 43.8 D 51.8 D -
11 W Branch St & Rodeo Dr TWSC C 11.8 B 10.8 B -
12 El Camino Real & US 101 SB Ramps /
Halcyon Rd
Signal C 19.9 B 23.1 C -
13 E Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 16.2 B 22.9 C -
14 E Grand Ave & Courtland St Signal C 9.7 A 11.2 B -
15 E Grand Ave & Elm St Signal C 9.6 A 12.2 B -
16 E Grand Ave & Brisco Road TWSC C 12.8 B 18.8 C -
17 E Grand Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 23.2 C 23.6 C -
18 E Grand Ave & El Camino Real TWSC C 50.6 F 41.1 E No
19 E Grand Ave & US 101 SB Ramps Signa C 9.7 A 13.2 B -
20 E Grand Ave & US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 11.3 B 28.0 C -
21 E Grand Ave & E Branch St & W Branch St TWSC C 104.0 F 111.5 F Yes
22 E Branch St & Wesley St / Traffic Way Signal C 17.7 B 17.1 B -
23 E Branch St & Nevada St / Bridge St TWSC C 42.8 E 23.0 C Yes
24 E Branch St & Short St None C - - - - -
25 E Branch St & Mason St Signal C 11.4 B 11.1 B -
26 E Branch St / Huasna Rd & Corbett Canyon
Rd / Stanley
AWSC C 21.2 C 20.3 C -
27 S Traffic Way & Traffic Way / US 101 Ramps TWSC C 11.2 B 12.8 B -
28 Fair Oaks Ave & Traffic Way Signal C 13.5 B 12.7 B -
29 Fair Oaks Ave & US 101 SB Ramp / Orchard
Ave
AWSC C 39.8 E 16.9 C Yes
30 Fair Oaks Ave & Valley Rd Signal C 12.2 B 8.1 A -
31 Fair Oaks Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 54.2 D 17.0 B -
32 Farroll Ave & Halcyon Rd TWSC C 109.0 F 37.9 E No
33 The Pike & Halcyon Rd AWSC C 22.3 C 13.3 B -
Notes:
1. AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Tw o Way Stop Control; RNDBT = Roundabout
2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for AWSC,
3. Warrant = Based on California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Warrant 3
4. Bold = Unacceptable Conditions
5. OVR = Delay over 300 seconds
Source: GHD 2020.
Item 9.b. - Page 254
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
8
The City’s current Circulation Element includes a goal to attain and maintain LOS C or better on all
streets and controlled intersections. As shown in Table 1, the following study intersections operate at
unacceptable LOS 1 (D, E, or F) during the AM or PM peak hours under existing conditions:
• 18: East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real (at LOS F [AM]/E [PM])
• 21: East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street (at LOS F)
• 23: East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street (at LOS E [AM only])
• 29: Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue (at LOS E [AM only])
• 32: Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road (at LOS F [AM]/E [PM])
Of the locations listed above, several are unsignalized intersections that meet peak hour traffic signal
warrant criteria, as follows:
• 21: East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
• 23: East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
• 29: Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
EXISTING CONDITIONS ROADWAY OPERATIONS
New daily roadway traffic counts (two weekday counts at each location) were taken in November 2019
and compared to daily roadway counts taken in May 2012. Table 2 presents a summary of the prior 2012
ADT and current (2019) roadway volumes and LOS at each roadway segment. As presented in Table 2,
all study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing Conditions. There are no roadway
segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
Table 2. Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
# Street Segment Facility Type
2012 Past
ADT
2019
Average
ADT LOS
1 E Grand Ave West of Courtland St Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
21,630 19,770 A
2 E Grand Ave East of Courtland St Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
18,600 19,220 A
3 E Grand Ave West of Halcyon Rd Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
18,630 15,710 A
4 E Grand Ave East of Halcyon Rd Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
19,610 17,400 A
5 E Grand Ave East of US 101 NB
Ramps
Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
24,090 19,650 A
1 It should be noted that the GPCEU includes a change that would make LOS D an acceptable LOS compared to the current
Circulation Element, which considers LOS D an unacceptable LOS. Senate Bill (SB) 743 amends the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) transportation impact analysis for projects by replacing auto delay (LOS) as a basis for determining
significant impacts under CEQA with average vehicle miles traveled (VMT). The legislation in SB 743 does not preclude
agencies from adopting the use of auto LOS outside of CEQA in the local transportation planning and policy set forth in the
Circulation Element; however, it is no longer used as a threshold for evaluating environmental impacts related to transportation
under CEQA.
Item 9.b. - Page 255
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
9
# Street Segment Facility Type
2012 Past
ADT
2019
Average
ADT LOS
6 E Branch St East of Traffic Way Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
18,4900 13,700 C
7 E Branch St East of Crown Hill Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
11,410 10,980 C
8 Huasna Road East of SR 227 Two Lane Collector 6,600 8,190 C
9 Huasna Rd East of City Limits Two Lane Collector - 5,080 A
10 SR 227 South of Talley Ho Rd Two Lane Hwy 3,300 3,860 B
11 SR 227 South of Royal Oak
Place
Two Lane Hwy 1,880 1,950 A
12 Corbett Canyon Rd North of SR 227 Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
1,500 3,610 A
13 N Halcyon Rd North of E Grand Ave Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
8,900 9,740 B
14 Elm St South of E Grand Ave Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
- 10,250 A
15 El Camino Real North of E Grand Ave Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
- 2,310 A
16 S Halcyon Rd South of East Grand
Ave
Four Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
17,280 14,360 A
17 S Halcyon Rd North of Farroll Ave Four Lane (with tuning
lane) Arterial
- 12,920 A
18 S Halcyon Rd South of The Pike Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
67,00 8,530 A
19 Fair Oaks Ave East of S Halcyon Rd Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
11,220 8,800 A
20 Fair Oaks Ave East of Valley Rd Four Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
8,800 11,350 A
21 Valley Rd South of Fair Oaks Ave Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial 5,900 7,620 A
22 Traffic Way South of Branch St Four Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
13,180 10,770 A
23 W Branch St North of E Grand Ave Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
3,900 3,180 A
24 W Branch St West of Brisco Rd Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
13,900 12,810 A
25 W Branch St East of Oak Park Blvd Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
12,000 13,540 C
26 Rancho Pkwy North of W Branch St Two Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
8,400 8,390 A
27 Old Oak Park Rd North of Noyes Rd Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
4,090 1,470 A
28 Noyes Rd North of Old Oak Park
Rd
Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
4,960 6,210 A
29 Oak Park Blvd South of El Camino
Real
Four Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial 20,400 16,060 A
30 Oak Park Blvd South of E Grand Ave Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
12,490 11,030 A
Item 9.b. - Page 256
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
10
# Street Segment Facility Type
2012 Past
ADT
2019
Average
ADT LOS
31 Oak Park Blvd North of Farroll Ave Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
8,850 9,350 A
32 James Way West of Oak Park Blvd Four Lane (with turning
lane) Arterial
7,710 6,160 A
33 James Way East of Oak Park Blvd Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
6,340 6,110 A
34 James Way West of Talley Ho Rd Two Lane Collector 3,470 3,570 A
35 El Camino Real West of Brisco Rd Two Lane (no turning lane)
Arterial
4,630 4,610 A
36 Farroll Ave East of Oak Park Blvd Two Lane Collector 4,820 4,850 A
37 Branch Mill Rd East of E Cherry Ave Two Lane Collector 1,710 1,690 A
Source: GHD 2020.
TRUCK ROUTES
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles through
and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum annoyance to
residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for large trucks, known as
STAA Trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on the National Network, including the
Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 freeway through the City of Arroyo Grande and
statewide is a National Truck Network. SR 1 is a California Legal Truck Network north of the City of
Arroyo Grande, passing through San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access Arroyo Grande is
SR 227. SR 227 north of Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck Network and the
California Legal Advisory Truck Route. The following street segments are the approved truck routes in
Arroyo Grande:
• Barnett Street, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
• Branch Mill Road, from East Cherry Avenue to the Easterly City Limit
• Brisco Road, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
• Corbett Canyon Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
• East Branch Street, from US 101 Overpass to East Branch Street/Crown Hill
• East Cherry Avenue, from Traffic Way to Branch Mill Road
• East Grand Avenue, from US 101 Overpass to the Westerly City Limit
• El Camino Real, from Oak Park Boulevard to Barnett Street
• Fair Oaks Avenue, from Halcyon Road to Traffic Way
• Halcyon Road, from El Camino Real to the Southerly City Limit
• Huasna Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
• Nelson Street, from Traffic Way to South Mason Street
• Oak Park Boulevard, from El Camino Real to City Limit
• South Elm Street, from East Grand Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
Item 9.b. - Page 257
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
11
• South Mason Street, from Nelson Street to East Branch Street
• The Pike, from the Westerly City Limit to Halcyon Road
• Traffic Way, from East Branch Street to US 101
• Valley Road, from Fair Oaks Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
The City previously adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, which encourages walking and
bicycling through proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to complete
the partial network already in place in the City and County. The following functional classifications of
bicycle facilities are utilized within the GPCEU.
Class I Bike Path. Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-of-
way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with minimized cross flows of motorized traffic.
Class I bikeways must be compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). These
bikeways are intended to provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational opportunities as
compared to facilities that share right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane. Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on
each side of a street or highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike lanes
ranges between 4 and 6 feet depending on the edge of roadway conditions (curb and gutter). Bike lanes
are demarcated by a 6-inch white stripe, signage, and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route. Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the
same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs and
shared lane marking pavement stencils. While Class III routes do not provide measures of separation, they
have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law, bicycles are allowed
on all roadways in California except on freeways when a suitable alternate route exists. However, Class
III bikeways serve to identify roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway (No Bikeway Designation). A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not officially
designated as a bikeway. This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and recreation. In some
instances, entire street systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient bicycle travel, where signing
and pavement marking for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In other cases, prior to designation as a
bikeway, routes may need improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Separated Bikeways. Known as separated bikeways or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways provide
a separate travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the roadway and are
protected from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may include, but is not limited to,
grade separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical barriers, or on-street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
Highway Design Manual (HDM; Caltrans 2020a). It is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as
Class I, II, III, and IV should not be construed as a hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other.
Each class of bikeway has its appropriate application.
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide
for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (AASHTO 2012) and National Association of City
Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide (NACTO 2004) are used as resources
to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Item 9.b. - Page 258
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
12
Bicycle Boulevard. Bicycle boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in order to
prioritize bicycle safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
• Slow traffic speed and low volume.
• Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
• Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
• Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
• Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the
roadway is a priority route for bicyclists.
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For instance,
diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block but discourage through traffic
by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also calm traffic and improve pedestrian safety, as
well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle boulevards are generally applicable to local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a
designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane and/or
parking lane. A buffered bike lane is allowed as per Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD; FHWA 2012) guidelines for buffered preferential lanes
(section 3D-01). Buffered bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the traveled way, allow room
for bicyclists to pass without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and can be used to provide a buffer
between on-street parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes are ideal for streets with extra lanes or
extra lane width, and along roadways with higher travel speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green-Colored Bike Facilities. Green-colored bike facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the
extension of the bicycle lane through an intersection or transition through a conflict area as a supplement
to bike lane markings. The FHWA issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15, 2011, for the optional
use of green-colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.
Bike Boxes. Bike boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles but behind the
crosswalk at signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to motorists by
getting ahead of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle incursion into crosswalks.
Bike boxes also improve safety for conflicts with right-turning vehicles when the traffic signal turns
green. Bike boxes can be utilized to facilitate left-turn positioning and gives priority to cyclists.
Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”). Sharrows help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use
the full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane
markings help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and a
bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily recommended on
low-speed streets.
Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Conditions
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as Class II
and Class III bikeways. The City also has short segments of off-street trails typically consisting of soft
surface (decomposed granite) materials. The trails are typically situated in open space along a creek
tributary. The two exceptions are trails located along Equestrian Way and Grace Lane, which are
decomposed granite paths located behind the curb. These do not meet Class I Bike Path standards
(10-foot paved path with 2-foot shoulders, or 12-foot paved path).
Item 9.b. - Page 259
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
13
There are gaps in the sidewalk network; a Pedestrian Safety Review conducted by ITS Berkeley in 2010
and the Draft Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan identify some areas where there are opportunities for
improvement. The Pedestrian Safety Review focused on key intersections throughout the City and
suggested recommendations that could improve the pedestrian safety crossing large streets with many
lanes of traffic. The Draft Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan focused on multimodal improvements
along the Halcyon Road corridor, connecting Arroyo Grande Hospital, residences, and the elementary
school. Locations near and between residences, schools, parks, retail centers, and City services should
provide adequate sidewalks and marked crossings.
There are gaps in the network of bicycle facilities. Arterials and collectors that are north–south roadways
that do not have bicycle facilities include portions of Elm Street, Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road,
Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park Boulevard. Arterials and collectors that are east–west roadways
that do not have bicycle facilities include portions of Farroll Avenue, East Grand Avenue, East Branch
Street, and East Cherry Avenue. Subsequent bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) analysis is included.
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the City for
active transportation modes. As part of the GPCEU, roadway facilities will be identified where it is
possible to modify the existing cross section and increase the active transportation components for
pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed GPCEU policies are requirements to prepare a
Pedestrian Master Plan and update the existing Bicycle and Trails Master Plan. It is proposed for the
bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment of bicycle LTS will be required to specifically evaluate the
performance of the existing bicycle system and to help identify bicycle facility improvements.
Mineta Transportation Institute criteria was applied to roadway segments with bike lanes (with and
without on-street parking) and roadway segments without bike lanes (mixed traffic segments) to
determine existing Bicycle LTS. As shown, the majority of segments along major roads (arterials and
collectors) within the City of Arroyo Grande can be considered high stress (LTS 3 or 4). Even with the
presence of bike lanes, the high stress nature of roadway segments within the City are primarily due to
roadway speed limits of 35 mph or greater, and roadways with three or more total travel lanes. For those
roadways with speed limits lower than 35 mph, lack of adequate bike lane striping or physical separation
between cyclists and vehicles (i.e., buffers) results in high stress conditions. In addition, lack of adequate
bicycle protection (i.e., bike pockets) at intersections with lengthy vehicle right-turn pockets, or gaps in
bike lane striping at intersection approaches, result in high stress conditions at all intersections along
major roads within the City of Arroyo Grande.
Other factors were noted as contributing to high stress conditions, including quality and condition of
existing bike lane striping and gaps in striping along segments on either side of the roadway. Segments
with significant bike lane striping fading along existing Class II bicycle routes were noted at the following
locations:
• West Branch Street between Oak Park Boulevard and Camino Mercado
• El Camino Real between Hillcrest Drive and Brisco Road
• Oak Park Boulevard Between Ash Street and The Pike
• The Pike between Oak Park Boulevard and Elm Street
• Valley Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Castillo Del Mar
Item 9.b. - Page 260
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
14
Major gaps along existing Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike lanes, or
bike lanes only in one direction) occur at the following locations:
• East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
• East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and Grande Foods Market
• Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
• Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
• Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
• Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
Vehicle on-street parking is also a contributor to high stress conditions for cyclists and is allowed on the
majority of the City’s arterials and collectors.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
The City’s public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCo Transit), a branch of the San
Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA); SoCo Transit will merge with SLORTA early 2021.
Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 serve major arterial roadways in the City. The Avila-Pismo Trolley connects to
SoCo Transit Routes at the Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town
Center/Walmart, and Ramona Gardens Park and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium
Outlets. The following route descriptions are from the San Luis Obispo South County Transit Short-
Range Transit Plan (LSC Transportation Consultants 2019).
Route 21 provides hourly service between 6:29 AM and 7:29 PM on weekdays, 7:29 AM and 7:29 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:29 AM and 6:29 PM on Sundays. The route consists of a large clockwise loop traveling
south on James Way and West Branch Street serving Arroyo Grande, west on Grand Avenue serving
Grover Beach, and north on Price Street and US 101 to complete a smaller counter-clockwise loop
serving Pismo Beach and Shell Beach. This route connects with SLORTA Route 10 at the top of the hour
at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets (Pismo Beach Outlets), and with Routes 24, 27, and 28 at Ramona
Garden Park Transit Center in Grover Beach at 29 minutes after the hour.
Route 24 provides service hourly from 6:29 AM to 7:29 PM on weekdays, 7:29 AM to 7:29 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:29 AM to 6:29 PM on Sundays. This loop route serves the core of Pismo Beach, Grover
Beach, and Arroyo Grande, primarily in a counter-clockwise direction. It is largely aligned with Route 21,
except that Route 24 adds service to downtown Arroyo Grande but does not serve the Shell Beach area of
Pismo Beach. From the Pismo Beach Outlets, the route travels northwest towards Pismo Beach circling
south down Highway 1 to Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in Grover Beach. The route then travels
east on Grand Avenue, north towards Arroyo Grande, and west looping back towards the Town
Center/Walmart stop before returning to the Pismo Beach Outlets.
Route 27 provides hourly service from 6:03 AM to 8:13 PM on weekdays only. This route travels in
clockwise direction serving Arroyo Grande, Oceano, and the eastern portions of Grover Beach. This route
connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Gardens at 29 minutes after the hour and with Route 28 at 32
minutes after the hour.
Route 28 provides hourly service from 6:20 AM to 8:14 PM on weekdays, 7:32 AM to 8:14 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:32 AM to 7:14 PM on Sundays. This route travels in a counter-clockwise direction
serving the same route as Route 27 in reverse order (except for one block around Long Branch Avenue
and Oak Park Boulevard). This route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Garden Park at 29
minutes after the hour and with Route 27 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Item 9.b. - Page 261
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
15
Avila-Pismo Trolley runs April through September during holidays, weekends, and Fridays. Hourly
service is generally provided from 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM with hours extending to 9:00 PM in June, July,
and August. The trolley connects with SoCo Transit Routes 21 and 24 and SLORTA 10 at the Pismo
Beach Outlets at the top of each hour. No fare is charged on this service.
RTA Route 10 provides hourly regional service between San Luis Obispo and Santa Maria. SoCo Transit
is connected to other cities by SLORTA Route 10, which makes stops in Arroyo Grande at East Grand
Avenue at El Camino Real and El Camino Real at Halcyon Park and Ride.
RAIL
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The nearest
Amtrak station is located in the City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of Arroyo Grande. The primary
access to the station is on West Grand Avenue east of SR 1. The SoCo Transit Bus Route 21 provides
service to the railway station for the City of Arroyo Grande.
AIR
The Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. SoCo Transit Route 21 provides
service to this airport for the City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational activities
and is accessible by SR 1 via West Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the City of
San Luis Obispo, about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by three commercial airlines
providing services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Phoenix, San Francisco, and Seattle. It is also home to
full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is located on the west side of
SR 227, about 2 miles east of US 101.
1.3 Proposed Improvements
The City’s GPCEU goals and policies will provide the overall direction the City desires in planning and
implementing the expansion of the circulation system to meet the changing travel demands of the
community. The implementing policies will establish the link between the City’s goals and the
implementing programs, and guide how the programs will actually be implemented. The programs are the
specific action items that will accomplish the improvement or plan that will meet and serve the expanded
community need. The guiding and implementing policies reflect the City’s vision for a comprehensive
circulation system that is safe and efficient for pedestrians, bicycles, trucks, automobiles, and public
transportation.
1.3.1 Proposed Circulation Plan
The City’s proposed Circulation Plan, shown on Figures 3 through 5, following the listed policies, was
developed through transportation analysis and public input to guide the future circulation planning and
improvements to the Arroyo Grande circulation system. The Circulation Plan includes the following
policies.
Item 9.b. - Page 262
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
16
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES
Street and Highway Standards
CT1 Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map
(Circulation Element Update Figure 2-2) as development occurs and as part of the City’s
Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities,
improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the
Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards: Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and State’s adopted
Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each classification. Variations
and modifications in Standards and planned alignments may be permitted with City
Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1 Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards
appropriate to a designated connected system of “Scenic Streets &
Highways” for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT1-1.2 Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be consistent
with the Proposed Standard Cross Sections shown in Table 2-2
(reference).
CT1-2 Intersections: Roundabouts should be considered when evaluating new or modified
intersection controls as an alternative to intersection signalization. Protected active
transportation intersection elements should be considered when intersections are
improved along a protected (Class I or Class IV) bikeway route.
CT1-3 State Facilities: State facilities are to be designed and constructed per Caltrans design
standards or as mutually approved.
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets: 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn lane,
access management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike & pedestrian
facilities per adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features: minimum 110’ right
of way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets: 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional landscaped
parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan,
some transit and other design features; minimum 86’ of right-of-way.
CT1-6 Collector Streets: 2 lanes with or without turn lane; access management, bike and
pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways & on-street parking where feasible; minimum 78’ of right-of-way.
CT1-7 Local Collector Streets: 2 lanes without a turn lane; bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional landscaped parkways and
on-street parking where feasible; minimum 60’ right-of-way.
CT1-8 Local Streets: 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan,
sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or other
special conditions; minimum 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-9 Complete Streets: Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to enable safe
access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all
Item 9.b. - Page 263
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
17
ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and revised for
design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network of complete streets.
Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and parkways and/or street
trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification and
adjacent land use.
CT1-9.1 Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience of
pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of
consideration to automobiles.
CT1-9.2 Use roadway rehabilitation and maintenance projects as opportunities to
introduce or enhance multimodal facilities and amenities by making the
best use of available right of way, including narrowing travel lanes to
standard dimensions, striping new or enhanced bikeways, adding or
enhancing crosswalks, improving intersection markings, and other
transportation “best practices”.
CT1-9.3 Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects by closing gaps in
multimodal networks and enhancing the quality of multimodal facilities
and amenities.
CT1-9.4 Improve the existing street network to minimize nonmotorized and
transit travel times and improve the mobility experience of transit,
bicycle, and walking trips between new projects and surrounding land
uses in an effort to reduce vehicle trips.
CT1-9.5 Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists all
skill levels and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other
mobility limitations.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements: Consider alternative improvements to traditional street,
highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards, which
maximize access to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent mobility to all
roadway users. These improvements may include treatments that improve the safety
and/or comfort of active transportation and transit users, such as consideration of travel
lane reductions (road diets), green paint for conflict markings, buffered bicycle lanes,
bicycle boxes for two-stage turns, and other alternative striping, signage, or physical
design. Alternatives may be permitted with City Council approval or City Engineer /
Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT1-11 Auto Circulation: Provide efficient citywide automobile circulation by maintaining and,
where necessary, improving local and regional roadway facilities. Continue to seek
opportunities to improve connectivity throughout the City and to maintain safe and
efficient regional connectivity with improved access to US 101.
CT1-12 Signal Operations: Provide and maintain coordinated traffic control systems that move
traffic within and through the City in an efficient and orderly manner. Upgrade systems
as technology evolves.
Item 9.b. - Page 264
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
18
CT1-13 Safety: Maintain and periodically update a local roadway safety plan consistent with
state and federal Highway Safety Improvement Program requirements.
CT1-14 Access Management: Minimize, to the maximum extent feasible, the number of access
points along arterial roadways, including by consolidating or relocating driveways to
provide for more efficient traffic movement.
Vehicle Miles Traveled
CT2 Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and the
City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1 Reduce VMT: Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of significance, as
established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA
pursuant to SB 743.
Automobile Level of Service (LOS)
CT3 Attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS “D” or better on all street
segments and controlled intersections to the maximum extent feasible.
CT3-1 Degradation of LOS: New development, which is projected to degrade conditions to a
LOS E or below or further exacerbate conditions already below LOS D, shall be required
to make transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation to the maximum
extent feasible. Improvements to non-automobile modes of transportation at the same
segment or intersection may also be considered as an offset to degradation of automobile
LOS.
CT3-2 Transportation Monitoring: The City should conduct periodic traffic counts, monitor
selected streets and model arterial and collector street network.
CT3-2.1 The City should periodically review actual system performance to
consider Capital Improvement Programs, operational improvements,
and/or policy revision and refinement.
CT3-3 Transportation Study Requirements: Require that General Plan Amendments, Specific
Plans, Rezoning Applications, and development projects that generate 100 or more peak
hour trips are studied in accordance with the City’s adopted Transportation Impact Study
Guidelines. Transportation Studies may also be required at the discretion of the City’s
Public Works and/or Planning Departments.
Parking
CT4 Establish and manage on street parking to serve the primary purposes of the uses of each
street while balancing the interferences that on-street parking may have on the primarily
purposes of those streets.
CT4-1 On-Street Parking: The City shall manage curb parking in business & commercial
districts to provide for high turnover & short-term use to those visiting businesses and
public facilities.
CT4-1.1 Management of on-street parking shall not preclude consideration of
converting on-street parking spaces to parklets.
Item 9.b. - Page 265
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
19
CT4-2 Village Core Parking Lots: Develop adequate public or shared off-street parking lots
conveniently located behind and beside buildings in the Village Core and East Grand
Avenue corridor, consistent with area design guidelines.
CT4-3 Parking in-lieu districts: Support parking district(s) to collect in-lieu fees from new
development to construct public parking where parking requirements cannot be met.
CT4-4 Parking in Industrial Areas: Encourage secure off-street parking for tractor-trailer rigs
in industrial land use areas where feasible.
CT4-5 Parking in Agricultural Areas: Discourage on-street parking in Agricultural areas to
enhance visibility and minimize trespassing.
Coordinated Land Use and Circulation
CT5 Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation system
and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such as safe and
uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of greenhouse as, air, and
noise pollution, and access bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
CT5-1 Government Code Consistency: Provide and maintain a citywide circulation system
that is correlated with planned land uses in the City and surrounding areas in the region
consistent with Government Code §65302.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development: Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments” and
coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family residential and
special needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and near Office,
Regional Commercial, Business Park, and major Community Facility areas.
CT5-2.1 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that
serve regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial
areas and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street
missed use and commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way
and Rancho Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand
Avenue, and W. Branch Street corridors.
CT5-3 High Density Development: Consider higher density allowance and reduced parking
requirements within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating Development Code.
CT5-4 Community Design: Utilize the circulation system as a positive element of community
design, including street trees and landscaped parkways and medians, special streetscape
features in Mixed Use corridors and Village Core, and undergrounding of utilities,
particularly along major streets.
CT5-5 Provision of Rights of Way: When new development occurs in the vicinity of adopted
“Study Areas” as shown in Circulation Map (Figure 2-2) or “Plan Lines”, and where
legally and financially feasible, require installation or funding of all or a portion of right-
of-way and improvements associated with new development.
Item 9.b. - Page 266
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
20
CT5-6 Building Code Bicycle Facility Requirements: Update Building Code to include
requirements for enhanced bicycle facilities such as, showers, repair stations, ebike
chargers, lockers, etc., for buildings that support large employers.
CT5-6.1 Update Development Code to include bicycle-parking requirements for
new development.
CT5-7 Building Setback Lines: The City shall amend its municipal code enabling adoption of
official building setback lines for the City, and to provide for the designation, recording,
enforcement of, and appeal from such official building setback lines for the purposes of
conveying planned multimodal transportation infrastructure. The amended Municipal
Code shall prohibit issuance of building permits for structures within designated setback
areas.
CT5-8 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Plan and prioritize Village Core and E. Grand Avenue
corridor improvements that reduce congestion and promote non-motorized travel between
nearby complimentary uses.
CT5-9 Travel Demand Management: Consider ways to shift travel demand away from the
peak period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, especially in
situations where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators (e.g., large
retail developments on highway corridor). Strategies to consider include:
a) Requiring employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use;
b) Requiring shuttle service to major events and destinations;
c) Requiring events to occur at off-peak hours;
d) Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large
shopping or office centers; and
e) Performing periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control
system with emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to
optimize flow along arterial corridors.
Planning and Funding
CT6 Coordinate circulation and transportation planning and funding of collector and arterial
street and highway improvements with other local, County, SLOCOG, State and federal
agencies. Request contribution to major street improvement projects from other
jurisdictions that generate traffic within the City.
CT6-1 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Coordinate and support SLOCOG updates to the
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) to maintain consistency with the City of Arroyo
Grande’s General Plan.
CT6-2 Interchange Priorities: Coordinate and support progress on the Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Traffic Way/Fair Oaks Avenue interchange improvements to US Route 101.
CT6-3 County Impact Fee Program Support: Encourage the County to establish a “Road
Impact Fee” within Arroyo Grande Fringe areas of the County to fund new
development’s proportional share of transportation improvements.
CT6-4 City Transportation Impact Fee Program: Maintain & periodically update a
Multimodal City circulation and transportation impact fee program for new or intensified
Item 9.b. - Page 267
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
21
development in Arroyo Grande to ensure proportional share developer participation and
implementation of the City’s adopted multimodal infrastructure plans, programs, and
policies.
CT6-5 Right of Way Acquisition: Pursue acquisition of public street right-of-way as
opportunity for dedication and/or purchase arises. Attempt to obtain ultimate right-of-
way for street improvements at the time of development, except when lesser right-of-way
will avoid significant social, neighborhood, or environmental impacts and will perform
equivalent traffic movement function.
CT6-5.1 Plan lines establish planned right-of-way acquisitions necessary to
implement future roadway improvements, plan lines are intended to
prevent development from obstructing or precluding planned
infrastructure. Adopt plan lines, or planned right-of-way acquisitions, as
necessary to accommodate planned widening, extension, or realignment
improvements and include Right-of-Way acquisition costs into
Transportation Impact Fee Program.
CT6-6 Regional Travel Demand Model Consistency: Encourage Caltrans, SLOCOG, and the
County to refine and maintain a regional transportation demand model to be consistent
with adopted City plans and policies and to assist in regional and local circulation and
transportation planning, CIP funding, and new development project environmental and
impact analysis.
CT6-7 County MOU for Development Review: Pursue MOU with the County for referral of
development projects and long-range plans in the County’s Nipomo Mesa area.
CT6-8 Supplemental Private Funding: Utilize assessment and improvement districts and other
supplemental private funding to correct local area deficiencies such as inadequate
parking, transit and streetscape enhancement, or completion of local street or trail
segments that benefit the area.
CT6-9 Regional Coordination: As both City and regional travel increase transportation
demand, work cooperatively with regional partner agencies, including Caltrans, San Luis
Obispo Council of Governments, San Luis Obispo County, and others, to plan and fund
improvement projects that increase roadway capacity while maintaining or improving
access to multi-modal facilities following the City’s community & circulation priorities.
CT6-9.1 Coordinate local actions with State, regional, County, and neighboring
agencies to ensure consistency between local and regional actions.
CT6-9.2 Coordinate with partner agencies to implement regional transit solutions
as part of the SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategy.
CT6-10 Debit Financing: Consider debt financing for projects identified in the Transportation
Impact Fee Program to advance high priority improvements such as but not limited to the
Brisco Interchange project.
Neighborhood Traffic Management
CT7 Provide safe and well-connected neighborhood streets that balance automotive circulation
needs with neighborhood context and bicycle and pedestrian users’ safety.
Item 9.b. - Page 268
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
22
CT7-1 Local Streets: On residential, Local Streets strive to achieve an average daily (ADT)
automobile volume of 1,500 or less.
CT7-2 Local Collector Streets: On Local Collector Streets strive to achieve an average daily
(ADT) automobile volume of 3,000 or less.
CT7-3 Degradation of Neighborhood Traffic Conditions: New development that causes Local
Streets to exceed 1,500 ADT, Local Collector streets to exceed 3,000 ADT, or further
exacerbates streets already exceeding these thresholds shall be required to implement
traffic calming measures on those affected neighborhood streets to the maximum extent
feasible.
CT7-4 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines: The City shall maintain and
periodically updates its Neighborhood Traffic Calming Guidelines in accordance with
industry best practices.
CT7-5 Non-Automobile Connections: Design new street network and modify existing street
network where possible to enable direct physical connections within and between
residential areas, shopping destinations, employment centers, and neighborhood
parks/open spaces, including, where appropriate, connections accessible only by
pedestrians and bicycles.
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES
Bicycle Transportation
CT8 Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle Improvements
Map (Figure 3-3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities, improve these facilities,
and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the Bicycle & Trails Master
Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all areas of the
City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize connections with
schools, parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1: The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle
facilities as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the existing
bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing offsite
gaps per the City’s Bicycle and Trails Master plan to the maximum extent feasible.
Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-2.1 New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle
infrastructure.
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan and proposed
improvements (Figure 3-3 and 3-4) in accordance with the City’s Standard Specifications
& Engineering Standards, State Engineering Standards & Specifications, and the National
Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
Item 9.b. - Page 269
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
23
CT8-3.1 Update the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan, to incorporate pedestrian travel, in accordance with
State guidelines and industry best practices.
CT8-3.2 Ensure that the future updates to the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master
Plan maintains consistency with the requirements of the Streets and
Highway Code in order to be eligible for further funding for
improvements from the State, such as the Active Transportation Program
(ATP).
CT8-4 Class I Bike Path: An essential part of developing a low-stress bicycle network, these
off-street paths and trails are designated for both pedestrian and bicycle use.
CT8-5 Class II Bike lanes: On-Street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated from
automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, class II bike lanes shall be
provided to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto lanes.
When Class II bike lanes exceed LTS 3 (or operate low-stress network LTS standard), the
facility shall be converted to protected Class IV bikeway or a parallel Class I to the
maximum extent feasible.
CT8-6 Class III Bike Route: On-street auto lanes shared by both bicycles and automobiles. In
order to increase awareness and visibility of bicyclists sharing the roadway with
motorized vehicles, Class III bicycle facilities shall include respective signage (Bikes
May Use Full Lane) and markings such as shared lane markings (sharrows) to the
maximum extent feasible.
When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS
standard), the facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if determined
feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Bike Boulevard: On local collectors where Class II bike lanes are not present,
on local streets where LTS 3 is exceeded, Class III bike routes should be upgraded to the
maximum extent feasible with features commensurate with a bicycle boulevard.
When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress network LTS
standard), the facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if determined
feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes: On-street separated bikeways reserved for use by
bicyclists only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and
sidewalks.
Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or two-way
facilities on one side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete curbs,
landscaping, parking lanes, bollards, or other vertical elements.
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
CT9 Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better on all
bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress network.
CT9-1 Designation of LTS Standards: The City shall designate and adopt context-specific
LTS standards that exceed the general LTS 3 goal, including designation of a low-stress
Item 9.b. - Page 270
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
24
bicycle network of complimentary LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities, as part of an Active
Transportation Plan, and/or through Safe Routes to School Plan(s).
CT9-2 Degradation of LTS: New development which is projected to degrade bicycle LTS
below the designated standard, or further exacerbate conditions already below the
standard shall be required to make transportation improvements that offset the level of
degradation to the maximum extent feasible.
Pedestrian Transportation
CT10 Schedule and complete projects to fulfill gaps in City’s sidewalk network and construct
new connections identified in the Pedestrian and Transit Infrastructure Improvements
Map (Figure 3-4) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement
Program.
CT10-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas of
the City as a priority system, prioritize connections with schools, parks, transit, and major
public facilities.
CT10-1.1 The City should strive to include implementation of planned pedestrian
facilities as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT10-2 Pedestrian Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the
existing pedestrian network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete
missing offsite gaps. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement
agreements.
CT10-2.1 New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle
infrastructure
CT10-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement pedestrian infrastructure in accordance with City
and State Engineering Standards & Specifications.
CT10-3.1 Provide pedestrian facilities that are accessible to persons with
disabilities and ensure that roadway improvement projects address
accessibility by employing universal design concepts consistent with
ADA requirements.
CT10-3.2 Strive to attain an effective walkway width (continuous clear path of
travel) of 8’ or more in high pedestrian traffic areas.
CT10-3.3 Pedestrian walkways on roadways with speed limits above 35 mph shall
be buffered (i.e., on-street parking, bike lanes, landscape strips, etc.)
from the adjacent travel lane to the maximum extent feasible.
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan: Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan into a
Citywide Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode improvement plan and
policies.
Safe Routes to School Policies
CT11 Create safe and inviting environments for students, families, and staff to walk, bicycle,
and use public transportation to and from school.
Item 9.b. - Page 271
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
25
CT11-1 Develop Safe Routes to School Plan(s): Develop a focused Safe Routes to School Plan
(or Plans) for all K-12 schools in Arroyo Grande to improve safe and convenient walking
and biking to school.
CT11-2 Designate Low-Stress Bicycle Network: Designate a low-stress bicycle network that
supports safe bicycle access to schools for all ages and abilities. A network of LTS 1 and
LTS 2 facilities should be designated in the vicinity of schools when preparing and
updating Safe Routes to School Plans and/or the City’s Active Transportation Plan.
CT11-3 Prioritize Active Transportation Network Improvements: Prioritize the closure of
gaps in the pedestrian network (sidewalks, crosswalks) and low-stress bicycle network.
Seek connections and paths between homes and schools, especially where dead-end
streets, cul-de-sacs, and other street patterns impede circulation. Identify, improve, and
formalize “shortcuts” and “goat paths” where feasible and implement wayfinding.
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES
Transit Service
CT12 Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit operators
and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops: Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of all
residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1 New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit stops
shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a
maximum ¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development
to the maximum extent feasible.
CT12-1.2 Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design
Guide, Urban Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide,
such as floating transit islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3 Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop elements
such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street
Design Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street
Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators: In cooperation with the Regional Transit Authority
(RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit system for local
and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or disabled persons.
CT12-2.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial
and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments
CT12-2.2 Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement transit
intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
Item 9.b. - Page 272
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
26
CT12-3 Employers: The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public transit
and/or provide van/carpools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex time,
telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts: Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and other
educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system, including
parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit providers, public
parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with safe bicycle and
sidewalk facilities.
CT12-5 Marketing: Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing and
promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit services
available for local and regional trips.
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES
Truck and Emergency Services Transportation
CT13 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the arterial
and collector street network to minimize impact on local streets, particularly residential
neighborhoods.
CT13-1 Truck Routes: Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining City’s
designated routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT13-1.1 Continue to sign truck routes and ensure that clear signage is provided
from regional gateways to truck routes in the City.
CT13-2 Deliveries: Promote off-peak truck deliveries within the village core.
CT13-3 Emergency Access Design: Emergency access design standards shall limit cul-de-sac
lengths to the maximum extent feasible, provide a logical grid or connected system of
local streets providing at least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize
through traffic on local streets, particularly traversing single-family residential
neighborhoods.
1.3.2 Proposed Future Improvements
The GPCEU identifies areas for future improvements to the City’s circulation system. Some future
improvements identified in the GPCEU and listed below are included in the City’s existing 2012
Circulation Element as proposed improvements and some improvements listed below are newly proposed
in the GPCEU. The improvements included in the 2012 Circulation Element and listed below have not
been constructed yet; therefore, for analysis purposes, the following improvements are considered
collectively as potential future improvements in the GPCEU and throughout this document.
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
1. Brisco Road Interchange Project: relocate northbound ramps and roundabout at Rodeo Drive;
realign Grace Lane/Rodeo Drive; changes to Brisco Road/El Camino Real); and realignment of
southbound onramp at East Branch Street
2. East Branch Street at Huasna Road/Corbett Canyon Road: new roundabout
3. Fair Oaks Ave/Halcyon Road: new roundabout
Item 9.b. - Page 273
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
27
4. Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue: intersection improvements (possibly a new signal or roundabout)
5. Halcyon Road road diet (lane reduction or road rechannelization)
6. Fair Oaks Avenue road diet (lane reduction or road rechannelization)
7. East/West Branch Street at East Grand Avenue: restrict turns to be right-out only, allowing left
turns in, in conjunction with roundabouts at Traffic Way/East Branch Street and at East Grand
Avenue/US 101 northbound ramps
8. East Branch Street/Bridge Street/Nevada: intersection improvements (anticipated to be additional
turn restrictions)
9. Proposed pedestrian improvements:
a. Controlled crossings include marked crossings at signalized or stop-controlled
intersection where the approach with intersection control is proposed for a marked
crossing or improved crossing.
b. Midblock crossings include marked crossings at uncontrolled locations and may
necessitate the need for advance warning, higher visibility, signage, flashing beacons,
bulb-outs, and/or median refuges.
10. Bikeway improvements:
a. new Class IV facilities on arterials and all arterials and collectors improved with Class II
facilities except for East Branch Street;
b. new bike boulevards at Linda Drive and at Mason Street south of East Branch Street; and
c. new bikeways across new road extensions.
1.4 Required Discretionary Approvals
As proposed, the project is expected to require authorizations/permits from the agencies shown in
Table 3.
Table 3. Agency Permits/Authorizations
Agency Applicable Permit or Authorization
City of Arroyo Grande (Lead Agency) California Environmental Quality Act Lead Agency
Environmental Clearance/Adoption
California Department of Transportation Environmental Clearance
Encroachment Permit
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District Authority to Construct, Portable Engine Permit, Diesel Engine
Permit
Item 9.b. - Page 274
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
28
Figure 3. Proposed intersections and roadway improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 275
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
29
Figure 4. Proposed bicycle facility improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 276
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
30
Figure 5. Proposed pedestrian and transit facility improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 277
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
31
2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND ENVIRONMENTAL
EVALUATION
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The proposed project could have a “Potentially Significant Impact” for environmental factors checked
below. Please refer to the attached pages for discussion on mitigation measures or project revisions to
either reduce these impacts to less than significant levels or require further study.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services
☐ Agriculture and Forestry
Resources ☒ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials ☐ Recreation
☒ Air Quality ☒ Hydrology and Water Quality ☒ Transportation
☒ Biological Resources ☒ Land Use and Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources
☒ Cultural Resources ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities and Service Systems
☐ Energy ☒ Noise ☒ Wildfire
☒ Geology and Soils ☐ Population and Housing ☒ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL 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 proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. 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 is required.
☐ I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially
significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has
been addressed by mitigation measure based on the earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the
effects that remain to be addressed.
☐ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Date: Signed:
Item 9.b. - Page 278
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
32
I. Aesthetics
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
(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) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the
existing visual character or quality of public views of
the site and its surroundings? (public views are those
that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage
point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the
project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in
the area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) establishes that it is the policy of the state to take all
action necessary to provide people of the state “with… enjoyment of aesthetic, natural, scenic and historic
environmental qualities” (California Public Resources Code [PRC] Section 21001(b)). A scenic vista is
generally defined as a high-quality view displaying good aesthetic and compositional values that can be
seen from public viewpoints. Some scenic vistas are officially or informally designated by public
agencies or other organizations. A substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista would occur if the project
would significantly degrade the scenic landscape as viewed from public roads or other public areas. A
proposed project’s potential effect on a scenic vista is largely dependent on the degree to which it would
complement or contrast with the natural setting, the degree to which it would be noticeable in the existing
environment, and whether it detracts from or complements the scenic vista.
The California Scenic Highway Program was created by the State Legislature in 1963 with the intention
of protecting and enhancing the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors. A
highway may be designated scenic depending on how much of the natural landscape can be seen by
travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the
traveler’s enjoyment of the view. Designated and eligible Scenic Highways within San Luis Obispo
County include US 101, SR 46, portions of SR 41, SR 1, and Lake Nacimiento Drive. A portion of
US 101 extends northwest to southwest through the City of Arroyo Grande.
The City of Arroyo Grande Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element (ACOSE) includes goals
and policies intended to protect visually accessible scenic resources. Scenic resources protected under the
City’s ACOSE may include agricultural land, open spaces, hillsides, ridgelines, canyons, valleys,
landmark trees, woodlands, wetlands, streambeds, and banks, as well as aspects of the built environment
of historic nature or that are unique to the City (City of Arroyo Grande 2007).
The City of Arroyo Grande is comprised of 3,388 acres of land along US 101 that is predominantly urban
and built up with agricultural areas located in the southern and southeastern portions of the City and
conservation and open space areas located in the eastern and southern portions of the City. The City is
Item 9.b. - Page 279
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
33
surrounded by developed land in all directions, including the cities of Pismo Beach and Grover Beach and
other unincorporated communities in the county. Land in the northern and eastern portions of the City are
comprised of hilly terrain and the central, southern, and western portions of the City are comprised of
relatively flat alluvial plains.
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
For CEQA purposes, a scenic vista is generally defined as a viewpoint that provides expansive views of a
highly valued landscape or scenic resource 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. As described above, the City’s ACOSE
identifies scenic resources as agricultural land, open spaces, hillsides, ridgelines, canyons, valleys,
landmark trees, woodlands, wetlands, streambeds, and banks, as well as aspects of the built environment
of historic nature or that are unique to the City. Visual quality of the area is characterized by urban and
built-up land with agricultural and open space conservation areas scattered throughout the City,
predominantly located in the southeastern and northeastern portions of the City and along portions of the
western side of the US 101, located in the southern portion of the City (City of Arroyo Grande 2007).
The GPCEU proposes goals and policies intended to create an optimal multi-modal transportation system
for the City and adequately anticipate and plan transportation infrastructure to meet future needs of the
City. Proposed updates to the objectives and policies included in the Circulation Element would allow
future development of improvements to the circulation system, but improvements facilitated by the
objective and policy updates are not anticipated to have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.
In addition to objective and policy updates, the GPCEU identifies specific planned improvements for the
City’s circulation system. As shown on Figures 3 through 5, the GPCEU identifies future improvements
to freeway ramps, roadways and intersections, bicycle lanes, and transit facilities. Proposed improvements
that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be limited to the realignment of on/off
ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements (road diets, turn
modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and midblock crossings),
and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new bikeways). These
improvements are anticipated to be mostly at ground level and are not expected to have the potential to
compromise views of scenic resources. Future construction activities associated with the buildout of
identified improvements have the potential to result in short-term construction-related impacts to local
views; however, these impacts are anticipated to be short term in nature and would not result in any
permanent impacts to scenic vistas. Future design and buildout of improvements to the circulation system
would be required to comply with objectives and policies of the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective
C/OS1-1 and corresponding policies intended to protect visually accessible scenic resources; therefore,
buildout of future improvements is not anticipated to have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista
and impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway?
US 101 runs in a northwest–southwest direction through the City of Arroyo Grande and is considered an
eligible state scenic highway by Caltrans (Caltrans 2020b). There are no other eligible or designated state
scenic highways in the City of Arroyo Grande. The proposed GPCEU objective and policy updates do not
identify specific improvements that would result in adverse effects to scenic resources. Proposed updates
to the objectives and policies included in the Circulation Element would allow future development of
Item 9.b. - Page 280
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
34
improvements to the circulation system; however, improvements facilitated by the objective and policy
updates are not anticipated to have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic resource because the
improvements are anticipated to be located within existing developed areas within the City to modify
existing transportation infrastructure.
Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be limited to the
realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements (road
diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and midblock
crossings), and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new bikeways).
These improvements would be located within existing developed areas to modify existing transportation
infrastructure and would not result in substantial damage to scenic resources.
As described previously, the City’s ACOSE includes goals and policies intended to protect visually
accessible scenic resources. Scenic resources protected under the City’s ACOSE may include agricultural
land, open spaces, hillsides, ridgelines, canyons, valleys, landmark trees, woodlands, wetlands,
streambeds, and banks, as well as aspects of the built environment of historic nature or that are unique to
the City (City of Arroyo Grande 2007). Future development of improvements to the transportation system
would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS1-1 and corresponding
policies intended to protect visually accessible scenic resources. If future development of improvements
to the transportation system has the potential to result in substantial damage to scenic resources,
subsequent environmental review would be required; therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, buildout
of future improvements is not anticipated to have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista and
impacts would be less than significant.
c) In non-urbanized areas, would the project substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (public
views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If
the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable
zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
The City of Arroyo Grande is an urbanized area and the City’s ACOSE includes Objective C/OS1-1 and
corresponding policies intended to protect visual resources within the City. The GPCEU proposes
objectives and policies related to existing and future transportation needs of the City. The proposed
GPCEU objectives and policies would not result in changes to existing land use or zoning designations;
damage a scenic resource, viewshed, or scenic corridor; or result in other substantial impacts to the visual
character of the City; therefore, the objectives and policies would not conflict with applicable zoning or
other regulations governing scenic quality.
In addition to objective and policy updates, the GPCEU identifies specific future improvements to the
City’s circulation network. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would
generally be limited to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and
intersection improvements (road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian
improvements (controlled and midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities,
bike boulevards, and new bikeways). These improvements would be located within developed areas and
would include improvements to existing transportation infrastructure. The improvements would not result
in changes to existing land use or zoning designations; damage a scenic resource, viewshed, or scenic
corridor; or result in other substantial permanent impacts to the visual character of the City; therefore, the
improvements identified in the GPCEU would not conflict with applicable zoning or other regulations
governing scenic quality. If future improvements would conflict with applicable zoning or other
regulations governing scenic quality, they would be subject to subsequent environmental review;
therefore, for the purposes of this analysis, buildout of future improvements is not anticipated to conflict
Item 9.b. - Page 281
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
35
with applicable zoning or other regulations governing scenic quality and impacts would be less than
significant.
d) Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
The GPCEU includes proposed objectives, policies, and specific improvements related to the City’s
transportation system. The only source of new light or glare associated with improvements identified in
the proposed GPCEU would be the installation of new traffic signals at intersections. Any new traffic
signals or lighting installed would be required to comply with the lighting regulations identified in
Section 16.48.090 of the City’s Municipal Code to prevent light pollution from degrading nighttime
views of the area. The GPCEU does not include other objectives, policies, or specific improvements that
would create a new source of substantial light or glare capable of adversely affecting day or nighttime
views; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
The GPCEU identifies objectives, policies, and specific improvements related to the City’s circulation
system. Future improvements made to the existing roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and public
transit are anticipated to be mostly at ground level and are not expected to have the potential to
compromise vistas of scenic resources, damage scenic resources, compromise scenic quality, or create a
new source of substantial light or glare. Additionally, future development would be required to comply
with applicable land use and zoning designations, the policies identified in the City’s ACOSE for the
protection of scenic resources, and lighting regulations identified in Section 16.48.090 of the City’s
Municipal Code. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
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 Dept. of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources,
including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range
Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest
Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
(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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Item 9.b. - Page 282
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
36
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(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? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(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 or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
The California Department of Conservation (DOC) Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP)
develops maps and statistical data used for analyzing impacts on California’s agricultural resources.
Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and current land use. For environmental review
purposes under CEQA, the FMMP categories of Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance,
Unique Farmland, Farmland of Local Importance, and Grazing Land are considered “farmland.” Other
non-agricultural designations include Urban and Built-up Land, Other Land, and Water. According to the
FMMP, Arroyo Grande is primarily comprised of land designated as Urban and Built-up Land with areas
of Prime Farmland and Unique Farmland located in the southern and northeastern portions of the City.
The City’s General Plan Land Use Map identifies areas north and south of US 101 as Agricultural land
use in the southern and northeastern portions of the City. The City’s ACOSE includes Objectives Ag1
through Ag6 and corresponding policies for the protection of agricultural resources, including, but not
limited to, the conservation of prime agricultural land and soils, conservation of groundwater for
agricultural operations, and the promotion of the coexistence of agricultural and urban land uses (City of
Arroyo Grande 2007).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project 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?
According to the DOC FMMP, the City of Arroyo Grande is primarily comprised of land designated as
Urban and Built-up land with areas designated Prime Farmland and Unique Farmland located in the
southern and northeastern portions of the City (DOC 2020). The proposed GPCEU does not include
goals, policies, or specific future improvements that would result in the conversion of Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. Future improvements and development
activities related to the City’s circulation system are anticipated to be within existing developed and
disturbed areas and are not expected to have the potential to result in the conversion of farmland. Future
development would be required to comply with applicable land use and zoning designations and the
policies identified in the City’s ACOSE for the protection of agricultural resources. If future development
has the potential to conflict with land use or zoning designations or result in the conversion of farmland,
subsequent environmental review would be required. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 283
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
37
b) Would the project conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a
Williamson Act contract?
The City of Arroyo Grande includes land that is currently under a Williamson Act contract in the southern
and northeastern portions of the City along Valley, Branch Mill, and Corbett Canyon Roads (County of
San Luis Obispo 2016b). The GPCEU does not include objectives, policies, or specific future
improvements that would result in changes to existing land use or zoning designations for agricultural use
or conflict with a Williamson Act contract. Buildout of future improvements is anticipated to occur within
existing developed areas within the City and be limited to improvements to existing transportation
infrastructure. Future development would be required to comply with applicable land use and zoning
designations and the policies identified in the City’s ACOSE for the protection of agricultural resources If
future improvements have the potential to conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract, they would be subject to subsequent environmental review. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
c) Would the project 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))?
According to the City’s Zoning map, there is no designated forest land or timberland within the City
limits. The GPCEU does not include objectives, policies, or specific future improvements that would
conflict with existing zoning standards or alter the physical environment in a manner that would result in
the loss of forest land or timberland; therefore, no impact would occur.
d) Would the project result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to
non-forest use?
According to the City’s Land Use and Zoning maps, there is no designated forest land within the City
limits. The GPCEU does not include objectives, policies, or specific future improvements that would
result in the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses; therefore, no impact would occur.
e) Would the project involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
As discussed previously, the GPCEU includes objectives, policies, and specific improvements related to
the City’s transportation system. The objectives, policies, and specific improvements would not result in
changes to existing land use or zoning for agricultural resources or result in the conversion of Farmland.
Future improvements associated with buildout of the GPCEU are anticipated to be located in existing
developed areas and include improvements to existing transportation infrastructure. Improvements would
be required to comply with existing land use and zoning designations and the objectives and policies
pertaining to the protection of agricultural resources included in the City’s ACOSE; therefore, future
improvements would not result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or forest land to
non-forest use. If future improvements have the potential to result in the conversion of Farmland to non-
agricultural use, they would be subject to subsequent environmental review. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
Conclusion
The GPCEU does not include goals, policies, or specific future improvements that would result in
changes to existing land use or zoning designations, conflicts with zoning for agricultural use, the
Item 9.b. - Page 284
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
38
conversion of Farmland, conflicts with a Williamson Act contract, or the conversion of forest land or
timberland. Future improvements made to the existing roadways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and
public transit are anticipated to be located within existing developed and disturbed areas and are not
expected to result in the conversion of farmland, conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a
Williamson Act contract, or conflict with zoning or result in the conversion or loss of timberland or forest
land. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with applicable land use and zoning
designations and the policies identified in the City’s ACOSE for the protection of agricultural resources.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
III. Air Quality
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
(a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to
odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of
people?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
San Luis Obispo County is part of the South Central Coast Air Basin, (SCCAB), which also includes
Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. Air quality within the SCCAB is regulated by several jurisdictions
including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), California Air Resources Board (CARB),
and San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). Each of these jurisdictions
develops rules, regulations, and policies to attain the goals or directives imposed upon them through
legislation. The CARB is the agency responsible for coordination and oversight of state and local air
pollution control programs in California and for implementing the California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of
1988. The State Department of Public Health established California Ambient Air Quality Standards
(CAAQS) in 1962 to define the maximum amount of a pollutant (averaged over a specified period of
time) that can be present without any harmful effects on people or the environment. The CARB adopted
the CAAQS developed by the Department of Public Health in 1969, which had established CAAQS for
10 criteria pollutants: particulate matter (under 10 microns [PM10] and under 2.5 microns [PM2.5]), ozone
(O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfate, carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), visibility reducing
particles, lead (Pb), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and vinyl chloride.
The Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) later required the USEPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment, and also set
Item 9.b. - Page 285
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
39
deadlines for their attainment. The USEPA has established NAAQS for six criteria pollutants (all of
which are also regulated by CAAQS): CO, lead, NO2, ozone, PM10 and PM2.5, and SO2. California law
continues to mandate compliance with CAAQS, which are often more stringent than national standards.
However, California law does not require that CAAQS be met by specified dates as is the case with
NAAQS. Rather, it requires incremental progress toward attainment. The SLOAPCD is the agency
primarily responsible for ensuring that NAAQS and CAAQS are not exceeded and that air quality
conditions within the county are maintained.
The state and national attainment status designations pertaining to San Luis Obispo County are
summarized in Table 4. San Luis Obispo County is currently designated as a nonattainment area with
respect to the state ozone and PM10 standards. In addition, the eastern portion of the county is designated
nonattainment for the national ozone standards. The county is designated attainment or unclassified for
the remaining state and national standards.
Table 4. Summary of Ambient Air Quality Standards and Attainment Designations
Pollutant Averaging Time
California Standards* National Standards*
Concentration Attainment Status Primary Attainment Status
Ozone (O3)
1-hour 0.09 ppm
(180 μg/m3)
Non-Attainment
-- Non-Attainment
Eastern San Luis
Obispo County
Attainment
Western San Luis
Obispo County** 8-hour 0.070 ppm
(137 μg/m3)
0.070 ppm
(137 μg/m3)
Respirable Particle
Matter (PM10)
24-hour 50 μg/m3
Non-Attainment
150 μg/m3 Unclassified/
Attainment AAM 20 μg/m3 –
Fine Particulate
Matter (PM2.5)
24-hour No State
Standard Attainment 35 μg/m3 Unclassified/
Attainment AAM 12 μg/m3 12 μg/m3
Carbon Monoxide
(CO)
1-hour 20 ppm
(23 mg/m3)
Attainment
35 ppm
(40 mg/m3)
Unclassified
8-hour 9 ppm
(10 mg/m3)
9 ppm
(10 mg/m3)
Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2)
1-hour 0.18 ppm
(339 μg/m3) Attainment
100 ppb
(188 μg/m3) Unclassified
AAM 0.030 ppm
(57 μg/m3)
0.053 ppm
(100 μg/m3)
Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
1-hour 0.25 ppm
(655 μg/m3)
Attainment
75 ppb
(196 mg/m3)
Unclassified
3-hour –
Secondary:
0.5 ppm
(1,300 μg/m3)
24-hour 0.04 ppm
(105 μg/m3)
0.14 ppm
(for certain areas)
AAM – 0.030 ppm
(for certain areas)
Lead
30-day Average 1.5 μg/m3
Attainment
– No Attainment
Information Calendar Quarter – –1.5 µg/m3
(for certain areas)
Item 9.b. - Page 286
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
40
Pollutant Averaging Time
California Standards* National Standards*
Concentration Attainment Status Primary Attainment Status
Rolling 3-Month
Average – 0.15 μg/m3
Visibility-Reducing
Particle Matter 8-hour Extinction of 0.23
per kilometer Attainment
No
Federal
Standards
Sulfates 24-hour 25 μg/m3 Attainment
Hydrogen Sulfide 1-hour 0.03 ppm
(42 μg/m3) Attainment
Vinyl Chloride 24-hour 0.01 ppm
(26 μg/m3)
No Attainment
Information
Notes:
µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter, pp, = parts per million, AAM = Annual Arithmetic Mean
* Unclassified (USEPA/federal definition): Any 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 that pollutant.
** San Luis Obispo County has been designated non-attainment east of the -120.4 degree longitude line, in areas of San Luis Obispo County that
are south of latitude 35.45 degrees, and east of the -120.3 degree longitude line, in areas of San Luis Obispo County that are north of latitude 35.45
degrees.
*** Any project with a grading area greater than 4.0 acres of worked area can exceed the 2.5-ton PM10 quarterly threshold.
Source: SLOAPCD 2019.
Naturally Occurring Asbestos (NOA) is identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. Serpentine
and other ultramafic rocks are fairly common throughout the county and may contain NOA. If these areas
are disturbed during construction, NOA-containing particles can be released into the air and have an
adverse impact on local air quality and human health. According to the SLOAPCD’s NOA map, the
southeastern portion of the City is located in an area the SLOAPCD has identified as having the potential
for NOA to be present (SLOAPCD 2021).
The SLOAPCD’s San Luis Obispo County 2001 Clean Air Plan (CAP) is a comprehensive planning
document intended to evaluate long-term air pollutant emissions and cumulative effects and provide
guidance to the SLOAPCD and other local agencies on how to attain and maintain the state standards for
ozone and PM10. The CAP presents a detailed description of the sources and pollutants that impact the
jurisdiction’s attainment of state standards, future air quality impacts to be expected under current growth
trends, and an appropriate control strategy for reducing ozone precursor emissions, thereby improving air
quality.
The SLOAPCD has developed and updated their CEQA Air Quality Handbook (most recently updated
with a November 2017 Clarification Memorandum) to help local agencies evaluate project-specific
impacts and determine if air quality mitigation measures are needed, or if potentially significant impacts
could result. General screening criteria is used by the SLOAPCD to determine the type and scope of air
quality assessment required for a particular project (Table 1-1 in the SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality
Handbook). These criteria are based on project size in an urban setting and are designed to identify those
projects with the potential to exceed the SLOAPCD’s significance thresholds. A more refined analysis of
air quality impacts specific to a given project is necessary for projects that exceed the screening criteria
below or are within 10% of exceeding the screening criteria.
The county’s air quality is measured by a total of 10 ambient air quality monitoring stations, and pollutant
levels are measured continuously and averaged each hour, 24 hours a day. The significance of a given
pollutant can be evaluated by comparing its atmospheric concentration to federal and state air quality
standards. These standards represent allowable atmospheric containment concentrations at which the
public health and welfare are protected and include a factor of safety. The SLOAPCD prepares an Annual
Item 9.b. - Page 287
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
41
Air Quality Report detailing information on air quality monitoring and pollutant trends in the county. The
2019 Annual Air Quality Report is the most recent available Air Quality Report (SLOAPCD 2020).
Sensitive Receptors
One of the most important reasons for air quality standards is the protection of those members of the
population who are most sensitive to the adverse health effects of air pollution, termed “sensitive
receptors.” The term “sensitive receptors” refers to specific population groups, as well as the land uses
where individuals would reside for long periods. Commonly identified sensitive population groups
include children, the elderly, the acutely ill, and the chronically ill. Commonly identified sensitive land
uses would include facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others
who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Residential dwellings, schools, parks,
playgrounds, childcare centers, convalescent homes, and hospitals are examples of sensitive land uses.
Health Risk from a Nearby High-Volume Roadway
Diesel‐fueled trucks and cars travel on US 101, which is considered a high‐volume roadway, so future
residents living in any proposed residential units near US 101 could be exposed to diesel particulate
matter (DPM), which has been classified by the state as a toxic air contaminant and a carcinogen.
San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District Thresholds
The SLOAPCD thresholds for determining the significance of impacts for total emissions expected from a
project’s construction activities are provided in Table 5, below. The SLOAPCD has discretion to require
mitigation for projects that would not exceed the mitigation thresholds if those projects would result in
special impacts, such as the release of DPM emissions or asbestos near sensitive receptors.
Table 5. APCD Thresholds of Significance for Construction Operations
Pollutant
Threshold1
Daily
Quarterly
Tier 1
Quarterly
Tier 2
Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) + Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) (combined) 137 lbs 2.5 tons 6.3 tons
Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) 7 lbs 0.13 tons 0.32 tons
Fugitive Particulate Matter (PM10), Dust 2 -- 2.5 tons --
Notes:
1. Daily and quarterly emission thresholds are based on the California Health and Safety Code and the CARB Carl Moyer Guidelines.
2. Any project with a grading area greater than 4.0 acres of worked area can exceed the 2.5-ton PM10 quarterly threshold.
Source: APCD 2012.
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
As part of the CCAA, the SLOAPCD is required to develop a plan to achieve and maintain the state
ozone standard by the earliest practicable date. The SLOAPCD’s 2001 CAP addresses the attainment and
maintenance of federal and state ambient air quality standards. The CAP was adopted by the SLOAPCD
on March 26, 2002.
Item 9.b. - Page 288
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
42
The CAP outlines the SLOAPCD’s strategies to reduce ozone-precursor pollutants (i.e., reactive organic
gases [ROG] and nitrogen oxides [NOx]) from a wide variety of sources. The CAP includes a stationary-
source control program, which includes control measures for permitted stationary sources, as well as
transportation and land use management strategies to reduce motor vehicle emissions and use. The
stationary-source control program is administered by the SLOAPCD. Transportation and land use control
measures are implemented at the local or regional level by promoting and facilitating the use of
alternative transportation options, increased pedestrian access and accessibility to community services and
local destinations, reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT), and promotion of congestion management
efforts. In addition, local jurisdictions also prepare population forecasts, which are used by SLOAPCD to
forecast population-related emissions and air quality attainment, including those contained in the CAP.
In July 2005, SLOAPCD also adopted the Particulate Matter Report (PM Report). The PM Report
identifies various measures and strategies to reduce public exposure to particulate matter emitted from a
wide variety of sources, including emissions from permitted stationary sources and fugitive sources, such
as construction activities.
The proposed GPCEU is not considered a large development project that would have the potential to
result in a substantial increase in population or employment. Furthermore, based on the traffic modeling
and VMT analysis prepared for this project (Appendix C), the proposed GPCEU is anticipated to result in
an overall reduction in VMT by approximately 783 miles (Table 6). It is also important to note that
circulation network improvements in the proposed GPCEU would be anticipated to improve system-wide
circulation and result in additional reductions in vehicle congestion and delay.
Table 6. Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled
Year Land Use1 Network Net VMT
20152 2015 Existing Land Uses 2015 Existing 296,012
20153 2015 Existing Land Uses 2015 + GPCEU 294,717
Net VMT Difference -1,294
20454 2045 Land Use Element 2045 Land Use Element 340,173
20455 2045 Land Use Element 2045 Land Use Element + GPCEU 339,391
Net VMT Difference -783
Notes:
1 Applied the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) model.
2 2015 Conditions represent existing land uses and existing transportation network.
3 2015 + GPCEU represent existing land uses with the proposed circulation element improvements.
4 2045 Conditions represent 30-year Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) scenario
5 2045 Conditions + GPCEU represent 30-year RTP/SCS scenario plus the proposed circulation element improvements
VMT modelling methodology is boundary-based total Citywide VMT using the SLOCOG Model VMT postprocessor (includes Residential VMT,
Retail VMT, and Work VMT)
Model does not reflect GPCEU’s full potential to decrease VMT as the policies are not reflected (Ex: Complete Streets policies, bicycle/pedestrian
improvements, safe routes to school, etc.)
Source: GHD 2020
APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT POLICIES
Applicable policies related to air quality contained in the proposed GPCEU are summarized in Table B-1
(Appendix B). As depicted, the proposed GPCEU includes numerous policies that would support
alternative means of transportation, including improvements to transit, pedestrian, and bicycling
networks. Additional policies are included to support reductions in VMT, including traffic-flow
improvements and improved pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
Item 9.b. - Page 289
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
43
In summary, the proposed GPCEU would not result in an increase in population or employment. In
addition, policies contained in the GPCEU are consistent with the control measures identified in the CAP.
Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant.
b) Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard?
SHORT-TERM CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Construction-generated emissions are short term and of temporary duration, lasting only as long as
activities occur, but possess the potential to represent a significant air quality impact. Construction
activities that typically result in short-term emissions may include, but are not limited to, demolition, site
grading and excavation, road paving, motor vehicle exhaust associated with construction equipment and
worker trips, and the movement of construction equipment, especially on unpaved surfaces. Emissions of
airborne particulate matter are largely dependent on the amount of ground disturbance associated with site
preparation activities.
The specific construction-related requirements associated with future development of the proposed
improvements are not known at this time. As a result, no modeling of potential construction emissions
was performed. However, future development would be anticipated to result in an increase in short-term
construction-generated emissions. Depending on the activities conducted, emissions associated with
individual construction projects may exceed the SLOAPCD’s significance thresholds. As a result,
construction of future transportation improvements would be considered to have a potentially significant
short-term air quality impact. Implementation of mitigation measures provided below would reduce
potential impacts to be less than significant.
APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT POLICIES
The proposed GPCEU does not include any policies related to short-term construction-generated
emissions. Air quality impacts associated with proposed construction-related projects would be analyzed
in more detail in subsequent project-specific environmental review (if applicable) and mitigation
measures would be recommended to reduce significant construction-related air quality impacts. The level
of mitigation would be project- and site-specific and would include measures normally required by the
City and/or SLOAPCD. With implementation of emission reduction measures and compliance with
applicable SLOAPCD rules and regulations, this impact would be considered less than significant with
mitigation.
LONG-TERM OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
As noted in Impact III(a), the proposed GPCEU includes numerous policies that would support alternative
means of transportation, including improvements to transit, pedestrian, and bicycle networks. Additional
policies are included to support reductions in VMT, including traffic-flow improvements and improved
pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Although construction of future transportation improvements may result in
a redistribution of local vehicle traffic, these improvements are proposed for purposes of improving
overall circulation system performance and reducing VMT, congestion, and idling. It is also important to
note that implementation of the proposed GPCEU would not result in changes to existing designated truck
routes or construction of major transportation facilities near sensitive receptors. As a result,
implementation of the proposed GPCEU is anticipated to result in overall reductions in mobile source
emissions. This impact is considered less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 290
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
44
c) Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
As noted in Impact III(b), future development of proposed circulation improvements would be anticipated
to result in short-term increases in emissions, including emissions of fugitive dust and diesel-exhaust
particulate matter. Depending on the activities conducted, emissions associated with individual
construction projects may exceed the SLOAPCD’s significance thresholds. As a result, construction of
future transportation improvements would be considered to have a potentially significant short-term air
quality impact. Refer to Impact III(b) for additional discussion of air quality impacts. Impacts related to
the construction of future transportation improvements and associated short-term air quality impacts are
considered to be less than significant with mitigation.
As previously discussed, construction of future transportation improvements may result in a redistribution
of local vehicle traffic. However, these improvements are proposed for purposes of improving overall
circulation system performance and reducing VMT, congestion, and idling. As a result, implementation of
the proposed GPCEU would not result in a worsening of existing or projected future intersection or
roadway levels of service. It is also important to note that implementation of the proposed GPCEU would
not result in changes to existing designated truck routes. Based on the traffic analysis prepared for this
project, implementation of the proposed GPCEU would also result in an overall reduction in VMT. For
these reasons, implementation of the proposed GPCEU is anticipated to result in overall reductions in
long-term exposure of sensitive land uses to localized concentrations of mobile source pollutants. This
impact is considered less than significant. Refer to Impacts III(a) and III(b) for additional discussion of
consistency with applicable air quality plans and long-term air quality impacts.
d) Would the project result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors)
adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
NOA is identified as a toxic air contaminant by the CARB. NOA-containing particles released into the air
during construction could have an adverse impact on local air quality and human health. According to the
SLOAPCD NOA map, the southeastern portion of the City is located in an area identified as containing
NOA. Future improvement projects located within the southeastern portion of the City have the potential
to release NOA and would be required to comply with SLOAPCD regulations for construction activity
within areas identified as containing NOA.
The occurrence and severity of odor impacts depends on numerous factors, including: the nature,
frequency, and intensity of the source; wind speed and direction; and the sensitivity of the receptors.
While offensive odors rarely cause any physical harm, they still can be very unpleasant, leading to
considerable distress among the public and often generating citizen complaints to local governments and
regulatory agencies. Projects with the potential to frequently expose members of the public to
objectionable odors would be deemed to have a significant impact.
The proposed GPCEU would not result in the development of odorous emission sources. However,
construction of proposed future transportation improvements may result in short-term increases in odors
commonly associated with roadway construction, such as asphalt paving. Odorous emissions associated
with construction projects would be short-term, limited to the duration of the construction activity, and
would dissipate rapidly at increased distance from the source. As a result, construction of proposed future
transportation improvements would not result in odors that would affect a substantial number of people.
This impact is considered less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 291
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
45
Conclusion
The GPCEU proposes goals, policies, and objectives aimed at reducing VMT by promoting the creation
of complete streets and an increase in pedestrian, bicycle, and transit access throughout the City.
Implementation of the GPCEU would be consistent with applicable air quality management plans and is
anticipated to reduce vehicle-related emissions throughout the City. Future buildout of improvements
identified in the GPCEU has the potential to result in the generation of emissions during short-term
construction activities that could exceed SLOAPCD thresholds. Future physical improvements to the
circulation system, as allowed by the GPCEU, would be subject to applicable General Plan and
SLOAPCD regulations, as well as identified mitigation. Certain future improvement projects may also be
subject to subsequent environmental review and possibly additional mitigation measures to address any
potentially significant impacts related to air quality. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant
with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate environmental review and
would include project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation
of the following measure to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts.
AQ/MM-1 Future development projects that are subject to discretionary review shall be evaluated in
comparison to SLOAPCD-recommended thresholds of significance and shall incorporate
emission-reduction measures sufficient to reduce potentially significant short-term air
quality impacts to a less-than-significant level. Examples of such measures may include,
but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
Implementation of SLOAPCD-recommended measures to reduce construction-
related emissions, including emissions from construction vehicles, off-road
equipment, and fugitive dust.
For any project located within an area identified as potentially containing NOA,
compliance with the measures outlined in CARB’s Air Toxics Control Measure
(NOA ATCM) for Construction, Grading, Quarrying, and Surface Mining
Operations shall be required.
Use of low- or zero-emission construction equipment and use of existing
electrical power, to the extent locally available.
Increased diversion of demolition and construction-generated waste for
recycling/reuse.
Use of low- or zero-volatile organic compound (VOC) content architectural
coatings.
If hydrocarbon-contaminated soil is encountered during any project, the
SLOAPCD should be notified as soon as possible.
Item 9.b. - Page 292
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
46
IV. Biological Resources
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or 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, regulations or by
the California Department of Fish and Game or US
Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally
protected wetlands (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?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Setting
Arroyo Grande is an urbanized, developed city located 1 mile inland from the Pacific Ocean. Arroyo
Grande Creek is located in the southern portion of the City, serves as a wildlife corridor, and extends east
to west, draining at the Pacific Ocean through way of Pismo Beach. There are freshwater/forested shrub
wetlands associated with Arroyo Grande Creek and there are other wetland resources located throughout
the City (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS] 2020). The City has designated conservation and open
space areas in the southeastern and northeastern portions of the City and along portions of the western
edge of US 101 located in the southern portion of the City (City of Arroyo Grande 2018). Open space and
wetland areas would serve as prime habitat for several plant and wildlife species.
Item 9.b. - Page 293
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
47
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through
habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
SPECIAL-STATUS PLANT SPECIES
Based on a review of the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) database and the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB),
the following special-status plant species either have documented occurrences within the City or are
considered to have the potential to occur within the City (Appendix D):
• California jewelflower (Caulanthus californicus); Federally Endangered, State Endangered,
California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare Plant Rank 1B.1
• Chorro Creek bog thistle (Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense); Federally Endangered, State
Endangered, CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.2
• coastal goosefoot (Chenopodium littoreum); CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.2; CNDDB Occurrence
(Occ.) 5
• Gambel’s water cress (Nasturtium gambelii); Federally Endangered, State Threatened, CNPS
Rare Plant Rank 1B.1; CNDDB Occ. 16
• Kellogg’s horkelia (Horkelia cuneata var. sericea); CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.1; CNDDB Occ.
48
• La Graciosa thistle (Cirsium loncholepis); Federally Endangered, State Threatened, CNPS Rare
Plant Rank 1B.1
• marsh sandwort (Arenaria paludicola); Federally Endangered, State Endangered, Rare Plant
Rank 1B.1
• Nipomo Mesa lupine (Lupinus nipomensis); Federally Endangered, State Endangered, CNPS
Rare Plant Rank 1B.1
• Pismo clarkia (Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata); Federally Endangered, State Rare, CNPS Rare
Plant Rank 1B.1; CNDDB Occ. 7 and 8
• salt marsh bird’s beak (Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus); Federally Endangered, State
Endangered, CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.2
• San Luis Obispo owl’s-clover (Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis); CNPS Rare Plant Rank
1B.2; CNDDB Occ. 19
• Santa Margarita manzanita (Arctostaphylos pilosula); CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.2; CNDDB
Occ. 31
• southern curly-leaved monardella (Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata); CNPS Rare Plant Rank
1B.2; CNDDB Occ. 29 and 38
• spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis); Federally Threatened, CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.1
• straight-awned spineflower (Chorizanthe rectispina); CNPS Rare Plant Rank 1B.3; CNDDB Occ.
21, 22, and 26
Item 9.b. - Page 294
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
48
The GPCEU identifies objectives, policies, and specific improvements for the City’s circulation system.
Proposed GPCEU objectives and policies do not include specific improvements that have the potential to
result in habitat modification or other adverse impacts to special-status plant species. Future buildout of
the GPCEU is not anticipated to result in habitat modification or adverse impacts to special-status plants
because improvements are anticipated to be located within developed and disturbed areas. Similarly,
specific future improvements that are identified in the GPCEU are anticipated to occur in developed areas
and are not expected to result in habitat modification or other adverse impacts to special-status plant
species. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be limited
to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements
(road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and
midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new
bikeways). These future improvements would be located within existing developed and disturbed areas
and would not result in habitat modification or other adverse impacts to special-status plant species.
If special-status plants are present within the undeveloped portions of the project impact area,
implementation of construction activities could result in direct and indirect impacts to special-status
species. Direct impacts could include destruction or removal of special-status plants as a result of the
movement or use of construction equipment, materials, and workers within the undeveloped project
impact areas. Indirect impacts to special-status plants could occur through habitat modification, ground
disturbance, and erosion. Development of future improvements would be required to comply with
existing land use and zoning designations, as well as the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS2
and corresponding policies intended to protect important environmental and sensitive biological
resources. Future development of improvements that has the potential to result in adverse impacts to
special-status plants would be subject to subsequent environmental review. Mitigation has been provided
to avoid and/or minimize potential adverse impacts to special-status plants, if present, through botanical
surveys, avoidance, preservation, and relocation. Therefore, impacts to special-status plants are expected
to be less than significant with mitigation.
SPECIAL-STATUS ANIMAL SPECIES
Based on a review of the USFWS IPaC database and the CDFW CNDDB, the following special-status
animal species either have documented occurrences within the City or are considered to have the potential
to occur within the City (see Appendix D):
• American badger (Taxidea taxus); Species of Special Concern (SSC); Occ. 200
• blunt-nosed leopard lizard (Gambelia silus); Federally Endangered, State Endangered, CDFW
Fully Protected
• California clapper rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus); Federally Endangered
• California condor (Gymnogyps californianus); Federally Endangered, State Endangered, CDFW
Fully Protected
• California least tern (Sterna antillarum browni); Federally Endangered, State Endangered, CDFW
Fully Protected
• California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii); Federally Threatened, CDFW SSC; CNDDB Occ.
319, 418, and 459
• California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense); Federally Threatened, State Threatened
• giant kangaroo rat (Dipodomys ingens); Federally Endangered, State Endangered
• Kern primrose sphinx moth (Euproserpinus Euterpe); Federally Threatened
Item 9.b. - Page 295
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
49
• least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus); Federally Endangered, State Endangered
• marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus); Federally Threatened, State Endangered
• monarch – California overwintering population (Danaus plexippus pop. 1); Special Animal;
CNDDB Occ. 249, 251, 320, and 399
• Northern California legless lizard (Anniella pulchra); CDFW SSC
• obscure bumble bee (Bombus caliginosus); Special Animal; CNDDB Occ. 164 and 165
• southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus); Federally Endangered, State
Endangered
• steelhead – south-central California coast Distinct Population Segment (DPS) (Oncorhynchus
mykiss irideus pop. 9); Federally Threatened; CNDDB Occ 17
• tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi); Federally Endangered
• vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi); Federally Threatened
• western pond turtle (Emys marmorata); SSC; CNDDB Occ. 1143 and 1165
• western snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus); Federally Threatened, SSC; CNDDB Occ.
171, 172, and 173
The GPCEU includes objectives, policies, and specific improvements related to the City’s circulation
system. As discussed previously, proposed GPCEU objectives and policies do not include specific
improvements that have the potential to result in habitat modification or other adverse impacts to special-
status animal species. Future buildout of the GPCEU is not anticipated to result in habitat modification or
adverse impacts to special-status animal species because improvements are anticipated to be located
within developed and disturbed areas.
As shown on Figures 3 through 5, specific future improvements that are identified in the GPCEU are
anticipated to occur in developed areas and are not expected to result in habitat modification or other
adverse impacts to special-status animal species. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified
in the GPCEU would generally be limited to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new
roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements (road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway
extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements
(Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new bikeways). Proposed improvements located within
existing developed areas would generally not require building demolition or tree or vegetation removal;
therefore, impacts to special-status animal species in these areas are not anticipated. However, additional
special-status animals included in the species lists in Appendix D are considered to have the potential to
occur within undeveloped areas in the City. Implementation of proposed improvements in these areas
have the potential to result in direct and indirect impacts to special-status animal species in the form of
injury or mortality resulting from the use and/or movement of construction equipment, and disturbance
from noise, dust, and habitat modification resulting from construction activities.
Development of future improvements would be required to comply with existing land use and zoning
designations, as well as the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS2 and corresponding policies
intended to protect important environmental and sensitive biological resources. Implementation of the
avoidance and minimization measures, such as appropriate timing of vegetation removal, preconstruction
surveys, and exclusion zones, would reduce the potential for adverse effects to special-status animal
species. Therefore, potential impacts to sensitive species would be less than significant with mitigation.
Item 9.b. - Page 296
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
50
b) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or
other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and
Wildlife Service?
There are numerous surface water resources and associated riparian habitat present within the City,
including Arroyo Grande Creek, which is located in the southern portion of the City. The GPCEU
identifies objectives, policies, and specific improvements related to the City’s circulation system.
Proposed GPCEU objectives and policies do not include specific improvements that have the potential to
result in riparian habitat modification or other adverse impacts to sensitive natural communities. Proposed
improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be limited to the realignment
of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements (road diets, turn
modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and midblock crossings),
and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new bikeways). These
proposed improvements would generally be located within existing developed areas and are not
anticipated to result in impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. Future
improvements would be required to avoid alteration of riparian corridors, implement erosion control and
drainage measures, implement vegetation management within riparian corridors, and maintain setbacks in
accordance with the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS2 and corresponding policies. Mitigation
has also been included to avoid impacts to riparian habitat to the maximum extent feasible. If future
improvements have the potential to result in adverse impacts to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
communities, those improvements would be subject to subsequent environmental review. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
According to the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) surface waters and wetlands mapping tool, there is
a freshwater forested/shrub wetland associated with Arroyo Grande Creek located in the southern portion
of the City and several other wetland areas located throughout the City. Proposed GPCEU objectives and
policies do not include specific improvements that have the potential to result in a substantial adverse
effect on federally or state-protected wetlands. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in
the GPCEU would generally be limited to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new
roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements (road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway
extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements
(Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new bikeways). These proposed improvements would
generally be located within existing developed areas and are not anticipated to result in impacts to
federally or state-protected wetlands. Future improvements would be required to avoid alteration of
riparian corridors, implement erosion control and drainage measures, implement vegetation management
within riparian corridors, and maintain setbacks in accordance with the City’s ACOSE, specifically
Objective C/OS2 and corresponding policies. Mitigation has also been included to avoid impacts to
wetlands to the maximum extent feasible. If future improvements have the potential to result in adverse
impacts to wetlands, those improvements would be subject to subsequent environmental review.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
d) Would the project 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?
Arroyo Grande Creek serves as a wildlife corridor, is located in the southern portion of the City, and
flows east to west, emptying in the Pacific Ocean through Pismo Beach. The City is predominately
Item 9.b. - Page 297
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
51
comprised of developed land with limited connectivity opportunities. However, there is an area of land
located in the northwestern portion of the City that has connection with implementation flexibility,
meaning that there are areas identified as having connectivity importance, but have not been identified as
channelized areas, species corridors, or habitat linkages at this time (CDFW 2021).
Proposed GPCEU objectives and policies do not include specific improvements that have the potential to
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. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be
limited to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection
improvements (road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements
(controlled and midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike
boulevards, and new bikeways). These proposed improvements would generally be located within
existing developed areas and are not anticipated to interfere with the movement of wildlife or otherwise
impact wildlife migration corridors. Future improvements would be required to comply with Section
13.24.120 (Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130 (Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements) of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all
construction and grading permit projects prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project
phases, and require projects that result in site disturbance of 1 acre or more prepare and implement a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with Best Management Practices (BMPs) to reduce or
avoid construction-related pollution to water resources. Future improvement and development projects
would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, Municipal Code, and State Water Resources
Control Board (SWRCB) water discharge requirements. Mitigation has been included to avoid further
avoid impacts to riparian corridors and migratory birds to the maximum extent feasible. Any future
improvements that have the potential to interfere with the movement of wildlife or result in other impacts
to migration corridors or nursery sites would be subject so subsequent environmental review. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
e) Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Section 12.16 of the City’s Municipal Code is designed to preserve, enhance, and revitalize the City’s
urban forest. The Community Tree Program sets forth guidelines and policies with regards to:
• Street tree requirements for new development;
• Landmark trees;
• Responsibility for tree-damaged sidewalks and public improvements;
• Privately owned trees affecting the public right-of-way;
• Tree removal in residential, mixed-use, and commercial zones;
• Public utility company requirements; and
• Installation, maintenance, and removal of trees relating to property development.
Regulated trees include street trees within the public right-of-way fronting the property, landmark trees,
and any oak trees with a trunk width over 12 inches in diameter when measured 4.5 feet from the base.
Removing them is prohibited without first obtaining a permit. The permit is available when the removal is
deemed appropriate. Any removal of a regulated tree without a permit is considered to be a misdemeanor
violation with a minimum $150.00 tree replacement fee.
Item 9.b. - Page 298
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
52
Proposed GPCEU objectives and policies would not conflict with the City’s Municipal Code. Proposed
improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be limited to the realignment
of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements (road diets, turn
modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and midblock crossings),
and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new bikeways). These
proposed improvements would generally be located within existing developed areas and are not
anticipated to conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Future
improvements would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS-2 and
corresponding policies, which is intended to safeguard important environmental and sensitive biological
resources contributing to a healthy, functioning ecosystem. Future improvements would also be required
to comply with the City’s Municipal Code, specifically the Community Tree Program. Future
improvements that would conflict with the City’s ACOSE or the Community Tree Program would be
subject to subsequent environmental review. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
f) Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan?
A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) was prepared for Arroyo Grande Creek in 2004 to address protection
of habitat for steelhead and California red-legged frog. The HCP extends approximately 10 miles and its
boundaries include Arroyo Grande Creek downstream from Lopez Dam to the flood control channel at
Fair Oaks Boulevard.
Proposed GPCEU objectives and policies would not conflict with the HCP prepared for Arroyo Grande
Creek. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would generally be limited
to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and intersection improvements
(road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian improvements (controlled and
midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities, bike boulevards, and new
bikeways). These proposed improvements would generally be located within existing developed areas and
are not anticipated to conflict with any HCP policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Future
improvements would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS-2 and
corresponding policies, which is intended to safeguard important environmental and sensitive biological
resources contributing to a healthy, functioning ecosystem. Future improvements would also be required
to comply with the HCP prepared for Arroyo Grande Creek. Mitigation has been included to further avoid
potential adverse impacts to biological resources to the maximum extent feasible. Future improvements
that would conflict with the City’s ACOSE or an applicable HCP would be subject to subsequent
environmental review. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Conclusion
The City of Arroyo Grande supports special-status plant and wildlife species, surface water resources,
wetland resources, wildlife corridors, and other sensitive biological communities. Proposed GPCEU
objectives and policies do not include specific improvements that have the potential to result in habitat
modification or other adverse impacts to special-status species, riparian habitat or sensitive natural
communities, wetlands, wildlife corridors or nursery sites, or conflict with applicable policies, ordinances,
or HCPs intended to protect biological resources. Future buildout of the GPCEU is not anticipated to
result in impacts to these resources because improvements are anticipated to be located within developed
and disturbed areas. Proposed improvements that are specifically identified in the GPCEU would
generally be limited to the realignment of on/off ramps, construction of new roundabouts, lane and
intersection improvements (road diets, turn modifications, etc.), roadway extensions, pedestrian
improvements (controlled and midblock crossings), and bikeway improvements (Class IV and II facilities,
bike boulevards, and new bikeways). These future improvements would be located within existing
Item 9.b. - Page 299
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
53
developed and disturbed areas and are not anticipated to result in substantial adverse impacts to these
species. Future improvements would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, Municipal Code,
Community Tree Program, applicable HCPs, and associated policies intended to protect biological
resources. Mitigation has also been included to further avoid potential impacts to sensitive biological
resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would
include project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the
following measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential adverse impacts to
biological resources.
BIO/MM-1 Prior to commencement of construction activities within undeveloped areas that could
contain special-status plants, the City shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct an
appropriately timed protocol-level botanical survey. If special-status plants are observed
within the project impact area, the following measures shall be implemented:
An environmental training program shall be developed to educate construction
personnel about special-status plant species with potential to be encountered
during construction, and the avoidance and minimization measures being
employed to prevent or reduce impacts to these species.
If federally listed plant species are determined to occur within the project area
and cannot be avoided, the project must obtain incidental take authorization from
the USFWS through a Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) Section 7
Biological Opinion and Incidental Take Statement.
If feasible, avoid disturbance in areas with special-status plant species. Areas
with special-status plant species to be avoided shall be marked on project plans
and marked in the field with flagging and/or brightly colored fencing to facilitate
plant recognition and avoidance.
If plant species listed by the state as endangered or threatened are determined to
occur within the project area and cannot be avoided, the project must obtain
incidental take authorization from CDFW through a California Endangered
Species Act (CESA) Section 2081 Incidental Take Permit. Species that are
considered State Rare by CDFW must be completely avoided since CDFW
currently does not have a legal mechanism to allow for “take.”
Plants listed as rare by the CNPS that have no federal or state status are not
protected under CESA. During CEQA project analysis, CDFW may require
implementation of specific mitigation measures for impacts to rare plants found
within the project area.
If it is determined by the City that impacts to special-status plant species exceed
the levels that are authorized by the affected regulatory agency, they will notify
the project contractor immediately. The project contractor will resolve the
situation immediately by eliminating the cause of the identified effect to special-
status species or require that all actions that are causing these effects are halted
until coordination with the appropriate resource agency is completed. No work
will resume until the issue is resolved.
Item 9.b. - Page 300
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
54
BIO/MM-2 During construction, the project contractor shall implement the following measures, as
appropriate to avoid the spread of invasive species:
To avoid the spread of invasive species, the contractor shall stockpile topsoil and
redeposit the stockpiled soil within the excavated trenches after construction of
the new project component is complete, or transport topsoil to a certified landfill
for disposal.
During construction, the project contractor 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.
Any landscape and/or restoration planting plans, if proposed, must emphasize the
use of native species expected to occur in the area. Project plans must avoid the
use of plant species that the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC),
California Exotic Pest Plant Council (Cal-EPPC), CDFW, or other resource
organizations considers to be invasive or potentially invasive. Prior to issuance of
grading permits, all project landscape and restoration plans shall be verified to
ensure that the plans do not include the use of any species considered invasive by
the Cal-IPC, Cal-EPPC, or CDFW.
Use of rodenticides and herbicides shall be prohibited.
BIO/MM-3 Prior to construction in any undeveloped area that contains a potential wetland, seep,
drainage, or other surface water feature, the City shall retain a qualified biologist or
wetland delineation specialist to conduct a biological survey and/or wetland delineation
within the project impact area and shall implement the following measures, as applicable:
Prior to project implementation, the project area shall be clearly flagged or
fenced so that the contractor is aware of the limits of allowable site access and
disturbance. Areas within the designated project site that do not require regular
access shall be clearly flagged as off-limit areas to avoid unnecessary damage to
sensitive habitats or existing vegetation within the project area.
Prior to project implementation, a project Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared.
During project activities, erosion control measures shall be implemented. Silt
fencing, fiber rolls, and barriers (e.g., hay bales) shall be installed to establish a
minimum 25-foot setback distance between the project impact areas and adjacent
wetlands and other waters. At a minimum, silt fencing shall be checked and
maintained on a daily basis throughout the construction period. The contractor
shall also apply adequate dust control techniques, such as site watering, during
construction.
Prior to construction, the City shall prepare and submit to the Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) or SWRCB a Notice of Intent (NOI) and
prepare a SWPPP in accordance with the requirements of the State General Order
related to construction projects. The SWPPP shall identify the selected
stormwater management procedures, pollution control technologies, spill
response procedures, and other means that will be used to minimize erosion and
sediment production and the release of pollutants to surface water during
construction. The City shall ensure that sedimentation and erosion control
measures are installed prior to any ground-disturbing activities.
Item 9.b. - Page 301
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
55
Prior to the commencement of site preparation, ground-disturbing, or
construction activities, the City will identify required BMPs on all construction
plans. These practices will be implemented prior to, during, and following
construction activities as necessary to ensure their intended efficacy. Measures
may include, but not necessarily be limited to, the placement of silt fencing along
the down-slope side of the construction zone, on-site storage of a spill and clean-
up kit at all times, and employment of both temporary and permanent erosion and
sedimentation control measures (e.g., silt fencing, hay bales, straw wattles).
During project activities, if work within stream channels is necessary, it shall be
conducted during the dry season if possible (April 15–October 15).
Prior to construction within 50 feet of any stream or other surface water resource,
the City shall prepare project-specific plans for crossings. If construction
activities require any earthwork within the banks of the drainage (including
beneath the bed of the channel), the City shall coordinate with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE), CDFW, and RWQCB to obtain the appropriate
permits for direct impacts to the jurisdictional features.
Prior to construction within 50 feet of any stream or other surface water resource,
the City shall ensure preparation and implementation of a Spill Prevention and
Contingency Plan that includes provisions for avoiding and/or minimizing
impacts to sensitive habitat areas, including wetland and riparian areas and
waterbodies due to equipment-related spills during project implementation. The
City shall ensure contamination of habitat does not occur during such operations.
Prior to the onset of work, the City shall ensure that the plan allows a prompt and
effective response to any accidental spills. All workers shall be informed of the
importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measure to take should a
spill occur. The plan shall include the following provisions:
a. All equipment fueling shall be conducted within the designated staging
areas of the project site. Such areas shall consist of roadway or ruderal
habitat. At no time shall any equipment fueling be conducted within 100
feet of any wetland and riparian habitat area, or waterbody;
b. An overview of the containment measures to appropriately store and
contain all fuels and associated petroleum products during the project
shall be included in the plan. This shall include provisions for equipment
staging areas, such as the need for drip pans underneath parked
equipment and designated storage areas for fuel dispensing equipment
with visqueen lining or similar and secondary containment; and
c. A description of the response equipment that would be on-site during
construction and exact procedures for responding to any inadvertent
spills, including miscellaneous fuel and/or lubricant spills from
construction equipment and vehicles during operations. Final
specifications of the Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the City prior to project implementation.
If impacts to wetlands or other surface water resources would occur as a result of
proposed project activities and are unavoidable, a mitigation, monitoring, and
reporting plan shall be prepared and approved by the City and other jurisdictional
agencies, as appropriate (i.e., USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB). Wetland
mitigation will increase the aerial extent of wetland habitat on site at a 2:1 ratio
(created wetland area to impacted wetland area), or other ratio determined by the
Item 9.b. - Page 302
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
56
permitting agency. Mitigation implementation and success will be monitored for
a minimum of 3 years, depending on the jurisdictional agencies’ requirements.
BIO/MM-4 Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall retain a qualified
biologist that is familiar with the special-status species that have documented occurrences
within the City and that have the potential to occur within the City.
BIO/MM-5 Prior to commencement of site preparation, ground-disturbing, or construction activities,
the City will retain a biologist to prepare and deliver a worker orientation and training
program for all construction staff. This program will include information on the
protection of trees, riparian and wetland habitat, special-status plant and animal species
that have the potential to occur in the project area, and nesting birds. The training shall
also include any applicable regulatory policies and provisions regarding species
protection and minimization measures to be implemented. The point of contact appointed
by the City will be identified. Any employee or contractor who might detect the presence
of or inadvertently injure or kill a special-status species or who finds a dead, injured, or
entrapped animal will report their observation to this point of contact.
BIO/MM-7 Prior to the commencement of site preparation, ground-disturbing, or construction
activities, the City will obtain all necessary permits, approvals, and authorizations from
regulatory agencies.
BIO/MM-8 A preconstruction survey by the qualified biologist shall be conducted no more than 30
days and no less than 14 days prior to the commencement of any site preparation and/or
construction activities in previously undisturbed areas. If any evidence of occupation of
that portion of the project site by listed or other special-status plant or animal species is
observed, the following measures shall be implemented:
A buffer shall be established by a qualified biologist that results in sufficient
avoidance to comply with applicable regulations. If sufficient avoidance cannot
be established, the USFWS and CDFW shall be contacted for further guidance
and consultation on additional measures.
The City shall obtain any required permits from the appropriate wildlife agency.
Copies of the preconstruction survey and results, as well as all permits and
evidence of compliance with applicable regulations, shall be maintained by the
City.
BIO/MM-9 Prior to the commencement of construction activities, the City shall retain a qualified
biologist to conduct a preconstruction nesting bird survey. Within 1 week (7 days) prior
to construction activities taking place during the avian breeding season (February 1–
August 31) the approved qualified biologist shall conduct a nesting bird survey within the
project disturbance areas and a 500-foot buffer surrounding all project disturbance areas
(wherever legal access is available). At a minimum, nesting surveys shall be conducted
prior to construction occurring between February 1 and August 31. A qualified biologist
will determine if nesting activity is occurring either prior to or after this February–August
period and nesting surveys will be performed accordingly.
If an active nest is found, an avoidance buffer shall be established around the nest in
which no construction work is permitted. The size of the buffer will be adequate to ensure
that the nest, nesting birds, and chicks (including fledglings and precocial chicks) are not
disturbed. For nests of raptors and special-status bird species, the size of the buffer will
be determined based on a project-specific nesting bird management plan approved by the
Item 9.b. - Page 303
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
57
appropriate resource agencies or consultation with the appropriate resource agencies. For
all other nests, the size of the buffer will be determined by a qualified biologist.
Construction monitors will ensure that work crews are aware of the buffer and related
work restrictions. The buffer zone will remain in place until the young have fledged and
are no longer dependent on the nest or the nest is no longer active, as determined by a
qualified biologist.
An active nest is defined as a nest with eggs or chicks, or as otherwise defined by the
CDFW. If an active nest must be moved during the nesting season, the City shall
coordinate with the USFWS and CDFW to obtain approval prior to moving the nest.
Prior to the start of construction, the City shall prepare a draft Nesting Bird Management
Plan, in consultation with CDFW, describing measures to detect birds that may nest on
and adjacent to the project corridor or facilities and to avoid impacts to or take of those
birds or their nests during project construction. The draft Nesting Bird Management Plan
shall be submitted to the City for review and approval in consultation with the USFWS
and CDFW. The Nesting Bird Management Plan will be finalized by the City prior to
issuance of CDFW’s Notification to Proceed. The Nesting Bird Management Plan will
describe avoidance measures, such as buffer distances from active nests, based on the
specific nature of project activities, noise, or other disturbance of those activities, the bird
species and conservation status, and other pertinent factors. The plan will specify species’
(or groups of species) appropriate buffer distances based on tolerance of human activities.
Standard nest buffers shall be 300 feet, and 500 feet for raptor species, or as specified in
the CDFW-approved Nesting Bird Management Plan.
BIO/MM-10 Prior to the commencement of site preparation, ground-disturbing, or construction
activities, the perimeter of these activity areas will be delineated with construction
fencing to avoid inadvertent egress into habitat intended to remain undisturbed.
Verification that this fencing has been installed will be conveyed to the City by the
contractor. The contractor will be responsible for fence maintenance throughout the entire
construction process.
With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts to biological resources would be less than
significant.
V. Cultural Resources
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource pursuant to §
15064.5?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to
§ 15064.5?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of dedicated cemeteries? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Item 9.b. - Page 304
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
58
Setting
San Luis Obispo County possesses a rich and diverse cultural heritage and has an abundance of historic
and prehistoric cultural resources dating as far back as 9,000 B.C. The County of San Luis Obispo
(County) protects and manages cultural resources in accordance with the provisions detailed by CEQA
and local ordinances. PRC Section 5024.1 requires that any properties that can be expected to be directly
or indirectly affected by a proposed project be evaluated for California Register of Historical Resources
(CRHR) eligibility. The purpose of the CRHR is to maintain listings of the state’s historical resources and
to indicate what properties are to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from material
impairment and substantial adverse change.
As defined by CEQA, a historical resource includes:
1. A resource listed in or determined to be eligible for listing in the CRHR.
2. Any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency
determines to be historically significant or significant. The architectural, engineering, scientific,
economic, agricultural, educational, social, political, military, or cultural records of California
may be considered to be a historical resource, provided the lead agency’s determination is
supported by substantial evidence.
The earliest inhabitants of Arroyo Grande Valley were the northern or Obispeño Chumash Indians. The
Arroyo Grande area was still occupied by Chumash Indians at the time of contact with the first Spanish
explorer, Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo. During the colonial settlement of California, the Arroyo Grande
Valley became separated into two major ranchos, which were granted by the Mexican government around
1840. In the mid-1860s, a severe drought decimated the cattle population, forcing the large ranchos to
subdivide property and sell smaller parcels to new settlers for agricultural uses. In 1863 the County Board
of Supervisors established the township of Arroyo Grande. The town of Arroyo Grande was founded in
1897 in southern San Luis Obispo County (City of Arroyo Grande Police Department [AGPD] 2020).
Beginning in the late 1800s, inhabitants of Arroyo Grande utilized its location and soils for agriculture
production. Others came to Arroyo Grande to drill oil. Commercial and residential areas began growing
as more inhabitants came to the City. Arroyo Grande Creek supported irrigation needs and its periodic
flooding and drought was critical for agricultural practices (Page & Turnbull 2013).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
historical resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
The City contains buildings that are designated as Historical Resources by the California Office of
Historic Preservation (OHP). These resources include Former City Hall (214 East Branch Street), Conrad
House (208 East Branch Street), a residence (145 West Branch Street), an office (139 West Branch
Street), Santa Manuela Schoolhouse (Heritage Square/Nelson Green), Ruby’s House (134 South Mason
Street), Heritage House (126 South Mason Street), Swinging Bridge (Short Street, spanning Arroyo
Grande Creek), Bridge Street Bridge (Bridge Street, south of Olohan Alley), Paulding House (551 Crown
Hill Street), and 100F Hall (128 Bridge Street) (Page & Turnbull 2013).
The GPCEU proposes goals and policies intended to create a multi-modal transportation system for the
City and adequately anticipate and plan future transportation infrastructure to meet future needs of the
City. Construction activities required for the implementation of proposed GPCEU improvements have the
potential to affect historical resources. Future development would be required to comply with goals and
policies of the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS4 and corresponding policies, which are
Item 9.b. - Page 305
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
59
intended to preserve historic and cultural resources of public interest that reflect the legacy of earlier
human settlement. Compliance with Policies C/OS4-3 and C/OS4-4 would require avoiding disturbance
to archaeological and culturally sensitive sites and protecting the character of significant historical
features and settings by C/OS designation. Mitigation in the form of avoidance measures has been
included to ensure impacts to known CRHR-eligible properties and historic and archaeologically sensitive
areas would be minimized. Therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
Arroyo Grande has a rich heritage of both with numerous Chumash Indian sites dating back more than
9,000 years. Given the abundance of historic and prehistoric archaeological resources known to be located
in the City of Arroyo Grande, and comments expressed by interested Native American parties, the City is
considered sensitive for the presence of known and previously unidentified historic-era and Chumash
affiliated archaeological sites. As such, it is possible that intact archaeological deposits may be present
below paved and/or developed portions of the study area. Early development may have served as a means
of “capping” any resources that may have been present in the currently obscured portions of the City.
While these paved areas are planned to be subject to varying levels of potential disturbance, any
excavations into native soils below prior disturbance would have a heightened potential for discovery of
previously undiscovered, subsurface archaeological resources.
Construction activities required for the implementation of proposed GPCEU improvements have the
potential to affect archaeological resources. Future development would be required to comply with goals
and policies of the City’s ACOSE, specifically Objective C/OS4 and corresponding policies, which are
intended to preserve historic and cultural resources of public interest that reflect the legacy of earlier
human settlement. Compliance with Policies C/OS4-3 and C/OS4-4 would require avoiding disturbance
to archaeological and culturally sensitive sites and protecting the character of significant historical
features and settings by C/OS designation. Avoidance is the most effective mitigation; early, meaningful
consultation with locally affiliated Native American representatives would assist in the avoidance of
sacred sites and significant resources.
Although the uppermost 2 to 3 feet within the road prism of developed areas have largely been disturbed
by excavation from the placement of utilities and associated infrastructure, it is possible that intact native
soils remain capped at greater depth. Where excavations for the proposed improvements occur in unpaved
areas or exceed 2 to 3 feet in paved areas, there is increased potential to encounter buried archaeological
deposits. Mitigation is provided 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) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries?
Arroyo Grande Cemetery is a dedicated cemetery within the City’s limits and is located on the western
side of the US 101 between West Branch Street and North Halcyon Road. No human remains are known
to exist within the GPCEU improvement areas, and the likelihood for unknown human remains to exist is
low within the uppermost 2 to 3 feet of the soil horizon where construction activities would be expected
to occur, due to the extent of previous disturbance. However, the discovery of unknown human remains is
always a possibility during ground disturbance. 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(b). This code section states that no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has
made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. The County Coroner
must be notified of the find immediately. If the human remains are determined to be prehistoric, the
Item 9.b. - Page 306
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
60
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
within locations of proposed GPCEU improvements is low due to the extent of previous disturbance and
limited depth of grading that would be required for most of the proposed improvements, 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.
Conclusion
The GPCEU proposes objectives, policies, and specific improvements to the City’s circulation system to
meet the existing and future transportation needs of the City. Any future development within the City
resulting from buildout of GPCEU improvements would be subject to applicable state and local policies
and regulations, including Objective C/OS4 and corresponding policies in the City’s ACOSE, and State
of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). Implementation of Mitigation Measures
CUL/MM-1 through CUL/MM-4 would further ensure potential impacts would be avoided.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review, would be
required to comply with the objectives and policies in the City’s ACOSE, and would include project-
specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the following
measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts.
CUL/MM-1 Prior to commencement of construction activities that will require ground disturbance at
more than a surficial depth (e.g., outside of the developed road prism [asphalt, road
base]), including activities within paved areas and landscaped areas, the City shall retain
a City-approved archaeologist to conduct a review of existing records search data to
determine if the site of new improvements has been previously subject to archaeological
study, and whether the study adequately addresses the potential for archaeological
resources to occur within the disturbance area associated with construction. The City
and/or the approved archaeologist shall coordinate with locally affiliated Native
American representative(s) in determining archaeological sensitivity for proposed
projects.
If it is determined a study has not been conducted or existing research is inadequate, a
City-approved archaeologist shall prepare a Phase I Archaeological Survey Report of the
project area. The study shall identify cultural resources that have the potential to be
impacted by future development and provide mitigation measures to avoid and/or
minimize potential impacts.
If the City determines that the construction of a proposed improvement has the potential
to result in direct or indirect impacts to a significant historic resource, the City shall retain
a qualified architectural historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards to evaluate the resource(s) and provide recommendations for
avoidance or mitigation measure to reduce impacts.
To the extent feasible, sensitive resources shall be avoided during all ground-disturbing
site preparation and construction activities. If impacts to sensitive archaeological areas
are unavoidable, additional tasks such as additional Native American coordination, Phase
II archaeological testing, Phase III data recovery, and historic research shall also be
conducted, as necessary. Archaeological and Native American monitoring may also be
required during project construction in sensitive areas.
Item 9.b. - Page 307
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
61
CUL/MM-2 Prior to commencement of construction activities that will require ground disturbance at
more than a surficial depth (e.g., outside of the developed road prism [asphalt, road
base]), including activities within paved areas and landscaped areas, project contractors
and their staff shall have cultural resources sensitivity training and be made aware of the
potential for cultural resources being unearthed, the process for such discoveries, and
proper treatment of significant cultural resources. This information may be presented to
contractors and their staff through the use of “tail-gate” meetings or other mechanisms
(e.g., handouts).
CUL/MM-3 If a potentially significant cultural resource is encountered during subsurface earthwork
activities, and an archaeological and/or Native American monitor is not present, all
construction activities within a 100-foot radius of the find shall cease and the City shall
be notified immediately. Work shall not continue until a qualified archaeologist, in
conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary,
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 unidentified resources found during
construction shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and
Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA 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, in
conjunction with locally affiliated Native American representative(s) as necessary, 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 Central Coast Information Center (CCIC), located at the University of
California, Santa Barbara, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered
materials.
CUL/MM-4 All project-related ground disturbance that may disturb geologic units that are considered
to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., previously undisturbed native soils) 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. Where excavations for the project exceed 2 to 3 feet, monitoring by a
qualified paleontological monitor shall be required.
With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts related to cultural resources would be less than
significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 308
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
62
VI. Energy
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Result in a potentially significant environmental
impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) has historically been the primary electricity provider for the
City. On August 13, 2019, the City Council adopted a resolution joining Monterey Bay Community
Power (MBCP) under a joint powers agreement (JPA) implementing the community choice aggregation
program authorized by Ordinance No. 700. Through that resolution, the City Council committed to
joining Central Coast Community Energy (3CE; formerly Monterey Bay Community Power) and,
beginning in January 2020, 3CE became the City’s primary electricity provider. 3CE is striving to provide
100% carbon-free energy mix to the City by 2030.
The City’s ACOSE establishes objectives and policies to achieve energy conservation. These goals
include development standards and design guidelines that consider refinement to minimize unnecessary
energy use. The City of Arroyo Grande Climate Action Plan (City of Arroyo Grande 2013) identifies
transportation as the largest contributor of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at 44%. The City’s Climate
Action Plan includes climate action measures intended to conserve energy, reduce VMT, divert solid
waste from landfills, reduce water consumption, and plant trees to reduce GHG emissions.
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during
project construction or operation?
The GPCEU proposes objectives, policies, and specific improvements for the City’s transportation
network, including objectives aimed at maintaining compatibility between the circulation system and
existing and planned land uses to promote energy conservation in the form of fossil fuel use. Future
development facilitated by the GPCEU is expected to be limited to transportation infrastructure and
would not result in the development of new buildings that would be subject to energy-efficient building
design or permanently increase energy demand within the City. Future improvements that require the
long-term use of energy, including traffic signals, would be supplied by 3CE, is striving to provide 100%
carbon-free energy mix to the City by 2030. During construction of future improvements, fossil fuels,
electricity, and natural gas would be used by construction vehicles and equipment. The energy consumed
during construction would be temporary in nature and would be typical of other similar construction
activities in the City. Federal and state regulations in place require fuel-efficient equipment and vehicles
and prohibit wasteful activities, such as diesel idling; therefore, potential impacts associated with
construction energy use would be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 309
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
63
b) Would the project conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable
energy or energy efficiency?
The GPCEU identifies objectives, policies, and future improvements related to the City’s transportation
system. Specific goals include the reduction of VMT throughout the City through the creation of complete
streets, increasing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit accessibility and ensuring compatibility between the
circulation system and existing and planned land uses to promote energy conservation in the form of
fossil fuel use. Future improvements would be designed in a manner that is consistent with relevant
energy conservation plans designed to encourage development that results in the efficient use of energy
resources. Future improvements are anticipated to result in the construction of permanent buildings that
would need to comply with green building codes or substantial new sources of energy demand. As
concluded in Impact VI(a), the GPCEU would not result in impacts associated with wasteful, inefficient,
or unnecessary use of energy; additionally, with the implementation of the energy efficiency policies
listed above, energy usage associated with future improvements would be minimized. The GPCEU would
not conflict with other goals and policies set forth in the SLOAPCD’s CAP related to renewable energy or
energy efficiency. Therefore, the GPCEU would not result in a conflict with or obstruction of a state or
local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency, and impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
Future improvements would be required to comply with state and local energy efficiency standards during
construction. Additionally, the GPCEU would be consistent with the goals and policies set forth in the
SLOAPCD’s CAP related to renewable energy or energy efficiency. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant, and mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
VII. Geology and Soils
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Directly or indirectly cause 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Item 9.b. - Page 310
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
64
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(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 direct or indirect risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use
of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
(f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande is located within the Coast Ranges geomorphic province, which is
characterized by its many elongated 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 City is
situated along the interface of the coastal range and the gently sloping coastal terrace, which extends to
the shoreline. The City encompasses an urban landscape in the southern portion of San Luis Obispo
County at an elevation of approximately 50–400 feet above mean sea level (msl).
There are a number of active or potentially active fault systems throughout San Luis Obispo County and,
given the past history of earthquakes in the area, experts agree that the probability of a damaging
earthquake occurring is high. Mapped faults within the City of Arroyo Grande include the potentially
active Wilmar Avenue Fault and the inactive Pismo Fault. The Wilmar Avenue Fault is exposed in the sea
cliff near Pismo Beach and the buried trace of the fault is inferred to strike northwest–southeast parallel
and adjacent to US 101 beneath portions of Arroyo Grande. The potentially active fault presents a
moderate potential fault rupture hazard to the City. The inactive Pismo Fault presents a very low potential
fault rupture hazard. Further studies to evaluate the activity of the faults are warranted, prior to placing
structures near the mapped fault traces (Mathe 2015).
Liquefaction potential increases with earthquake magnitude and ground shaking duration. Low-lying
areas adjacent to creeks, rivers, beaches, and estuaries underlain by unconsolidated alluvial soil are most
likely to be vulnerable to liquefaction. The portions of the City with high liquefaction potential are those
areas underlain by younger alluvium (Qa), which includes most of the low-lying downtown areas south of
Branch Street and along Grand Avenue. Higher elevation at the west end of the City, and north of
Highway 101 and Branch Street, are underlain by older Quaternary sediments comprised of sand dune
deposits (Qos) and the Paso Robles Formation (QTp) that have moderate liquefaction potential (City of
Arroyo Grande 2001b).
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Web Soil
Survey was used to estimate the erodibility of the City. The erosion factor within the City ranges from
slight to severe throughout the City (NRCS 2021). Landslides and slope instability can occur as a result of
wet weather, weak soils, improper grading, improper drainage, steep slopes, adverse geologic structure,
Item 9.b. - Page 311
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
65
earthquakes, or a combination of these factors. Despite current codes and policies that discourage
development in areas of known landslide activity or high risk of landslide, there is a considerable amount
of development that is impacted by landslide activity in the county each year. A majority of the existing
development in Arroyo Grande is located on gently inclined alluvial valley sediments, which has low to
very low potential for slope stability hazards. However, the residences located on the hilly terrain north of
Branch Street have greater potential for landslide activity (City of Arroyo Grande 2001b).
Shrink/swell potential is the extent to which the soil shrinks as it dries out or swells when it gets wet.
Extent of shrinking and swelling is influenced by the amount and kind of clay in the soil. Shrinking and
swelling of soils can cause damage to building foundations, roads and other structures. A high
shrink/swell potential indicates a hazard to maintenance of structures built in, on, or with material having
this rating. Moderate and low ratings lessen the hazard accordingly.
The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Safety Element includes objectives for reducing the potential for
loss of life and property resulting from geologic and seismic hazards (City of Arroyo Grande 2001b).
Paleontological resources are fossilized remains of ancient environments, including fossilized bone, shell,
and plant parts; impressions of plant, insect, or animal parts preserved in stone; and preserved tracks of
insects and animals. Paleontological resources are considered nonrenewable resources under federal and
state law. Paleontological sensitivity is defined as the potential for a geologic unit to produce
scientifically significant fossils, as determined by rock type, past history of the rock unit in producing
fossil materials, and fossil sites that have been recorded in the unit. Paleontological resources are
generally found below ground surface in sedimentary rock units. The boundaries of the sedimentary rock
unit are used to define the limits of paleontological sensitivity in a given region. In the county, the Coastal
Franciscan domain generally lies along the mountains and hills associated with the Santa Lucia Range.
Fossils recorded from the Coastal Franciscan formation include trace fossils (preserved tracks or other
signs of the behaviors of animals), mollusks, and marine reptiles. Nonmarine or continental deposits are
more likely to contain vertebrate fossil sites. Occasionally vertebrate marine fossils such as whale,
porpoise, seal, or sea lion can be found in marine rock units such as the Miocene Monterey Formation and
the Pliocene Sisquoc Formations known to occur throughout Central and Southern California. Vertebrate
fossils of continental material are usually rare, sporadic, and localized.
The City’s ACOSE does not identify goals or policies related to the preservation of paleontological
resources; however, the County of San Luis Obispo General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element
(COSE) identifies a policy for the protection of paleontological resources from the effects of development
by avoiding disturbance where feasible. Where substantial subsurface disturbance is proposed in
paleontologically sensitive units, Implementation Strategy CR 4.5.1 (Paleontological Studies) requires a
paleontological resource assessment and mitigation plan be prepared to identify the extent and potential
significance of resources that may exist within the proposed development and provide mitigation
measures to reduce potential impacts to paleontological resources.
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
a-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.
a-ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Item 9.b. - Page 312
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
66
a-iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
a-iv) Landslides?
As discussed above, the City is located in a seismically active area and the potential for erosion,
liquefaction, and landslides is present within and surrounding the City (City of Arroyo Grande 2001b).
The placement of structures within these soil conditions poses a moderate risk for structure instability,
damage, failure, and/or collapse.
Development of future improvements facilitated by the proposed GPCEU would be required to meet or
exceed the most current AASHTO requirements, 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 2.0 (Caltrans 2019). Roadway, pedestrian, and bicycle path elements
would comply with AASHTO’s A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets (“The Green
Book;” AASHTO 2018) and relevant City standards.
Compliance with AASHTO, the Caltrans HDM, and other applicable standards would typically indicate
that people and structures, including those related to unstable soil conditions, were properly safeguarded
against possible risks. The GPCEU does not propose development of any habitable structures; therefore,
no risk of injury or death resulting from damage or collapse of a habitable structure would occur. Through
compliance with applicable standards, the structural components of the proposed improvements would be
designed to withstand anticipated seismic and geologic stresses according to current established
engineering practices. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
As discussed above, erosion hazards within the City are considered to vary from slight to severe (NRCS
2021). Future improvements facilitated by the GPCEU would generally occur within existing developed
and disturbed areas and would include modifications to existing transportation infrastructure.
Construction activities required for the development of future improvements could result in soil erosion or
the loss of topsoil. Future improvements facilitated by the proposed GPCEU would be required to comply
with the City’s ACOSE, which requires erosion control measures to protect riparian areas and other water
resources (see Policies C/OS2-1.4, C/OS2-1.6, and C/OS-1.12), and Section 13.24.120 (Erosion and
Sedimentation Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130 (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Requirements) of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all construction and grading permit
projects prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project phases, and require projects that
result in site disturbance of 1 acre or more prepare and implement a SWPPP with BMPs to reduce or
avoid construction-related pollution to water resources. BMPs would be intended to control stormwater
runoff and prevent pollution and would include measures to prevent soil erosion; therefore, compliance
with these policies and regulations would ensure impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project 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?
Refer to Impact Discussion VII(a), above. The City is located in a seismically active area and is underlain
with soils that may become unstable. Development of future improvements facilitated by the proposed
GPCEU would be required to meet or exceed the most current AASHTO requirements and comply with
the Caltrans SDC (Caltrans 2019), The Green Book (AASHTO 2018), and relevant City standards.
Compliance with AASHTO, the Caltrans HDM, and other applicable standards would typically indicate
that people and structures, including those related to unstable soil conditions, were properly safeguarded
Item 9.b. - Page 313
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
67
against possible risks. The GPCEU does not propose development of any habitable structures; therefore,
no risk of injury or death resulting from damage or collapse of a habitable structure would occur. Through
compliance with applicable standards, the structural components of the proposed improvements would be
designed to withstand anticipated seismic and geologic stresses according to current established
engineering practices. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or
property?
Refer to Impact Discussion VII(a), above. The City is underlain with numerous soil types, some of which
are considered expansive. Development of future improvements facilitated by the proposed GPCEU
would be required to meet or exceed the most current AASHTO requirements and comply with the
Caltrans SDC (Caltrans 2019), The Green Book (AASHTO 2018), and relevant City standards.
Compliance with AASHTO, the Caltrans HDM, and other applicable standards would typically indicate
that people and structures, including those related to unstable soil conditions, were properly safeguarded
against possible risks. The GPCEU does not propose development of any habitable structures; therefore,
no risk of injury or death resulting from damage or collapse of a habitable structure would occur. Through
compliance with applicable standards, the structural components of the proposed improvements would be
designed to withstand anticipated seismic and geologic stresses according to current established
engineering practices. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
Implementation of the GPCEU would not result in the construction of septic tanks or alternative
wastewater disposal systems; therefore, no impact would occur.
f) Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
According to U.S. Geologic Survey (USGS), Arroyo Grande is underlain by the Pismo Formation, which
is primarily comprised of massive gray or white arkosic sandstone that is fine- to medium-grained,
moderately well sorted, soft to hard, and friable. Based on marine megafossils from the area, the
formation is from the late Pliocene era (USGS 2020).
The proposed GPCEU improvement areas are largely comprised of engineered fill associated with the
development of existing roadways, where presence of paleontological resources is very low. Although the
uppermost 2 to 3 feet within the road prism have largely been disturbed by excavation for previous
utilities, it is possible that intact native soils remain capped at greater depth. Where excavations for the
construction of future improvements exceed 2 to 3 feet, there is increased potential to encounter buried
paleontological resources. Mitigation is provided to minimize the potential for disturbance of
paleontological resources to less-than-significant levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant
with mitigation.
Conclusion
Development of future improvements facilitated by the proposed GPCEU would be required to meet or
exceed the most current AASHTO requirements and comply with the Caltrans SDC, the Caltrans HDM,
The Green Book, relevant City standards, and other applicable standards. Mitigation has been included to
Item 9.b. - Page 314
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
68
avoid potential impacts to paleontological resources if excavation exceeds 2 to 3 feet; therefore, impacts
would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate environmental review, and
would be required to meet or exceed the most current AASHTO requirements and comply with the
Caltrans SDC, The Green Book, relevant City standards, and other applicable standards. Additionally,
implementation of the following measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid
potential impacts to paleontological resources.
GEO/MM-1 For any projects that require excavation or other ground-disturbing activities that would
exceed 2 to 3 feet below ground surface, the following measures shall be implemented:
All project-related ground disturbance that may disturb geologic units that are
considered to have a high paleontological sensitivity (i.e., previously undisturbed
native soils) 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 fossil resources upon
further examination of the geologic units during grading operations. Where
excavations for the project exceed 2 to 3 feet, monitoring by a qualified
paleontological monitor shall be required.
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 (GPS) 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.
In the event that a subsurface fossil is discovered within the project corridor, field
data forms will be used to record pertinent geologic data, stratigraphic sections
will be measured at the fossil locality, and appropriate sediment samples will be
collected and submitted for analysis.
Any 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, 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.
Item 9.b. - Page 315
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
69
VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation
adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
GHGs 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).
CO2 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 CARB, transportation (vehicle
exhaust) and electricity generation are the main sources of GHG in the state.
The passage of Assembly Bill (AB) 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act (2006), recognized
the need to reduce GHG emissions and set the GHG 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 GHG emissions from significant sources through regulation, market
mechanisms, and other actions. Subsequent legislation (i.e., Senate [SB] Bill 97, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions bill) directed the CARB to develop statewide thresholds.
In March 2012, the SLOAPCD approved thresholds for GHG emission impacts, and these thresholds
have been incorporated into the SLOAPCD’s CEQA Air Quality Handbook (SLOAPCD 2012). The
SLOAPCD 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 (i.e., Climate Action Plans): A qualitative threshold that is
consistent with AB 32 Scoping Plan measures and goals; or
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.
Item 9.b. - Page 316
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
70
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNITIES STRATEGY
San Luis Obispo County’s 2014 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS) was adopted by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) in 2015. The GHG
reduction target designated for this region is 8% per capita by 2035. Implementation of the strategies
identified in the 2014 RTP/SCS is anticipated to achieve a projected 10% per capita GHG reduction by
2035. Mobile source related GHG reduction strategies contained in the RTP/SCS include the following:
• Provide a variety of transportation options
• Improve accessibility: bring people closer to products & services
• Encourage mixed land uses
• Encourage more compact building design
• Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities
• Prioritize funding to improve connectivity & Target Development Areas
• Encourage preservation of agricultural lands
• Encourage preservation of open space and critical environmental areas
The 2014 RTP/SCS includes numerous policies intended to achieve the above-noted strategies. Table B-2
(Appendix B) provides a summary of the proposed GPCEU consistency with the applicable policies
identified in the 2014 RTP/SCS. As depicted, the proposed GPCEU is consistent with applicable GHG
reduction measures identified in the 2014 RTP/SCS.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
The City’s Climate Action Plan (City of Arroyo Grande 2013) is a long-range plan aimed to reduce GHG
emissions from City operations, developments, and community activities throughout the City in
anticipation of the effects of climate change. The primary purposes of the Climate Action Plan are the
following:
• Summarizes the results of the City of Arroyo Grande 2005 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
Update, which identifies the major sources and quantities of GHG emissions produced within
Arroyo Grande and forecasts how these emissions may change over time.
• Identifies the quantity of GHG emissions that Arroyo Grande will need to reduce to meet its
target of 15% below 2005 levels by the year 2020, consistent with AB 32.
• Sets forth City government and community-wide GHG reduction measures, including
performance standards which, if implemented, would collectively achieve the specified emission
reduction target.
• Identifies proactive strategies that can be implemented to help Arroyo Grande prepare for
anticipated climate change impacts.
• Sets forth procedures to implement, monitor, and verify the effectiveness of the Climate Action
Plan measures and adapt efforts moving forward as necessary.
The Climate Action Plan is designed as a Qualified GHG Reduction Plan, consistent with State CEQA
Guidelines Section 15183.5(b). This allows for the streamlining of the GHG analysis on a project level by
using a programmatic GHG reduction plan meeting certain criteria. Project-specific analysis of GHG
Item 9.b. - Page 317
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
71
emissions is required if GHG emissions from a project would be cumulatively considerable
notwithstanding compliance with the Climate Action Plan.
The Climate Action Plan included an inventory of community-wide GHG emissions. The inventory was
prepared for purposes of identifying major sources and quantities of GHG emissions produced in Arroyo
Grande in 2005 and to forecast how these emissions may change over time. Based on the GHG emissions
inventory prepared in 2005, the City emitted approximately 84,399 metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MTCO2e). As shown in Figure 6, the largest contributors of community-wide GHG emissions
were the transportation (44%), residential energy (30%), and commercial/industrial energy (14%) sectors.
The remainder of emissions resulted from the solid waste (7%) and off-road (5%) sectors.
Source: City of Arroyo Grande 2013.
Figure 6. City of Arroyo Grande 2005 GHG emissions inventory by sector.
With implementation of GHG reduction efforts implemented by the state, including Pavley fuel efficiency
regulations, low-carbon fuel standards, Title 24 energy efficiency standards, and renewable portfolio
standards for energy production, the City’s community-wide GHG emissions inventory is projected to
decrease by 17,860 MTCO2e by year 2020. Additional GHG reduction measures implemented by the City
are projected to result in additional reductions of approximately 920 MTCO2e in 2020. Overall,
community-wide GHG emissions are projected to decrease to 75,653 MTCO2e (approximately 19%
below the projected business-as-usual [BAU] scenario of 93,513 MTCO2e).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or
indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
The proposed GPCEU includes numerous policies that would support alternative means of transportation,
including improvements to transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Additional policies are included to
support reductions in VMT. Although construction of future transportation improvements may result in a
redistribution of local vehicle traffic, these improvements are proposed for purposes of improving overall
circulation system performance and reducing VMT, congestion, and idling. As previously noted in Table
6, the proposed GPCEU would result in overall reductions in VMT, which would result in overall
reductions in mobile-source GHG emissions. Because the proposed GPCEU would not result in increased
population, these anticipated reductions in mobile-source GHG emissions would result in overall
reductions in GHG emissions on a per capita basis. This impact would be considered less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 318
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
72
b) Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for
the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
AB 32 SCOPING PLAN AND SB 375
In 2017, the CARB published California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, which is the state’s plan
to achieve GHG reductions in California required by AB 32 (CARB 2017). This scoping plan contained
the main strategies to be implemented in order to achieve the target emission levels identified in AB 32.
The scoping plan states that land use planning and urban growth decisions will play important roles in the
state’s GHG reductions because local governments have primary authority to plan, zone, approve, and
permit how land is developed to accommodate population growth and the changing needs of their
jurisdictions.
With regard to land use planning, the scoping plan expects approximately 5 million metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent (MMTCO2e) will be achieved associated with implementation of SB 375. SB 375
supports the state’s climate action goals to reduce GHG emissions through coordinated transportation and
land use planning with the goal of developing more sustainable communities. Under SB 375, the CARB
sets regional targets for GHG emissions reductions associated with passenger vehicle use. Each of
California’s metropolitan planning organizations must prepare an SCS as an integral part of its RTP. The
SCS contains land use, housing, and transportation strategies that, if implemented, would allow the region
to meet its GHG emission reduction targets. The Sustainable Communities Act of 2019 also establishes
incentives to encourage local governments and developers to implement the identified GHG reduction
strategies.
As stated in the Setting discussion, implementation of the strategies identified in the 2014 RTP/SCS are
anticipated to achieve a projected 10% per capita GHG reduction by 2035. Table B-2 provides a summary
of the proposed GPCEU consistency with the applicable policies identified in the 2014 RTP/SCS. As
depicted, the proposed GPCEU is consistent with applicable GHG reduction measures identified in the
2014 RTP/SCS; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
The transportation sector constituted roughly 44% of the City’s baseline GHG emissions. Factors
affecting transportation emissions include fuel economy, the type of fuel used, and VMT. The City’s
Climate Action Plan included various GHG reduction measures, which were projected to result in overall
reductions in VMT and associated mobile-source GHG emissions. In total, these GHG reduction
measures were projected to reduce community-wide GHG emissions by approximately 17,860 MTCO2e
in 2020. Table B-2 provides a summary of the proposed GPCEU consistency with applicable GHG
reduction measures identified in the City’s Climate Action Plan. As depicted, the proposed GPCEU is
consistent with applicable GHG reduction measures identified in the City’s Climate Action Plan;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
The proposed GPCEU includes numerous policies that would support alternative means of transportation,
including improvements to transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities. Additional policies are included to
support reductions in VMT. Although construction of future transportation improvements may result in a
redistribution of local vehicle traffic, these improvements are proposed for purposes of improving overall
circulation system performance and reducing VMT, congestion, and idling. The proposed GPCEU would
result in overall reductions in VMT, which would result in overall reductions in mobile-source GHG
emissions. Because the proposed GPCEU would not result in increased population, these anticipated
reductions in mobile-source GHG emissions would result in overall reductions in GHG emissions on a
Item 9.b. - Page 319
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
73
per capita basis. Additionally, the GPCEU is consistent with applicable GHG reduction measures
identified in the City’s RPT/SCS and Climate Action Plan; therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials 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 Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(e) For a project 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,
would the project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or working in the
project area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(g) Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
According to the California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) EnviroStor database, there
are no active hazardous materials sites within the City of Arroyo Grande. The nearest hazardous materials
site is a military evaluation site located in Grover Beach, approximately 1.5 miles northwest (DTSC
2021). In addition, the SWRCB Geotracker database indicates that previously active leaking underground
storage tank and other hazardous materials sites are inactive and there are no currently active sites located
within the City of Arroyo Grande (SWRCB 2021). Given the developed condition of the majority of the
City, it is highly likely that the surface soils along existing roadways are affected by deposition of
contaminants, including aerial lead, oils, fuels, and other lubricants.
Item 9.b. - Page 320
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
74
The purpose of the City’s Safety Element is to be prepared for disaster and to manage development to
reduce risk. Hazards identified in the City’s Safety Element include flooding, dam inundation, dam
failure, fire, geologic and seismic hazards, landslides, hazardous trees, and radiation hazards (City of
Arroyo Grande 2001b).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Although US 101 and local roadways within the City are commonly used for the routine transport of
potentially hazardous materials, the GPCEU would not change existing land uses or cause a routine or
permanent increase in the transport of hazardous substances within the project area. The GPCEU does not
include any changes to existing haul routes, and includes the following policies related to truck and goods
movement:
CT13 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the arterial
and collector street network to minimize impact on local streets, particularly residential
neighborhoods.
CT13-1 Truck Routes: Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining City’s
designated routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT13-1.1 Continue to sign truck routes and ensure that clear signage is provided
from regional gateways to truck routes in the City.
CT13-2 Deliveries: Promote off-peak truck deliveries within the village core.
CT13-3 Emergency Access Design: Emergency access design standards shall limit cul-de-sac
lengths to the maximum extent feasible, provide a logical grid or connected system of
local streets providing at least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize
through traffic on local streets, particularly traversing single-family residential
neighborhoods.
No adverse change in the transport or handling of hazardous materials within proximity to adjacent
schools would occur outside of construction activities; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment
through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
As discussed previously, 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) is often found along unpaved areas adjacent to highways as a result of tailpipe emissions occurring
during years that lead was used as an additive in gasoline. When present in high enough concentrations, it
is possible for ADL to cause soils to be classified as a hazardous waste, which could become a health
hazard for people exposed to the soil. The soil would be classified as hazardous waste if total lead
concentrations exceed 1,000 milligrams/kilogram or soluble lead concentrations exceed 5 milligrams/liter.
If ADL is present at high concentrations in the soil that would be exposed during construction of future
improvements, it could present a significant impact associated with hazardous materials. Therefore,
mitigation has been provided to reduce the potential impacts associated with exposure to soil containing
ADL during construction of the proposed project.
Item 9.b. - Page 321
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
75
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 vicinity could be adversely affected. Stormwater runoff flows
down gradient into the Pacific Ocean, and any unrestricted contaminants may be washed downslope
during a rain event. Mitigation would be implemented to ensure potential impacts are reduced to less than
significant, including compliance with standard requirements for the handling of hazardous materials,
preparation and implementation of a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan, and
implementation of a SWPPP.
The GPCEU does not propose new operational use, storage, or discharge of any hazardous substances and
would not change the existing land use or substantially increase the potential use of hazardous materials
in the City. Future construction activity would use common household materials including fuels, gasoline,
paints, solvents, oils, etc. and would be transported, handled, stored, and cleaned according to Title 22,
Division 4.5 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Therefore, implementation of the GPCEU
would not create a significant hazard to the public through foreseeable accident or upset and potential
impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
c) Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing
or proposed school?
There are numerous public and private elementary and high schools located throughout the City. As
discussed previously, construction activities have the potential to emit hazardous emissions or result in
the accidental release of hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of an existing school. Future improvements
and construction activities are not expected to use hazardous materials that would create a significant
hazard to the public in the event of accidental release. Construction activities are expected to use
commonly used household materials and would be required to comply with state requirements and
regulations regarding hazardous material transportation, handling, storage, and potential clean-up. Future
construction activities within 0.25 mile of a school would be required to comply with 22 CCR Division
4.5 and PRC Section 21151.8. The GPCEU would not facilitate the use of dangerous hazardous materials
that could lead to foreseeable upset, and future work would be subject to applicable state and local
regulations; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
There are no active/open hazardous material sites within the vicinity of proposed improvements.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) For a project 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, would the
project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working
in the project area?
The nearest airport to the project site is the Oceano County Airport, located approximately 0.8 mile
southwest from the southwestern border of the City of Arroyo Grande. According to the Airport Land Use
Plan for the Oceano County Airport (ALUP), the City of Arroyo Grande is not located within the
planning area of the ALUP (County of San Luis Obispo 2007). However, the City is located within 2
miles of the Oceano County Airport. The GPCEU proposes objectives, policies, and improvements for the
City’s circulation system. Future improvements facilitated by the GPCEU would be limited to
transportation infrastructure and are not anticipated to result in the development of new buildings or
Item 9.b. - Page 322
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
76
structures that have the potential to expose people to excessive noise as a result of being placed within
close proximity to an airport; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
f) Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The project would improve existing transportation infrastructure to improve long-term operation of the
local circulation system in the City. Construction of the proposed improvements may temporarily restrict
certain access routes in the City; however, future construction activities would be temporary in nature and
would be required to use proper detour signage and give notice of temporary traffic controls in
accordance with the City’s Safety Element and the Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
(LHMP). Detours around the site would be made available during the temporary road closure; however,
partial road closures could result in temporary impacts associated with public access during construction
of the proposed improvements. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
g) Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) Fire Hazard Severity
Zone (FHSZ) map, the City of Arroyo Grande and other cities included in the Five Cities area are located
within a Local Responsibility Area (LRA). Land surrounding the northern edge of the City is designated
as a moderate FHSZ, land surrounding the eastern edge of the City is designated as a high FHSZ, and
land surrounding the southern edge of the City is designated as a very high FHSZ (CAL FIRE 2020). The
proposed GPCEU improvements would be located in an urban area and would not expose people or
structures to a substantial risk of wildfires. The Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) is located within the
City and response times would be within acceptable levels. Future improvements are not expected to
result in new buildings that would be applicable to the California Fire Code. In addition, the GPCEU
would be consistent with the City’s Safety Element, the Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP, and CAL FIRE
standards for road development in order to reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death in the event of a
wildfire; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
The GPCEU identifies objectives, policies, and future improvements to roadways, intersections, freeway
ramps, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and public transit that would be subject to applicable state and
local regulations regarding the use of hazardous materials during construction to avoid upset to the public.
In addition, improvements are not expected to result in the development of new buildings that would be at
risk of excessive noise, be located in close proximity to an airport, or be at risk of being located within a
high FHSZ. The GPCEU would be consistent with the City’s Safety Element, the Multi-Jurisdictional
LHMP, and CAL FIRE standards for road development to prevent the public from hazards involving the
use of hazardous materials or wildfire. Mitigation is included to ensure impacts related to the accidental
release of hazardous materials are avoided. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would include
project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the following
measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts. In addition to
Mitigation Measure BIO/MM-3, implementation of the following measure would reduce potential impacts
to be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 323
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
77
HAZ/MM-1 Prior to construction, the City shall prepare a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
(ESA) to identify areas of existing hazardous materials. Based on the findings of the
Phase I ESA, recommended sampling or testing shall be implemented to avoid
inadvertent disturbance and/or release of hazardous materials.
With the incorporation of this measure, residual impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would
be less than significant.
X. Hydrology and Water Quality
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground water quality?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such
that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner which would result in
flooding on- or off-site;
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(iii) 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;
or
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release
of pollutants due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water
quality control plan or sustainable groundwater
management plan?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately 1 mile inland from the Pacific Ocean; however, the
City is not located within a coastal zone. The City is located in the Central Coast Watershed (Watershed
number: 18060006). Arroyo Grande Creek runs east–west in the southern portion of the City and
terminates at the Pacific Ocean. In addition, the City is comprised of wetland areas associated with
Arroyo Grande Creek and numerous other wetland and surface water areas throughout the City. There are
no Wild and Scenic River System features located within the City; the closest system is located more than
30 miles from the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 324
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
78
The City of Arroyo Grande is located within the Santa Maria River Valley Groundwater Basin – Arroyo
Grande Subbasin (No. 3-12.02). The Arroyo Grande Subbasin is approximately 7 miles long, oriented in a
northeastern to southwestern direction. The Arroyo Grande Subbasin is not considered a high-priority
basin and has ample water supply to meet the water demand of the City. However, a groundwater
sustainability plan (GSP) for the subbasin is being prepared to facilitate sustainable groundwater
management and use (County of San Luis Obispo 2020).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Based on the highway stormwater runoff data collected by the Caltrans Stormwater Research and
Monitoring Program, untreated runoff from Caltrans facilities may contain materials such as heavy
metals, sediment, and litter (Caltrans 2008). Caltrans has a well-developed stormwater program that,
under most circumstances, addresses all potentially significant impacts to water quality during storm
events. This program is primarily intended to comply with the Caltrans Statewide National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Permit and ensures that all construction, design, and
treatment BMPs are implemented and comply with RWQCB requirements. Construction of the proposed
GPCEU improvements would include the upgrading of existing facilities, could result in a minor increase
in impervious surfaces, and could contribute to an increase in runoff. Additionally, improvements
facilitated by the GPCEU could require crossing of Arroyo Grande Creek or other local creek features.
Future improvements would require construction activities that have the potential to degrade water quality
due to erosive, polluted, or other degraded sources of runoff. Future improvements would be required to
comply with the City’s ACOSE, which identifies goals and policies for protection of biological resources,
including water resources and associated habitat. Future improvements would also be required to comply
with Section 13.24.120 (Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130
(Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements) of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all
construction and grading permit projects prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project
phases, and require projects that result in site disturbance of 1 acre or more to prepare and implement a
SWPPP with BMPs to reduce or avoid construction-related pollution to water resources. Compliance with
the City’s ACOSE and Municipal Code would ensure potential impacts to water quality associated with
future improvements facilitated by the SWPPP would be minimized. Mitigation would be implemented to
require preparation and implementation of a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede
sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The GPCEU improvements would require minimal short-term construction-related water demands, which
would be served by the City’s municipal water supply. Implementation of the GPCEU would not require
long-term water demand and would not deplete groundwater supplies; therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
c) Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or
area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
c-i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Item 9.b. - Page 325
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
79
c-ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site;
c-iii) 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?
c-iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Refer to Impact Discussion X(a), above. Construction activities associated with buildout of improvements
identified in the GPCEU could alter existing drainages, result in erosion or siltation, increase surface
runoff, create polluted runoff, and impede flood flows associated with Arroyo Grande Creek. It is
anticipated that construction pollutants would primarily consist of 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 on-site
conditions change. Potential sources of temporary surface water impacts include construction materials,
contaminants in the existing roadway, and vehicle leaks. Future improvements would require construction
activities that have the potential to degrade water quality due to erosive, polluted, or other degraded
sources of runoff. Future improvements would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, which
identifies goals and policies for protection of biological resources, including water resources and
associated habitat. Future improvements would also be required to comply with Section 13.24.120
(Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130 (Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan Requirements) of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all construction and
grading permit projects prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project phases, and
require projects that result in site disturbance of 1 acre or more to prepare and implement a SWPPP with
BMPs to reduce or avoid construction-related pollution to water resources. Therefore, impacts related to
the alteration of drainage patters, erosion, siltation, runoff, and flood flows would be less than significant.
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of
pollutants due to project inundation?
Arroyo Grande Creek runs through the southern portion of the City, is oriented in an east–west direction,
and supports a 500-year flood hazard zone. Additionally, the mouth of Arroyo Grande Creek terminates at
the Pacific Ocean and is potentially at risk for inland tsunami (County of San Luis Obispo 2016a). Future
construction activities associated with the buildout of improvements identified in the GPCEU could risk
release of pollutants and, if improvement areas are located within a flood zone or near areas of potential
inland tsunami, pollutants from the project site could be released in the event of project inundation. Future
improvements would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, which identifies goals and policies
for protection of biological resources, including water resources and associated habitat. Future
improvements would also be required to comply with Section 13.24.120 (Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130 (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements)
of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all construction and grading permit projects prepare an
erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project phases, and require projects that result in site
disturbance of 1 acre or more to prepare and implement a SWPPP with BMPs to reduce or avoid
construction-related pollution to water resources. Therefore, impacts related to the alteration of drainage
patters, erosion, siltation, runoff, and flood flows would be less than significant.
e) Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The Arroyo Grande Subbasin is not considered a high-priority basin; however, a GSP is being prepared
for the sustainable management of the Arroyo Grande Subbasin. Future improvements to roads, bicycle
Item 9.b. - Page 326
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
80
and pedestrian facilities, and public transit, as facilitated by the GPCEU, are not anticipated to result in
new buildings or connections to the groundwater basin that could increase water demand or substantially
deplete groundwater resources. Future construction activities would likely require short-term water
demand for dust control and related construction needs; however, water is anticipated to be from the
City’s municipal water supply. Construction water demand would be temporary in nature and would be
conducted in accordance with applicable regulations for construction water use; therefore, the GPCEU
would not interfere with a groundwater management plan and impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
Future improvements would be required to comply with the City’s ACOSE, which identifies goals and
policies for protection of biological resources, including water resources and associated habitat. Future
improvements would also be required to comply with Section 13.24.120 (Erosion and Sedimentation
Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130 (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements)
of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all construction and grading permit projects prepare an
erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project phases, and require projects that result in site
disturbance of 1 acre or more to prepare and implement a SWPPP with BMPs to reduce or avoid
construction-related pollution to water resources. Future improvements are not anticipated to result in new
buildings or connections to the groundwater basin that could deplete groundwater supply or interfere with
a groundwater management plan. Mitigation would be implemented to require preparation and
implementation of a Hazardous Material Spill Prevention and Contingency Plan to minimize potential water
quality impacts; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would include
project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of Mitigation
Measure BIO/MM-3 would reduce potential impacts to be less than significant. With the incorporation of
this measure, residual impacts related to hydrology and water quality would be less than significant.
XI. Land Use and Planning
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a
conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Setting
The City’s General Plan consists of nine elements, including the Agriculture, Conservation and Open
Space; Land Use; Circulation; Housing; Safety; Noise; Economic Development; and Parks and
Recreation Elements, which guide and facilitate planning and development in the City (City of Arroyo
Grande 2001b). The City’s LUE identifies zoning and land use designations for the City and includes
goals and policies intended to guide growth and development. The City is comprised of a developed
urban area with agricultural land located in the eastern and southeastern portions of the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 327
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
81
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project physically divide an established community?
The proposed GPCEU would be consistent with the 2014 RTP/SCS (SLOCOG 2014b) and the City’s
General Plan (City of Arroyo Grande 2018). Implementation of the GPCEU would not physically divide
an established community; instead, the improvements facilitated by the GPCEU would improve vehicle,
bicycle, pedestrian, and public transit connectivity throughout the City and with surrounding
communities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with
any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
The proposed GPCEU would be consistent with the 2014 RTP/SCS (SLOCOG 2014) and the City’s
Grande General Plan (City of Arroyo Grande 2018). The GPCEU would not result in any conflicts with
existing land use or zoning designations. As previously discussed, the GPCEU policies are intended to
promote compatibility between existing and planned land uses and the City’s circulation system to
promote safe and uncongested neighborhoods; energy conservation; reduction of GHG, air, and noise
pollution; and access to bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities, which is consistent with the City’s
General Plan. Future improvements would be required to comply with land use and zoning designations,
the City’s ACOSE, the City’s Municipal Code, and the mitigation measures included throughout this
Initial Study; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Conclusion
The GPCEU would not conflict with existing land use or zoning designations or result in the development
of an improvement to the circulation network that would divide an established community. Development
of future improvements would be required to comply with existing land use and zoning designations, the
City’s General Plan, the City’s ACOSE, the City’s Municipal Code, and the additional mitigation
measures included throughout this Initial Study; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would
include project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the
measures included throughout this Initial Study, in addition to the following measures, to the maximum
extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts.
LU/MM-1 Prior to commencement of construction activities required for proposed improvements
located within a Caltrans right-of-way, the City shall obtain an encroachment permit.
LU/MM-2 Prior to commencement of construction activities, the City shall prepare circulation and
traffic plans, which shall identify how temporary construction activities would avoid
conflicts with existing bike and pedestrian access ways to the greatest extent feasible. If
construction activities would interfere with existing bike or pedestrian routes, temporary
access shall be provided to all areas of the project area to ensure continued access to
commercial businesses in the project area during construction of the proposed project.
The plan shall be approved by the City Public Works Director prior to the start of
construction.
Item 9.b. - Page 328
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
82
With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts related to land use and planning would be less
than significant.
XII. Mineral Resources
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that 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?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Setting
The California Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) of 1975 requires that the State Geologist
classify land into mineral resource zones (MRZ) according to the known or inferred mineral potential of
the land (PRC Sections 2710–2796).
The three MRZs used in the SMARA classification-designation process in the San Luis Obispo-Santa
Barbara Production-Consumption Region are defined below (California Geological Survey [CGS] 2015):
• MRZ-1: Areas where available geologic information indicates that little likelihood exists for the
presence of significant mineral resources.
• MRZ-2: Areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present,
or where it is judged that a high likelihood for their presence exists. This zone shall be applied to
known mineral deposits or where well-developed lines of reasoning, based on economic–geologic
principles and adequate data, demonstrate that the likelihood for occurrence of significant mineral
deposits is high.
• MRZ-3: Areas containing known or inferred aggregate resources of undetermined significance.
According to the DOC CGS Information Warehouse: Mineral Land Classification map, the City is located
within a SMARA Study area (CGS 2015). The 1990 General Plan did not identify any Mineral Resource
Zones within the City. According to the General Plan Integrated Program Environmental Impact Report
(EIR), the 1990 General Plan does not identify any mineral resource zones within the City limits (City of
Arroyo Grande 2001a).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
The City is located within a SMARA study area; however, there are no identified mineral resource zones
within the City (CGS 2015; City of Arroyo Grande 2001a). The GPCEU would not result in the loss of
availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region; therefore, no impact would
occur.
Item 9.b. - Page 329
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
83
b) Would the project 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?
The City’s General Plan Integrated Program EIR does not identify any mineral resource zones within the
City. The GPCEU would not 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; therefore, no impact
would occur.
Conclusion
The City is located within a SMARA study area; however, there are no identified mineral resource zones
within the City (CGS 2015; City of Arroyo Grande 2001a). The GPCEU would not result in the loss of
availability of a known mineral resource and future improvements would be required to comply with state
and local regulations to ensure the protection of unknown mineral resources. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant, and mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
XIII. Noise
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project result in:
(a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private
airstrip or 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, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area
to excessive noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Noise Element provides policy framework for addressing
potential noise impacts. The Noise Element establishes maximum allowable noise exposure levels for
transportation and non-transportation noise sources. The standards applied to transportation noise sources
are based on average-daily noise exposure levels (in A-weighted decibels [dBA] Community Noise
Equivalent Level/day-night equivalent level [CNEL/Ldn]). For noise-sensitive land uses exposed to non-
transportation noise, the maximum allowable noise exposure standards vary depending on the duration of
exposure and time of day. The City’s noise standards for determining the compatibility for new
development near transportation noise sources are summarized in Table 7.
Item 9.b. - Page 330
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
84
City Municipal Code Section 9.16.030 (Exceptions to Noise Standards) allow exceptions to construction-
related noise throughout the City so long as construction occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
p.m., Monday through Friday, and 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Saturday and Sunday.
Table 7. General Plan Land Use Compatibility Guidelines Near Transportation Noise Sources
Land Use
Land Use Compatibility
Acceptable
Conditionally
Acceptable Unacceptable
Residential, Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls, Meeting Halls, Churches <60 60–70 >70
Transient Lodging: Hotels and Motels <60 60–75 >75
Schools, Libraries, Museums, Hospitals, Nursing Homes <60 60–75 >75
Playgrounds and Parks <70 70–75 >75
Office Buildings <60 60–75 >75
Notes:
Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory. No noise mitigation measures are required.
Conditionally Acceptable: Use should be permitted only after careful study and inclusion of protective measures as needed to satisfy the policies
of the Noise Element.
Unacceptable: Development is usually not feasible in accordance with the goals of the Noise Element.
Source: City of Arroyo Grande 2001b
In areas where the noise environment is acceptable, new development may be permitted without requiring
noise mitigation. For areas where the noise environment is conditionally acceptable, new development
should be allowed only after noise mitigation has been incorporated into the design of the project to
reduce noise exposure. For areas where the noise environment is unacceptable, new development in
compliance with Noise Element policies is usually not feasible. New development of noise-sensitive land
uses shall not be permitted in areas exposed to existing or projected future levels of noise from
transportation noise sources which exceed 60 dB CNEL or Ldn (70 CNEL/Ldn for playgrounds and
neighborhood parks) unless the project design includes mitigation measures to reduce noise to or below
levels identified in Table 8 (City of Arroyo Grande 2001b).
US 101 runs northeast–southeast through Arroyo Grande and is the primary source of transportation-
related ambient noise within the City. Other sources of transportation-related ambient noise are from
other local roads throughout the City.
Table 8. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Maximum Allowable Noise Exposure Standards for
Transportation Noise Sources
Land Use
Outdoor
Activity Areas1
(dBA CNEL/Ldn)
Interior Spaces
(dBA CNEL/Ldn)
Interior
Spaces2
(dBA Leq)
Residential (except temporary dwellings and residential accessory uses) 603 45 --
Transient Lodging 603 45 --
Hospitals, Nursing Homes 603 45 --
Theaters, Auditoriums, Music Halls -- -- 35
Churches, Meeting Halls, Office Buildings Restaurants 603 -- 45
Schools, Libraries, Museums, Preschools, Child Care Facilities -- 45
Playgrounds (including school playgrounds) 70 -- --
Item 9.b. - Page 331
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
85
Land Use
Outdoor
Activity Areas1
(dBA CNEL/Ldn)
Interior Spaces
(dBA CNEL/Ldn)
Interior
Spaces2
(dBA Leq)
Notes:
1 Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving land
use.
2 As determined for a typical worst-case hour during periods of use.
3 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to 60 dB CNEL/Ldn or less using a practical application of the best-available noise
reduction measures, an exterior noise level of up to 65 dB CNEL/Ldn may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction
measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table. This determination will be made as the result of an
acoustical study.
Source: City of Arroyo Grande 2001b
GROUNDBORNE VIBRATION
Various criteria have been established to assist in the evaluation of vibration impacts. For instance,
Caltrans has developed vibration criteria based on potential structural damage risks and human
annoyance. Caltrans-recommended criteria for the evaluation of groundborne vibration levels, with regard
to structural damage and human annoyance, are summarized in Tables 9 and 10, respectively. The criteria
differentiate between transient and continuous/frequent sources. Transient sources of groundborne
vibration include intermittent events, such as blasting, whereas, continuous and frequent events would
include the operations of equipment, including construction equipment, and vehicle traffic on roadways
(Caltrans 2019).
The groundborne vibration criteria recommended by Caltrans for evaluation of potential structural
damage is based on building classifications, which take into account the age and condition of the building.
For newer residential structures and buildings, Caltrans considers a minimum peak-particle velocity (ppv)
threshold of 0.5 inches per second (in/sec) for continuous/frequent sources to be sufficient to protect
against building damage. With the exception of fragile buildings, ruins, and ancient monuments,
continuous groundborne vibration levels below approximately 0.3 in/sec ppv are unlikely to cause
structural damage. In terms of human annoyance, continuous vibrations in excess of 0.1 in/sec ppv and
transient sources in excess of 0.9 in/sec ppv are identified by Caltrans as being “strongly perceptible” and
considered to result in increased levels of annoyance. Within buildings, short periods of ground vibration
in excess of 0.2 in/sec ppv are generally considered to result in increased levels of annoyance (Caltrans
2019).
Table 9. Damage Potential to Buildings at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels
Structure and Condition
Vibration Level
(in/sec ppv)
Transient
Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely Fragile Historic Buildings, Ruins, Ancient Monuments 0.12 0.08
Fragile Buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and Some Old Buildings 0.5 0.25
Older Residential Structures 0.5 0.3
New Residential Structures 1.0 0.5
Modern Industrial/Commercial Buildings 2.0 0.5
Note: Transient sources create a single, isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include
impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.
Source: Caltrans 2013
Item 9.b. - Page 332
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
86
Table 10. Annoyance Potential to People at Various Groundborne Vibration Levels
Human Response
Vibration Level
(in/sec ppv)
Transient
Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Barely Perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly Perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly Perceptible 0.9 0.10
Severe 2.0 0.4
Note: Transient sources create a single, isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls. Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include
impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.
Source: Caltrans 2013
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary or permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
The proposed GPCEU includes various roadway improvements. The operation of heavy equipment
during the construction of infrastructure improvements would result in temporary increases in noise in the
immediate vicinity of individual construction sites. During construction of the proposed improvements,
noise from construction activities may intermittently dominate the noise environment in the immediate
area of construction. Table 11 summarizes noise levels produced by off-road equipment commonly used
on roadway construction projects.
Table 11. Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA)
at 50 feet from Source*
Distance to Noise Contours
(feet, dBA Leq)
Lmax Leq 70 65 60
Air Compressor 80 76 105 187 334
Backhoe/Front End Loader 80 76 105 187 334
Boring Hydraulic Jack/Power Unit 80 77 118 210 374
Compactor (Ground) 80 73 74 133 236
Concrete Mixer Truck 85 81 187 334 594
Concrete Mixer (Vibratory) 80 73 74 133 236
Concrete Pump Truck 82 75 94 167 297
Concrete Saw 90 83 236 420 748
Crane 85 77 118 210 374
Dozer/Grader/Excavator/Scraper 85 81 187 334 594
Generator 82 79 149 265 472
Gradall 85 81 187 334 594
Hydraulic Break Ram 90 80 167 297 529
Item 9.b. - Page 333
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
87
Equipment
Typical Noise Level (dBA)
at 50 feet from Source*
Distance to Noise Contours
(feet, dBA Leq)
Lmax Leq 70 65 60
Jack Hammer 85 78 133 236 420
Impact Hammer/Hoe Ram (Mounted) 90 83 236 420 748
Pavement Scarifier/Roller 85 78 133 236 420
Paver 85 82 210 374 667
Pile Driver (Impact/Vibratory) 95 88 420 748 1,330
Pneumatic Tools 85 82 210 374 667
Pumps 77 74 83 149 265
Truck (Dump/Flat Bed) 84 80 167 297 529
Notes: Distances to noise contours are approximate
* Lmax = maximum sound level; Leq = equivalent continuous sound pressure level
Source: AMBIENT Air Quality and Noise Consulting 2018.
As indicated in Table 11, maximum intermittent noise levels associated with construction equipment
typically range from approximately 77 to 95 dBA maximum sound level (Lmax) at 50 feet. Pile driving and
demolition activities involving the use of pavement breakers and jackhammers are among the noisiest
activities associated with transportation improvement and construction projects. For most transportation
improvement projects, excluding pile driving activities, average-hourly equipment noise levels typically
range from approximately 73 to 83 dBA equivalent continuous sound pressure level (Leq) at 50 feet. For
activities requiring pile driving, average hourly noise levels can reach levels of approximately 88 dBA Leq
at 50 feet. Noise levels from point sources such as construction sites typically attenuate at a rate of about
6 dBA per doubling of distance. Based on this attenuation rate and assuming a maximum noise level of
88 dBA Leq at 50 feet, average construction noise levels would decrease to 65 dBA Leq at approximately
700 feet from the construction site. Predicted noise levels would vary depending on multiple factors, such
as the number and type of equipment used, equipment usage rates, area of activity, and shielding provided
by intervening terrain and structures. Delivery vehicles, construction employee vehicle trips, and haul
truck trips may also contribute to overall construction noise levels.
Although construction-generated noise levels associated with road improvement projects would be short
term, significant increases in ambient noise levels at nearby land uses could potentially occur. For noise-
sensitive land uses, such as residential dwellings, activities occurring during the more noise-sensitive
evening and nighttime hours are of particular concern. Construction activities occurring during these more
noise-sensitive hours may result in increased levels of annoyance and potential sleep disruption to
occupants of nearby residential dwellings. For these reasons, potential impacts would be less than
significant with mitigation.
Goals and policies included in the GPCEU would promote compatibility between the circulation system
and existing and planned land uses with the goal of reducing traffic-related noise pollution. The GPCEU
identifies areas for future improvements and development related to the City’s circulation system. Future
construction activities have the potential to temporarily increase ambient noise levels within public areas
and would be required to comply with noise regulations and thresholds included in the City’s Noise
Element and allowable construction hours identified in Section 9.16.030 (Exceptions to Noise Standards)
of the City’s Municipal Code. As long as construction occurs between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00
p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekends, noise from construction activities is exempt
from standards established in Chapter 9.16 of the City’s Municipal Code. Future development of
transportation infrastructure has the potential to permanently increase ambient traffic-related noise as a
result of moving transportation noises closer to sensitive receptor locations and increasing transportation
Item 9.b. - Page 334
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
88
noise levels in the vicinity of sensitive receptor locations. Future development would be subject to
subsequent environmental review and would be required to comply with the City’s Noise Element and
LUE to ensure new sources of traffic-related noise do not result in adverse effects to the public; therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels?
Construction activities would require the use of various tractors, trucks, and jackhammers, which could
adversely affect nearby land uses. Groundborne vibration levels commonly associated with construction
equipment are summarized in Table 12. As indicated, the highest groundborne vibration levels would be
generated by the use of pile drivers and vibratory rollers. For most road construction and improvement
projects, excluding those involving the use of pile drivers, groundborne vibration levels at nearby land
uses would not typically exceed commonly applied criteria for structural damage or human annoyance.
However, depending on the equipment required and distance between the source and receptor,
groundborne vibration levels associated with some proposed roadway construction and improvement
projects could potentially exceed recommended criteria for structural damage and/or human annoyance
(0.2 and 0.1 in/sec ppv, respectively) at nearby land uses. However, proposed mitigation measures would
reduce potentially significant impacts to short- and long-term construction noise to less-than-significant
levels. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Table 12. Representative Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment
Equipment Peak Particle Velocity at 25 Feet
(in/sec)
Pile Driver (Impact) Upper Range 1.518
Typical 0.644
Pile Driver (Sonic) Upper Range 0.734
Typical 0.170
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Hoe Ram 0.089
Large Bulldozers 0.089
Loaded Trucks 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small Bulldozers 0.003
Source: FTA 2006, Caltrans 2004
Groundborne vibration impacts associated with proposed GPCEU would be analyzed in more detail in
subsequent project-specific CEQA and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (if applicable)
environmental impact assessments. Mitigation measures would be recommended to reduce significant
groundborne vibration impacts. The level of mitigation would be project and site specific and would include
measures normally required by Caltrans and/or applicable requirements of local jurisdictions. With
mitigation, this impact would be considered less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 335
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
89
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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, would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
The nearest airport to the City is the Oceano County Airport, located approximately 0.8 mile southwest of
the City of Arroyo Grande. According to the ALUP, the City of Arroyo Grande is not located within the
planning area of the ALUP (County of San Luis Obispo 2007); however, the City is located within 2
miles of the Oceano County Airport. The GPCEU proposes policies and goals for the City’s circulation
system and identifies areas for future improvements and development of roadways, intersection, freeway
ramps, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and public transit. Future improvements facilitated by the
GPCEU are not anticipated to result in the construction of new buildings or residential units or other
improvements that could expose people to excessive noise as a result of residing or working within 2
miles of an airport; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
Future improvements are expected to be conducted in compliance with the City’s Municipal Code and
Noise Element; however, mitigation is included to further reduce potential impacts related to noise and
groundborne vibration to be less than significant. Arroyo Grande is not located within an ALUP;
however, it is located in close proximity to Oceano Airport. Future improvements would not result in the
development of buildings that could be placed in close proximity to an airport and expose people to
excessive noise. Therefore, noise impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would
include project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the
following measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts.
NOI/MM-1 The City shall ensure that, where residences or other noise-sensitive uses are located near
construction sites, appropriate measures shall be implemented to reduce construction-
related noise impacts to a less-than-significant level. Specific techniques may include, but
are not limited to, restrictions on construction timing, use of sound control devices on
construction equipment, and the use of temporary walls and noise barriers to block and
deflect noise.
NOI/MM-2 If a particular project located adjacent to sensitive receptors requires pile driving, the City
shall require the use of pile drilling techniques instead, where feasible, to reduce the
physical impact and associated noise generation from pile driving. This shall be
accomplished through the placement of conditions on the project during its individual
environmental review.
NOI/MM-3 The City shall ensure that proposed new transportation projects are analyzed, in
accordance with applicable CEQA and/or NEPA (if applicable) requirements, for
potential noise and groundborne vibration impacts to nearby noise-sensitive land uses.
Noise and groundborne vibration studies shall be conducted in accordance with
applicable federal, state, and local requirements. Where significant impacts are identified,
mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce identified adverse impacts. Noise-
reduction measures may include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following:
Site/project design and use of buffers to ensure that future development is
compatible with transportation facilities.
Item 9.b. - Page 336
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
90
Construction of acoustic barriers to shield nearby noise-sensitive land uses. For
aesthetic concerns, the use of sound barriers, or any other architectural feature
that could block views from scenic highway or other view corridors, shall be
discouraged to the extent possible. Long expanses of walls or fences should be
interrupted with offsets and provided with accents to prevent monotony.
Whenever possible, a combination of construction elements should be used,
including solid fences, walls, and landscaped berms.
Changes to transportation facility design, if feasible. Examples may include
changes in proposed roadway alignment or construction of roadways so that they
are depressed below-grade of nearby sensitive land uses to create an effective
barrier between the roadway and sensitive receptors.
Where practical, use of low-noise pavements (e.g., rubberized asphalt).
With the incorporation of these measures, residual impacts related to noise would be less than significant.
XIV. Population and Housing
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Induce substantial unplanned 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 people or
housing, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
The City’s population has grown from 17,252 in 2010 to an estimated 17,976 in 2019, based on the 2010
Census. According to the Census Quickfacts for the City of Arroyo Grande, the City’s population is
84.8% White, 14.2% Hispanic and Latino, 4.2% Asian, 1.7% American Indian or Alaska Native, 1.0%
Black or African American, and 0.4% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander (U.S. Census Bureau
2010). Approximately 21.8% of the population is aged 65 years and older, approximately 19.2% of the
population is aged 18 years and under, and approximately 4.9% of the population is aged 5 years and
under (U.S. Census Bureau 2010). Between 2015 and 2019, there were 7,026 households with an average
of 2.53 persons per household and 67.5% owner-occupied housing unit rate (U.S. Census Bureau 2010).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project induce substantial unplanned 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)?
The purpose of the GPCEU is to relieve congestion and safety issues associated with current conditions.
The proposed improvements are designed to improve existing traffic conditions within the local
transportation network based on existing and proposed land uses within the City, along with regional
growth in adjacent cities, throughout San Luis Obispo County, and along the US 101 north/south corridor
Item 9.b. - Page 337
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
91
that has occurred since the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element was last updated in
2012. Future improvements would be built out as needed to accommodate planned growth, consistent
with the General Plan. Implementation of the GPCEU and associated improvements are intended to serve
the existing population and planned growth within the City and would not result in changes to land use or
zoning designations or induce unplanned population growth directly or indirectly; therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
b) Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The GPCEU includes improvements to the City’s circulation system that are not anticipated to displace
existing people or housing. Any future improvements that would have the potential to displace substantial
numbers of existing people or housing would require subsequent environmental review. The GPCEU is
not expected to necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere and impacts would be less
than significant.
Conclusion
The GPCEU includes policies intended to address existing and future transportation planning needs of the
City. Future improvements are not anticipated to result in the construction of new buildings or residential
units or other improvements that could contribute to population growth. Implementation of the GPCEU
and associated improvements are intended to serve the existing population and planned growth within the
City and would not result in changes to land use or zoning designations, induce unplanned population
growth directly or indirectly, or displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing; therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
XV. Public Services
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order 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? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Item 9.b. - Page 338
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
92
Setting
FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES
The FCFA is a JPA between the City of Arroyo Grande, City of Grover Beach, and Oceano Community
Services District, serving a population of 37,000 in a 10-square-mile service area (City of Arroyo Grande
2020). The FCFA was created to increase service levels to citizens and visitors, to ensure consistent and
professional training standards and to increase operational efficiencies. The FCFA currently operates out
of three stations with an average response time of 6 minutes.
POLICE PROTECTION SERVICES
The AGPD provides public safety services for the City of Arroyo Grande. The AGPD is located at 200
North Halcyon Road in Arroyo Grande and consists of 29 full-time employees (AGPD 2021). The crime
rate in the region is among the lowest in California. The AGPD responded to 17,137 documented
incidents in 2016 and 17,925 documented incidents in 2017. At the same time, the Department has been
able to maintain a response time for emergency calls at less than two minutes. The California Highway
Patrol (CHP) office, located at 4115 Broad Street in San Luis Obispo, serves South County, including the
City of Arroyo Grande.
SCHOOLS
Arroyo Grande students in grades K–12 are served by two school districts: San Luis Obispo Coastal
Unified School District and 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.
PARKS
Arroyo Grande has 13 City parks, several sports facilities, and open space and wildlife preserve areas.
LIBRARIES
The City does not provide library services to City residents. This service is provided by the San Luis
Obispo City-County Library system, which presently maintains the Arroyo Grande Library located at 800
West Branch Street in Arroyo Grande.
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services?
The GPCEU does not include and would not result in the provision of or need for new or physically
altered governmental facilities. Additionally, the proposed GPCEU does not have the potential to induce
unplanned growth, as it does not involve changes to land use or zoning designations or the construction of
new housing or businesses. As such, it would not have the potential to increase demand for fire or police
protection, schools, parks, libraries, or other public facilities. Therefore, impacts would be less than
significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 339
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
93
Conclusion
The GPCEU does not propose changes to land use or zoning designations or other development that could
result in unplanned population growth or otherwise contribute to demand for public services in a manner
that would require the provision of new or physically altered public services or facilities; therefore,
impacts related to public services would be less than significant and mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
XVI. Recreation
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(a) Would the project 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) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Parks and Recreation Element states that it is the overall goal
of the City to adequately provide for the recreational needs of residents and visitors of Arroyo Grande.
The Parks and Recreation Element acts as a guide for the development of additional park and recreation
facilities. The City currently funds public recreational facilities through the Quimby Act, federal and state
grants, land dedications and easements, trail easements, development impact fees, user fees, general
obligation bonds, revenue bonds, and cooperation with other agencies (City of Arroyo Grande 2001b).
Arroyo Grande prides itself on its beautiful array of parks, open space, and community recreational
facilities. The City provides and maintains recreational facilities, including 12 parks, the Soto Sports
Complex, fields and courts, and the James Way Oak Habitat open space and wildlife preserve (City of
Arroyo Grande 2021c).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project 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?
The proposed GPCEU would not create a new use that would generate unplanned population growth or
increase demand on existing recreational facilities. Deterioration of existing facilities would not occur as
a result of the proposed GPCEU; therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 340
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
94
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
The City adopted the City of Arroyo Grande Bicycle & Trails Master Plan (BTMP) (City of Arroyo
Grande 2012b), which was prepared in accordance with the California Bicycle Transportation Act and
includes all the requirements for Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) eligibility and the necessary
information for pedestrian and beach access grant applications and projects. The BTMP provides the
implementation tools for many General Plan/Local Coastal Plan directives. Future projects identified in
the BTMP are included in the SLOCOG 2014 RTP/SCS, the basis for identifying potentially fundable
projects in the next 25 years.
The goal of this local and regional planning effort is to interconnect the surrounding communities with a
seamless bicycle and pedestrian network for recreational and commuter use. The plan includes proposed
bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to complete the multimodal network
throughout the City.
The GPCEU encourages the use of walking and bicycling through proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails,
as well as on-street bicycle facilities to complete the partial network already in place in the City and
county. The GPCEU includes policies that would facilitate future improvements to the bicycle network,
promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities and connectivity, promote and improve pedestrian
circulation facilities to serve all areas of the City as a priority system, and prioritize connections with
schools, parks, transit, and major public facilities. The GPCEU does not include other recreational
facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment. Any future improvements to recreational facilities would be subject to
subsequent environmental review and would be required to avoid or mitigate adverse physical effects on
the environment; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
The GPCEU proposes a comprehensive update of goals and policies of the City’s current Circulation
Element and would not result in new development that could increase demand on recreational facilities. In
addition, the GPCEU does not include the construction or expansion of existing recreational facilities that
would result in adverse physical effects on the environment that are not evaluated in this Initial Study or
subject to subsequent environmental review; therefore, impacts would be less than significant, and
mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
XVII. Transportation
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Item 9.b. - Page 341
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
95
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Setting
As discussed in the Project Description, the GPCEU provides objectives and policy guidance for long-
term planning and implementation of the transportation system needed to serve the City’s projected
development. The objectives and policies in the GPCEU are closely correlated with the City’s LUE and
other elements that comprise the General Plan and are intended to enhance travel choices for current and
future residents, visitors, and workers. The GPCEU also defines a preferred transportation system that
reflects the City’s financial resources and broader goals, including providing safe and convenient access
for all modes of travel while preserving the local character of the community.
The 2019 RTP/SCS, adopted on June 5, 2019, is a long-term blueprint of San Luis Obispo County’s
transportation system. The plan identifies and analyzes transportation needs of the region and creates a
framework for project priorities. SLOCOG represents and works with the County and the cities within the
county in facilitating the development of the RTP/SCS.
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
As discussed in the Project Description, the GPCEU objectives and policies would provide the overall
direction the City desires in planning and implementing the expansion of the circulation system to meet
the changing travel demands of the community. The implementing policies would establish the link
between the City’s goals and the implementing programs, and guide how the programs would actually be
implemented. The guiding and implementing policies reflect the City’s vision for a comprehensive
circulation system that is safe and efficient for pedestrians, bicycles, trucks, automobiles, and public
transportation. The objectives, policies, and improvements proposed in the GPCEU are intended to reduce
VMT, enhance circulation, improve safety, and reduce congestion. The GPCEU is intended to improve
circulation infrastructure within the City and bring the circulation system capacity into consistency with
the intensity of surrounding land uses, the RTP/SCS, the City’s LUE, and the City’s BTMP. It should be
noted that the GPCEU includes a change that would make LOS D an acceptable LOS compared to the
current Circulation Element, which considers LOS D an unacceptable LOS. Senate Bill (SB) 743 amends
the CEQA transportation impact analysis for projects by replacing auto delay (LOS) as a basis for
determining significant impacts under CEQA with average VMT. The legislation in SB 743 does not
preclude agencies from adopting the use of auto LOS outside of CEQA in the local transportation
planning and policy set forth in the Circulation Element; however, it is no longer used as a threshold for
evaluating environmental impacts related to transportation under CEQA.
Item 9.b. - Page 342
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
96
The City adopted the 2012 BTMP, which includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-
street bicycle facilities to complete the partial network already in place in the City and County. The
GPCEU identifies goals and policies for existing and planned land uses to be connected to the City’s
bicycle network and would require any separately proposed development that has a gap in the network to
implement improvements to allow for connectivity to the network. In addition, the GPCEU would allow
for pedestrian accessibility and would promote future development to be located within a walkable
distance to surrounding land uses. Therefore, the GPCEU would be consistent with the 2012 BTMP.
The GPCEU also includes policies that require coordination with the SLORTA to promote regional and
local public transit. Therefore, the GPCEU would not conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance, or
policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system or a
congestion management plan.
Short-term construction activities would likely cause increased congestion in the vicinity of the
construction 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
2018 Standard Plans and Standard Specifications (Caltrans 2018) and City measures contained in the
General Plan. Mitigation measures have been recommended to minimize construction-related traffic
impacts. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
The GPCEU proposes objectives and policies intended to create an optimal multi-modal transportation
system for the City and adequately anticipate and plan transportation infrastructure to meet future needs
of the City. The objectives and policies of the GPCEU are intended to reduce VMT throughout the City.
The proposed GPCEU is not considered a large development project that would have the potential to
result in a substantial increase in population or employment. Furthermore, based on the traffic analysis
prepared for this project (see Appendix C), the proposed GPCEU is anticipated to result in an overall
reduction of 783 VMT (see Table 6). It is also important to note that circulation network improvements in
the proposed GPCEU would be anticipated to improve system-wide circulation and result in reductions in
vehicle congestion and delay.
The GPCEU does not propose specific development for improvement of roadways, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, and public transit; however, it would allow for future identification and buildout of
improvements to the City’s transportation infrastructure. Future improvements would require construction
activity that would require worker and equipment trips to and from future project sites; however, vehicle
trips are not expected to exceed the current threshold of 110 trips per day and would be considered less
than significant. The GPCEU would promote VMT-reduction strategies for existing and planned land
uses and would be consistent with SB 743; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
The GPCEU identifies goals, policies, and future improvements related to the circulation system. As
discussed in the Project Description, the proposed roadway alignments and improvements identified in
the GPCEU are conceptual and subject to further engineering and environmental review. Street designs
for the proposed roads shall conform to the typical street widths and design elements. The roadway design
standards for the City are based on engineering standards and on evolving policies and practices regarding
the City’s transportation infrastructure. The roadway design standards meet both nationally and state
acceptable design criteria. While these roadway design standards provide a template for construction, it is
Item 9.b. - Page 343
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
97
not a substitute for professional engineering judgment and close coordination with the City Engineer
during project development and plan preparations. All street improvements within the City would be
subject to the approval of the City Engineer; furthermore, these improvements would be subject to the
standards of the latest adopted edition of the Caltrans HDM. Therefore, none of the improvements would
be designed to substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. Any design features that are
inconsistent with these standards would require City Council or City Engineer or Public Works Director
approval; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) Would the project result in inadequate emergency access?
Construction of the proposed improvements included in the GPCEU could require temporary street
closures to accommodate construction vehicles and equipment during the installation of new
infrastructure and during the modification of existing roadways and intersections; however, detours would
be provided. Temporary closures of roadways and associated detours could result in temporary delays in
emergency response in the City by the AGPD; however, long-term congestion relief resulting from
implementation of the GPCEU would improve emergency access throughout the City for police, fire, and
emergency protection services. The proposed improvements 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.
Implementation of mitigation measures would minimize short-term construction delays in emergency
response and, following construction, the proposed GPCEU improvements would accommodate the
access requirements of emergency vehicles. Potential impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
Conclusion
The GPCEU proposes policies, goals, and objectives to create an optimal multi-modal transportation
system for the City and adequately anticipate and plan transportation infrastructure to meet future needs
of the City. Implementation of the GPCEU would result in comprehensive updates to goals and policies
and a reduction of VMT through several strategies outlined in the GPCEU. The GPCEU would allow for
future improvements of roads, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and public transit. Improvements would
be subject to goals and policies of the GPCEU and other General Plan Elements. In addition, goals and
policies of the GPCEU would be consistent with the City’s General Plan and other applicable
transportation plans. Mitigation is included to reduce potential impacts related to temporary road closures
during construction activities; therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would
include project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the
following measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts.
TR/MM-1 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.
Methods for ensuring permanent access to the commercial/retail centers and
private residents is preserved and/or improved to the maximum extent feasible
through implementation of the proposed improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 344
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
98
A signage plan and other methods, if feasible, for increasing the visibility of
businesses blocked by construction activities and educating travelers that
businesses adjacent to the construction activities are to remain open during
construction.
Clearly marked detour routes for alternate access to any businesses that are made
inaccessible or difficult to access due to construction activities.
Hours of haulage (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.).
Designation of truck routes that avoid residential areas to the extent possible.
Methods of traffic control on adjacent streets within the project area.
Adequate safety signage regarding traffic control.
Designated construction staging areas for construction personnel vehicles,
supplies, and equipment.
A telephone number for local residents to call if there are issues or complaints.
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.
TR/MM-2 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 prior to construction activities.
With the incorporation of these measures, as well as measures LU/MM-1 and LU/MM-2, residual impacts
associated with transportation and traffic would be less than significant.
XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as
either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is
geographically defined in terms of the size and scope
of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural
value to a California Native American tribe, and that
is:
(i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Item 9.b. - Page 345
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
99
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth
in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider
the significance of the resource to a California
Native American tribe.
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Setting
Approved in 2014, AB 52 added tribal cultural resources to the categories of resources that must be
evaluated under CEQA. Tribal cultural resources are defined as either of the following:
1. Sites, features, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe that are either of the following:
a. Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the CRHR; or
b. Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k).
2. A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence,
to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in PRC Section 5024.1(c). In applying these criteria
for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource
to a California Native American Tribe.
Recognizing that tribes have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, AB 52 requires
lead agencies to provide notice to tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic
area of a proposed project if they have requested notice of projects proposed within that area. If the tribe
requests consultation within 30 days upon receipt of the notice, the lead agency must consult with the
tribe regarding the potential for adverse impacts on tribal cultural resources as a result of a project.
Consultation may include discussing the type of environmental review necessary, the presence and/or
significance of tribal cultural resources, the level of significance of a project’s impacts on the tribal
cultural resources, and available project alternatives and mitigation measures recommended by the tribe to
avoid or lessen potential impacts on tribal cultural resources.
The earliest inhabitants of Arroyo Grande Valley were the northern or Obispeño Chumash Indians. The
Arroyo Grande area was still occupied by Chumash Indians at the time of contact with the first Spanish
explorer, Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (AGPD 2020). Archaeological evidence indicates that the Chumash
and their ancestors inhabited the California Coast for over 11,000 years. Their lifestyle was closely
connected to marine and terrestrial habitats where the diversity of the land allowed for complex
sociopolitical and technological culture. In 1542, at the time Spanish explorers arrived in California, the
Chumash had a population of approximately 20,000 and was one of the largest and most advanced tribes
in the region (Page & Turnbull 2013).
Item 9.b. - Page 346
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
100
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a
tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either
a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of
the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a-i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in
a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code
section 5020.1(k)?
a-ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
Given the abundance of prehistoric archaeological resources known to be located in the study area, and
interest expressed by interested Native American parties, the City is considered sensitive for the presence
of buried (i.e., obscured) resources. The City has sent the notices required for consideration of tribal
cultural resources consistent with AB 52. The City received a request for consultation on this project from
the Northern Chumash Tribal Council and has commenced consultation with this tribe. Standard
mitigation has been proposed to ensure impacts to any unknown resources that may be encountered
during project development would be avoided and/or minimized. Therefore, potential impacts would be
less than significant with mitigation.
Conclusion
The GPCEU proposes objectives, policies, and specific improvements to the City’s circulation system to
meet the existing and future transportation needs of the City. Any future development within the City
resulting from buildout of GPCEU improvements would be subject to applicable state and local policies
and regulations, including Objective C/OS4 and corresponding policies in the City’s ACOSE, and State
of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). Implementation of Mitigation Measures
CUL/MM-1 through CUL/MM-4 would further ensure potential impacts would be avoided.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review, would be
required to comply with the objectives and policies in the City’s ACOSE, and would include project-
specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of the following
measures to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid potential impacts. With the
incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL/MM-1 through CUL/MM-4, residual impacts related to
cultural resources would be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 347
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
101
XIX. Utilities and Service Systems
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
(a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of
new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards, or in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
(e) Comply with federal, state, and local management
and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
Utilities would be served by both the City and other regional entities. Conoco Phillips 66 oil lines;
overhead electrical, telephone, and cable utility lines; water lines; water hydrants; and other utilities are
located within the developed areas of the City. 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 2 miles north of the City in unincorporated San Luis Obispo County. The
Cold Canyon Landfill currently has a daily capacity of 1,650 tons per day and an estimated remaining
capacity of 13,000,000 cubic yards. Currently, the estimated closure date for this landfill is December 31,
2040 (California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery [CalRecycle] 2020).
Environmental Evaluation
a) Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of
which could cause significant environmental effects?
The GPCEU proposes a comprehensive update of the City’s current Circulation Element and identifies
areas for future improvements and development. Future improvements would be limited to roads,
intersections, freeway ramps, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and public transit facilities and would not
result in the development of buildings or residential units that would require or result in the relocation or
Item 9.b. - Page 348
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
102
construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities.
The existing stormwater drainage system in the City consists of City and Caltrans drains and outlets in the
developed portions of the City. Future improvements would also be required to comply with Section
13.24.120 (Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan Requirements) and Section 13.24.130 (Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan Requirements) of the City’s Municipal Code, which require that all
construction and grading permit projects prepare an erosion and sedimentation control plan for all project
phases, and require projects that result in site disturbance of 1 acre or more to prepare and implement a
SWPPP with BMPs to reduce or avoid construction-related pollution to water resources. The GPCEU
improvements would not result in substantial changes; therefore, no permanent or substantially altered
effects associated with discharge into or contamination of surface waters would result above that which
currently exists. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
The proposed GPCEU would require water supply during construction activities for uses such as dust
suppression and vehicle washing. The GPCEU would not result in a long-term increase in water demand.
The existing water supply is the City’s existing municipal water system. This water source is expected to
be capable of meeting the short-term water demands of the proposed improvements included in the City’s
GPCEU; therefore, potential impacts would be less than significant.
c) Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
The GPCEU does not propose use or development of any on-site wastewater disposal systems or
connection to any community wastewater system. Implementation of the proposed improvements would
not require wastewater discharge, 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.
d) Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment
of solid waste reduction goals?
The GPCEU would result in construction activities that would generate solid waste materials, including
cut volumes and demolition of existing road infrastructure. Future GPCEU improvements would be
served by the Cold Canyon Landfill, which has adequate permitted capacity to serve the project. Upon
completion of the proposed improvements, operation of the improvements would not generate any solid
waste. Short-term solid waste generated by construction activities would be disposed of in accordance
with state and local solid waste regulations; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
e) Would the project comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Refer to Impact Discussion XIX(d). Short-term solid waste produced by construction activities would be
disposed of in accordance with state and local solid waste regulations. Implementation of the GPCEU is
not anticipated to generate long-term solid waste that would be subject to applicable plans for the
reduction and regulation of solid waste; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 349
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
103
Conclusion
The GPCEU includes goals and policies intended to guide future improvements to the City’s
transportation, bicycle and pedestrian, and public transit facilities within the City’s circulation system.
Future improvements would not result in the development of new business, residential units, or other
buildings that would require new or expanded utility connections, new long-term water demand, or
increase the generation of wastewater or solid waste. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant,
and mitigation is not necessary.
Mitigation Measures
Mitigation is not necessary.
XX. Wildfire
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
(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?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Setting
In central California, the fire season usually extends from May through October; however, recent events
indicate that wildfire behavior, frequency, and duration of the fire season are changing in California.
FHSZs are defined by CAL FIRE based on the presence of fire-prone vegetation, climate, topography,
assets at risk (e.g., high population centers), and a fire protection agency’s ability to provide service to the
area (CAL FIRE 2007). FHSZs throughout the county have been designated as “Very High,” “High,” or
“Moderate.” In San Luis Obispo County, most of the area that has been designated as a “Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone” is located in the Santa Lucia Mountains, which extend parallel to the coast along
the entire length of the county. The Moderate FHSZ designation does not mean the area cannot
experience a damaging fire; rather, it indicates that the probability is reduced, generally because the
number of days a year that the area has “fire weather” is less than in high or very high FHSZs. The City
of Arroyo Grande is located within an LRA (CAL FIRE 2020)
The City’s Safety Element includes the objective of reducing the threat to life, structures, and the
environment caused by fire and includes specific policies related to pre-fire management; availability of
Item 9.b. - Page 350
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
104
facilities, equipment, and personnel; readiness and response; and loss prevention (City of Arroyo Grande
2001b).
The Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP was originally adopted in 2013 and modified in 2015. The intention of
the LHMP is to implement practical mitigation solutions to minimize risk of hazards within each City
covered by the LHMP. The plan includes specific action items related to fire hazard mitigation within
each jurisdiction (Mathe 2015).
Environmental Evaluation
a) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
According to the CAL FIRE FHSZ Viewer, the City is located in an LRA and is not located in a State
Responsibility Area (SRA). The GPCEU includes goals, policies, and future improvements related to the
City’s circulation system and future planning needs. Future improvements would be required to comply
with the City’s Safety Element, City’s Municipal Code, and Multi-Jurisdictional LHMP to ensure that any
temporary traffic controls and roadway designs are consistent with emergency response and evacuation
plans.
Construction of the proposed improvements included in the GPCEU could require temporary street
closures to accommodate construction vehicles and equipment during the installation of new
infrastructure and the modification of existing roadways and intersections; however, detours would be
provided. Temporary closures of roadways and associated detours could result in temporary delays in
emergency response and evacuation in the City; however, long-term congestion relief resulting from
implementation of the GPCEU would improve emergency access throughout the City. The proposed
improvements 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.
Implementation of mitigation measures would minimize short-term construction delays in emergency
response and, following construction, the proposed GPCEU improvements would accommodate the
access requirements of emergency vehicles. Potential impacts would be less than significant with
mitigation.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, if located in or near state
responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones,
would the project exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a
wildfire?
The City of Arroyo Grande is comprised of developed urban areas and is not designated as a FHSZ. The
City’s Safety Element designates wildland-urban interface (WUI) areas in the northern and eastern
portions of the City. The northern and eastern portions of the City consist of hilly areas and support
parcels within grassland or forested areas (City of Arroyo Grande 2001b). In Arroyo Grande, the windier
part of the year occurs between November and June and has average wind speeds of 8.3 miles per hour.
The other months of the year have an average wind speed of 7 miles per hour (Weather Spark 2020).
Future improvements to the circulation system would improve overall circulation but would not result in
the development of new buildings that could be placed within or adjacent to a high FHSZ or otherwise
exacerbate wildfire risks; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 351
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
105
c) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project 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?
According to the CAL FIRE FHSZ Viewer, the City of Arroyo Grande is not located within an SRA. The
GPCEU includes goals, policies, and future improvements for the City’s circulation system. Future
roadway and other transportation infrastructure improvements would be required to comply with the
City’s Safety Element and CAL FIRE standards to ensure public safety involving wildfire hazard;
therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
d) If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire
hazard severity zones, would the project 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?
According to the CAL FIRE FHSZ viewer, the City of Arroyo Grande is not located within a SRA. The
GPCEU includes goals, policies, and future improvements for the City’s circulation network. Future
improvements to the City’s circulation system would not result in the development of new buildings that
could be placed within or adjacent to an area at high risk for wildfire or post-fire hazards. Future
improvements would be required to comply with the City’s Safety Element and CAL FIRE standards to
ensure public safety; therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Conclusion
The GPCEU proposes objectives to design and designate efficient emergency access routes throughout
the City, which is consistent with the City’s Safety Element. Future improvements are not anticipated to
increase fire risk or place people or structures within a high FHSZ. Implementation of mitigation
measures would minimize short-term construction delays in emergency response and, following
construction, the proposed GPCEU improvements would accommodate the access requirements of
emergency vehicles. Potential impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.
Mitigation Measures
Future projects would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis for appropriate CEQA review and would
include project-specific mitigation measures as determined appropriate; however, implementation of
Mitigation Measures TR/MM-1 and TR/MM-2 to the maximum extent feasible is recommended to avoid
potential impacts. With the incorporation of these measures, as well as measures LU/MM-1 and
LU/MM-2, residual impacts associated with transportation and traffic would be less than significant.
Item 9.b. - Page 352
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
106
XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Environmental Issues
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact No Impact
(a) Does the project have the potential to 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 a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively
considerable” means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
(c) Does the project have environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Environmental Evaluation
a) Does the project have the potential to 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 a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples
of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
The GPCEU has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment. Implementation of
recommended mitigation measures would ensure that future buildout of the GPCEU 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 GPCEU would not
contribute significantly to GHG emissions, significantly increase energy consumption, or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant with mitigation described within each issue area.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of
a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
Because the GPCEU 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 GPCEU 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
Item 9.b. - Page 353
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
107
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 described
within each issue area.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The GPCEU would not create environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly. The GPCEU would improve existing infrastructure providing
beneficial impacts on the existing traffic and circulation systems. Adverse project effects would generally
be limited to the construction phase of the project and minimized through identified mitigation measures.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant with mitigation described within each issue area.
Item 9.b. - Page 354
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
108
3 LITERATURE CITED
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2012. Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities. Fourth Edition. Available at: https://nacto.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/04/AASHTO_Bicycle-Facilities-Guide_2012-toc.pdf. Accessed March
2021.
———. 2018. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Seventh Edition.
Arroyo Grande Police Department (AGPD). 2020. Department History. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/266/Department-History. Accessed December 29, 2020.
———. 2021. About AGPD. Available at: http://www.agpd.org/260/About-AGPD. Accessed December
2020.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.
November. Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf?utm_m
edium=email&utm_source=govdelivery. Accessed March 2021.
California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2020. California Important Farmland Finder (CIFF).
Available at: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/. Accessed December 28, 2020.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2020. California Natural Diversity Database
(CNDDB) Rare Find. Available at: https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB/Maps-and-
Data#43018408-cnddb-in-bios. Accessed December 29, 2020.
———. 2021. BIOS Viewer. Available at: https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios/?bookmark=648. Accessed
April 2021.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2007. Draft Fire Hazard Severity
Zones in Local Responsibility Areas. Available at
http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/san_luis_obispo/fhszl06_1_map.40.pdf. Accessed March
2021.
———. 2020. Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Viewer. Available at: https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.
Accessed on December 28, 2020.
California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). 2020. Solid Waste
Information System (SWIS) Facility/Site Activity Details: Cold Canyon Landfill, Inc. (40-AA-
0004). Available at:
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1509?siteID=3171. Accessed
April 2021.
California Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC). 2021. EnviroStor Database. Available at:
https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/map/?myaddress=City+of+Arroyo+Grande. Accessed
December 28, 2020.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2008. Stormwater Monitoring and Research
Program: Annual Data Summary Report. Available at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/env/stormwater/annual_report/2008/annual_report_06-
07/attachments/Monitoring_Research_Program_Annual_Data_Summary_Rprt.pdf. Accessed in
February 2018.
Item 9.b. - Page 355
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
109
———. 2018. Standard Specifications. Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-
media/programs/design/documents/f00203402018stdspecs-a11y.pdf. Accessed April 2021.
———. 2019. Caltrans Seismic Design Criteria. Version 2.0. April. Available at: https://dot.ca.gov/-
/media/dot-media/programs/engineering/documents/seismicdesigncriteria-sdc/202007-
seismicdesigncriteria-v2-a11y.pdf. Accessed April 2021.
———. 2020a. Highway Design Manual. Seventh Edition. July. Available at:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/manual-highway-design-manual-hdm. Accessed April 2021.
———. 2020b. Scenic Highways Mapper. Available at:
http://gisdata.dot.ca.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Highway/Scenic_Highways/MapServer. Accessed
on December 28, 2020.
California Geologic Survey (CGS). 2015. Mineral Land Classification Maps. California Geologic Survey
Information Warehouse. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/mlc/. Accessed April 2021.
California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). 2018. Technical Advisory on Evaluation
Transportation Impacts in CEQA. December. Available at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf. Accessed December
2020.
City of Arroyo Grande. 2001a. Integrated Program EIR Master Plan. Available at:
http://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/2080/General-Plan-Integrated-Program-
EIR?bidId=. Accessed April 2021.
———. 2001b. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation, Land Use, Safety, Noise, Parks and
Recreation Elements. Available at: https://www.arroyogrande.org/142/Planning-Division.
Accessed December 28, 2020.
———. 2007. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element.
Available at: https://www.arroyogrande.org/142/Planning-Division. Accessed December 2020.
———. 2012a. City of Arroyo Grande Water System Management Plan. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/1067/Water-System-Master-Plan-PDF.
Accessed April 2021.
———. 2012b. City of Arroyo Grande Bicycle & Trails Master Plan. Available at:
http://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/276/Bicycle-and-Trails-Master-Plan.
Accessed April 2021.
———. 2013. City of Arroyo Grande Climate Action Plan. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/1327/Climate-Action-Plan-PDF.
Accessed April 2021.
———. 2015. Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/3857/Local-Hazard-Mitigation-Plan-PDF.
Accessed April 2021.
———. 2016. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Housing Element. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/142/Planning-Division. Accessed January 2021.
Item 9.b. - Page 356
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
110
———. 2018. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Land Use Map. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/477/Land-Use-Map. Accessed December
28, 2020.
———. 2019. Consideration of a Resolution Requesting Membership in the Monterey Bay Community
Power Joint Power Authority. August 13, 2019. Available at:
https://www.arroyogrande.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Item/8791?fileID=15394. Accessed
April 2021.
———. 2020. Five Cities Fire Authority. Available at: https://www.arroyogrande.org/563/Fire. Accessed
December 28, 2020.
———. 2021a. Stormwater Management. Available at: http://www.arroyogrande.org/145/Stormwater-
Management#:~:text=The%20City%20of%20Arroyo%20Grande%20is%20enrolled%20in,pollu
tants%20in%20stormwater%20runoff%20and%20minimize%20illicit%20discharges. Accessed
April 2021.
———. 2021b. City of Arroyo Grande Draft Circulation Element Update. March.
———. 2021c. City Park and Facilities. Available at: https://www.arroyogrande.org/711/City-Parks-
Facilities. Accessed April 2021.
County of San Luis Obispo. 2004. Final Draft Arroyo Grande Creek Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP)
and Environmental Assessment/Initial Study (EA/IS) for the Protection of Steelhead and
California Red-Legged Frog. Revised February. Available at:
https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/getattachment/c6eac407-21b4-4fb8-88af-fd123b0d0951/DRAFT-
Arroyo-Grande-Creek-Habitat-Conservation-Plan.aspx. Accessed December 2020.
———. 2007. Airport Land Use Plan for the Oceano County Airport. Figure 2: Airport Land Use
Planning Areas. Available at: https://www.sloairport.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/02/OceanoFig2.pdf. Accessed December 2020.
———. 2016a. Tsunami Emergency Response Plan. County of San Luis Obispo Office of Emergency
Services (OES). Revised April. Available at:
https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/getattachment/c3d4bac0-f54f-47fa-bf10-b6e8368da393/Tsunami-
Response-Plan.aspx. Accessed April 2021.
———. 2016b. Land Use View. Available at: Land Use View (ca.gov). Accessed January 2021.
———. 2020. Arroyo Grande Groundwater Basin. Available at:
https://www.slocounty.ca.gov/Departments/Public-Works/Committees-Programs/Sustainable-
Groundwater-Management-Act-(SGMA)/Arroyo-Grande-Groundwater-Basin.aspx. Accessed
December 28, 2020.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2012. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. 2009
Edition, with May 2012 Revisions 1 and 2. Available at:
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009r1r2/mutcd2009r1r2edition.pdf. Accessed March 2021.
GHD. 2020. Circulation Element Update Existing Conditions Background Report. Prepared for City of
Arroyo Grande.
Item 9.b. - Page 357
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
111
LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. 2019. San Luis Obispo South County Transit Short-Range Transit
Plan. Prepared for the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority. December 23. Available at:
http://www.slorta.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/SoCo-Transit-Draft-Final-Plan.pdf.
Accessed March 2021.
Mathe, David. 2015. Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Prepared by David L. Mathe,
Emergency Preparedness Coordinator, Five Cities Fire Authority. Available at:
http://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/3857/Local-Hazard-Mitigation-Plan-PDF.
Accessed April 2021.
Municicode. 2020. Arroyo Grande, CA Municipal Code. Available at:
https://library.municode.com/ca/arroyo_grande/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=16194.
Accessed December 28, 2020.
National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) 2004. Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
Second Edition. March. Available at: https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/.
Accessed March 2021.
Page & Turnbull. 2013. Historic Context Statement and Survey Report for the City of Arroyo Grande,
California. Revised by the City of Arroyo Grande Historical Resources Committee. February 12.
Available at: https://www.arroyogrande.org/DocumentCenter/View/1389/Historic-Context-
Statement-PDF. Accessed December 2020.
San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD). 2001. 2001 Clean Air Plan. December
2001. Available at: https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/business/pdf/CAP.pdf. Accessed February 2021.
———. 2012. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. April. Available at:
https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/CEQA_Handbook_2012_v2%20%28Updated%20Map2019%29_L
inkedwithMemo.pdf. Accessed February 2021.
———. 2019. San Luis Obispo County Attainment Status. Available at:
https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-
org/images/cms/upload/files/AttainmentStatus29January2019.pdf. Accessed February 2021.
———. 2020. 2019 Annual Air Quality Report. November. Available at:
https://storage.googleapis.com/slocleanair-org/images/cms/upload/files/2019aqrt-FINAL.pdf.
Accessed February 2021.
———. 2021. Naturally Occurring Asbestos Map. Available at:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1YAKjBzVkwi1bZ4rQ1p6b2OMyvIM&ll=35
.364986805363756%2C-120.52563349999998&z=9. Accessed February 2021.
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG). 2015. 2014 Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy. Available at:
https://www.slocog.org/programs/regional-planning/2014-rtpscs. Accessed April 2021.
———. 2019. 2019 Regional Transportation Plan. June 5. Available at:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/oc6i8wshikuirsh/__FINAL%202019%20RTP.pdf?dl=0. Accessed
April 2021.
Item 9.b. - Page 358
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
112
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2021. GeoTracker. Available at: GeoTracker (ca.gov).
Accesses January 2021.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2010. City of Arroyo Grande Quickfacts. Available at:
https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/arroyograndecitycalifornia,fountainvalleycitycalifo
rnia,claremontcitycalifornia,cherrylandcdpcalifornia,nationalcitycitycalifornia,placervillecitycali
fornia#. Accessed April 2021.
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2021. Web
Soil Survey. Available at: https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx.
Accessed December 29, 2020.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2021. National Ambient Air Quality Standards Table.
Available at: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table. Accessed April 5, 2021.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2020 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Mapper. Available
at: https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Accessed December 28, 2020.
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2020. National Geologic Map Database. Available at:
https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Geolex/UnitRefs/SquireRefs_11983.html. Accessed December 29, 2020.
US-Mining. 2020. Arroyo Grande, CA Mines. Available at: http://www.us-mining.com/california/arroyo-
grande. Accessed December 29, 2020.
Waste Connections. 2020. Cold Canyon Landfill. Available at: https://www.coldcanyonlandfill.com/.
Accessed December 28, 2020.
Weather Spark. 2020. Average Weather in Arroyo Grande California, United States. Available at:
https://weatherspark.com/y/1273/Average-Weather-in-Arroyo-Grande-California-United-States-
Year-Round. Accessed December 28, 2020.
Item 9.b. - Page 359
APPENDIX A
Circulation Element Update Existing Conditions Background Report
Item 9.b. - Page 360
Item 9.b. - Page 361
GHD | 669 Pacific Street, Suite A, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
11144936 | 2101 | R1584RPT007.docx | November 2, 2020
Circulation Element
Update
Existing Conditions Background Report
Prepared for:
City of Arroyo Grande
Final Report
Item 9.b. - Page 362
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page i
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 9.b. - Page 363
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Existing Setting .................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends ................................................................................ 4
1.3 Roadway System ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 State Freeways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.2 State Highways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.3 Arterial Streets .................................................................................................. 9
1.3.4 Collectors ........................................................................................................ 10
1.3.5 Local Streets ................................................................................................... 10
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and Parameters .................................................................. 11
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) .......................................................................................... 11
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies ........................................................................................ 11
2.1.2 VMT Policies ................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations .............................................................................. 13
2.2.1 Intersection Operations .................................................................................. 13
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ...................................................................... 14
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations ....................................................................... 16
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters ...................................................................... 16
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies ................................................................................. 16
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress .......................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria ........................................................................................ 18
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy .......................................................................................... 19
3. Existing Traffic Operations ......................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies ............................................ 21
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ........................................................................ 25
3.3 Truck Routes .................................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................... 30
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions ............................................................ 33
Item 9.b. - Page 364
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 2
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis ................................................ 36
3.6 Public Transportation ....................................................................................................... 38
3.7 Rail ................................................................................................................................... 39
3.8 Air ..................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure Index
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Figure 1.2 Roadway Functional Classifications .................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions ............................................................. 17
Figure 3.1 Existing Intersection Lane Geometrics & Control ............................................................ 22
Figure 3.2 Existing Intersection Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................ 23
Figure 3.3 Existing Daily Roadway Traffic Volumes ......................................................................... 26
Figure 3.4 Map of Truck Routes in the City of Arroyo Grande ......................................................... 29
Figure 3.5 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan..................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.6 City of Arroyo Grande Sidewalk Inventory ...................................................................... 34
Figure 3.7 Existing Bikeways Map .................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3.8 City of Arroyo Grande Major Roads Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ...................... 37
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande .......................................................... 38
Table Index
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics........................................................... 5
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections ............................................................. 15
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds ........................................................... 16
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters ....................................................................................... 16
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes .................................... 18
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic ........................................................................................... 19
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes ............................................................................................. 19
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations .................................................................... 24
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ....................................................................... 27
Item 9.b. - Page 365
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 3
Appendix Index
Appendix A Traffic Counts
Appendix B Synchro Reports
Appendix C Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix D Bicycle LTS Analysis Worksheets
Item 9.b. - Page 366
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 4
1. Introduction
The City of Arroyo Grande has retained GHD to complete updates to the City’s General Plan
Circulation Element (CE), associated Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) and nexus study, and
finalization of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines. As part of the CE update, this Existing
Conditions Background Report has been prepared in order to document available background data,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), existing traffic operations, multimodal facilities, transit services, and
other pertinent transportation information describing the City’s transportation baseline. This report
summarizes the City’s existing roadway facilities in the context of a r egional setting and existing
service levels on critical facilities. Daily and peak hour traffic volumes are presented and analyzed,
and facilities with deficit capacity are identified. The Existing Conditions sets the transportation
baseline and will be utilized as the groundwork for forecasting transportation conditions, which will
then be utilized to assess future transportation needs.
The City’s ultimate objective is to update their Circulation Element to include policies, goals, and
objectives that will create an optimal multi-modal transportation system for the City. Policies goals,
and objectives will be consistent with the requirements of AB 1358, "The California Complete Street
Act", and SB 743, the change from Level of Service to VMT as the measure of transportation
impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to provide integrated smart growth
planning. The updated Circulation Element and TIF will also bring the City’s planning efforts in
compliance with the goals set forth in San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2019
Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) as required by SB
375, “The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008”, authorized by AB 32, “The
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006”.
1.1 Existing Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San
Luis Obispo County, California. The City lies about 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area
and 150 miles north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of
114 feet. The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis
Obispo, along the US 101 coastal corridor. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated
areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast direction. US 101
is the primary State highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San
Luis Obispo County and the State. State Route 227 also provides more localized access to/from the
City, connecting Arroyo Grande with the City of San Luis Obispo and surrounding County
community.
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends
Data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2009-2013 (2013) and 2013-2017 (2017) American
Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, form the basis of the following demographic analysis.
Based on the ACS data, the population in the City has increased by roughly 560 from 17,411 in
2013 to 17,971 in 2017, approximately a 3.2% increase.
Item 9.b. - Page 367
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 5
Prior to examining the various transportation modes in the City, the following sub-section will
examine some recent trends and current facts concerning commuter mode-choice and travel times
in the City. Table 1.1 presents the various means of transportation reported in the City of Arroyo
Grande between 2013 and 2017 ACS estimates.
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics
As presented in Table 1.1, the number of workers in the City did not increase significantly between
the two five year estimates. This increase in workers is approximately 2.2%. Overall, these statistics
indicate a consistent trend of a large percentage of commuters driving alone. Carpooling ,
motorcycle use, and walking decreased between 2013 and 2017, while biking and working at home
increased. Public transit use remained consistent.
Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1 present the reported travel times from the 2013 and 2017 ACS. As
presented in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, the average travel time to work for all workers increased by
1.6 minutes, a 7% increase from the 2013 ACS.
Number Percent Number Percent
Workers 16 and over 35,401 -36,196 -
Car, Truck or Van 31,188 88.1%32,070 88.6%
Drove Alone 27,082 76.5%28,124 77.7%
Carpooled 4,107 11.6%3,945 10.9%
Public Transportation (excludes taxi)389 1.1%398 1.1%
Motocycle, taxi, or other 354 1.0%290 0.8%
Bicycle 389 1.1%434 1.2%
Walked 991 2.8%688 1.9%
Worked at Home 2,089 5.9%2,317 6.4%
Means of Transportation
2013-2017 ACS2009-2013 ACS
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
Item 9.b. - Page 368
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 6
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work
Number Percent Number Percent
Did not work at home 33,312 -33,879 -
Less than 10 minutes 5,397 16.2%3,930 11.6%
10 to 14 minutes 5,463 16.4%4,946 14.6%
15 to 19 minutes 5,996 18.0%6,742 19.9%
20 to 24 minutes 6,363 19.1%6,606 19.5%
25 to 29 minutes 2,065 6.2%2,914 8.6%
30 to 34 minutes 4,430 13.3%4,709 13.9%
35 to 44 minutes 1,299 3.9%1,660 4.9%
45 to 59 minutes 1,099 3.3%949 2.8%
60+ minutes 1,166 3.5%1,457 4.3%
Mean Travel Time (minutes)
Travel Time
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
23.221.6
2009-2013 ACS 2013-2017 ACS
Item 9.b. - Page 369
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 7
As summarized in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, more commuters are experiencing longer travel times
to work (15+ minutes) in 2017 than in 2013. A large majority of commuters, about 70%, spent less
than 25 minutes commuting. Approximately 40% of commuters had a commute time of 20-25
minutes, indicating a presumably high amount of non-localized employment.
1.3 Roadway System
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses
throughout the City and beyond. A route’s design, including number of lanes needed, is determined
by its functional classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient
movement at the development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element.” The study area and
existing roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 1.2.
1.3.1 State Freeways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other road, railways
or pedestrian pathway, and instead are served by interchange are classified as highways. Highways
can either be toll or non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 mph. The
following freeways service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101
serves as the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo
County (and other portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and
the Los Angeles urban basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major
connection between and through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo
County, US 101 represents a major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general
four-lane divided freeway cross-section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo
Grande, US 101 forms full-access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way
and Fair Oaks Avenue.
1.3.2 State Highways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions with cross streets are characterized by at grade
intersections rather than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or
undivided roadways, with speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highways
service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
State Route 227 (SR 227) is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north-south
direction connecting the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a
general two-lane highway type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a
significant parallel commuter route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City
of Arroyo Grande.
Item 9.b. - Page 370
Fair Oaks AvenueJames WayOak Park BoulevardElm StreetThe PikeHalcyon RoadEl Camino RealValley RoadFair Oaks AvenueEast Grand AvenueWestBranchStreetHuasna RdRodeoDriveFarroll AvenueTallyHoRoadAsh StreetRanchoParkwayTrafficW ayCorbettCanyonRoadEast Branch StreetBranchMillRoadBrisco RoadCourtland StreetCaminoMercadoEast Cherry AvenueCarpenter Canyon Road£¤101£¤10112272271227FIGURE 1.20 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5MilesProject No.Revision No.411144936Date11/02/2020CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORTMap Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 FeetPaper Size ANSI AoData source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.Created by: rsouthernN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG1.2_RoadClassification.mxdPrint date: 02 Nov 2020 - 15:04LegendCity LimitsUS 101Sphere of Influence4-Lane (Primary)Arterial2-Lane Arterial Collector Residential Collector RoadsState Routes andHighwaysROADWAY FUNCTIONALCLASSIFICATIONItem 9.b. - Page 371
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 9
1.3.3 Arterial Streets
Arterial facilities serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily
to distribute cross-town traffic from freeways / highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Specifications and Engineering Standards define two categories: Primary Arterials and Arterials.
Primary Arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and Arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane.
Within the City, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds
ranging from 30 to 45 mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent
land uses. The following arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown
commercial thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The
duality of purpose of this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking does create safety and
capacity concerns. The high volume of traffic (18,500 ADT) at times conflicts with the community’s
desire to have a pedestrian-friendly downtown.
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north-south between State Route 1 (SR 1) in
the south, and Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between
Ash Street and Grand Avenue.
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east-west connectivity
across US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm
Street in the west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design
standards.
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east-west Primary arterial through and within the City (two
travel lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the
City). West of the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and
extends further west to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand
Avenue becomes East Branch Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR
227. Grand Avenue represents one of the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed
westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north-south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the
City of Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City,
with the southernmost terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue,
Halcyon Road is a four-lane primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road
and El Camino Real, forms a full-access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand
Avenue interchange.
Oak Park Boulevard is two-to-five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern
City limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjace nt Cities of Grover Beach and
Pismo Beach. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101, and extends south
of US 101 as a four-lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south beyond
The Pike as 22nd Street. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old Oak
Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a
northeasterly direction to connect with SR 227.
Item 9.b. - Page 372
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 10
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends
from East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to
the south.
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to
State Route 1 (SR 1) south of the City limits.
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road, and also a frontage road east of US 101 with both
commercial and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street ,
and provides important circulation and commercial accessibility east of the freeway.
1.3.4 Collectors
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to
residential, commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications and Engineering
Standards define two categories: Collectors and Residential Collectors. Collectors feature turn
lanes at intersections and may feature a two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), while residential collectors
do not have turn lanes.
James Way is a predominantly-east-west two-lane road serving as a residential collector between
Oak Park Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
Printz Road is a predominantly-east-west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s
northern limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for
several small local roads.
The Pike is a two-lane east-west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion
of The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City lim its.
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north-south collector that runs between West Branch Street and
James Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along W Branch
Street, including the Walmart, and residential areas north.
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino
Mercado, Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo
Drive, and Tally Ho Road are other important roadways serving Residential Collector functions
within the City.
1.3.5 Local Streets
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications map (Figure 1.2) as freeways, highways,
arterials, or collectors are designated as local streets.
Item 9.b. - Page 373
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 11
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and
Parameters
The following section outlines the analysis parameters and methodologies that will be used to
quantify the measures of circulation system effectiveness.
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
SB 743 was signed into law in 2013, with the intent to better align CEQA practices with statewide
sustainability goals related to infill development, active transportation, and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify n ew
metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. Among the changes to
the State CEQA Guidelines was removal of vehicle delay and Level of Service (LOS) from
consideration as environmental impacts under CEQA. For land use projects, OPR identified Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita (for residential), VMT per employee (for office), and net VMT (for
retail) as new metrics for transportation analysis. For transportation projects, lead agencies for
roadway capacity projects have discretion, consistent with CEQA and planning requirements, to
choose which methodology to use to evaluate transportation impacts.
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies
Various methodologies are currently available to calculate VMT. Travel demand models, sketch
models or planning tools, spreadsheet models, research, and data can all be used to calculate and
estimate VMT. GHD is investigating local VMT further and will update this section based on the
results of additional analysis and validation.
Boundary-Based and Project-Based VMT
Not all VMT is measured equally, and not all models are equally equipped to assess VMT.
Boundary-based VMT is calculated by multiplying traffic volumes on all roadway segments in a
study area by each segment’s length. This type of VMT is easily c alculated, but is not adequate for
CEQA analysis under SB 743. Project-based (or tour-based) VMT is more challenging to calculate,
as it requires estimating or measuring the length of individual trips by purpose, where trips cross
study area and jurisdictional boundaries.
SB 743 generally requires project-based VMT to be estimated, since boundary-based VMT
approaches do not account for the full lengths of trips that leave a particular study area (whether
that be a City, County, or State). For this reason, regional travel demand models, “big data”, and
household travel surveys that are not limited by local jurisdictional boundaries are the preferred
tools to estimate VMT under SB 743.
Published Data
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments’ Staff Report dated October 2, 2019 states baseline
and recommended VMT for incorporated Cities and County communities, based on the regional
Travel Demand Model. This information is presented below.
Item 9.b. - Page 374
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 12
The Baseline Regional VMT per capita (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 13.43
o Recommended threshold is 15% below baseline at 11.42
The Baseline Regional VMT per employee (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 8.59
o Recommended threshold is at 15% below baseline at 7.3
No baseline or threshold set for Retail.
The Staff Report shows an average daily VMT per capita for Arroyo Grande of approximately
9.5 for residents, and 7 for employees.
2.1.2 VMT Policies
With the adopted CEQA Guidelines (revised, January 20, 2016), transportation impacts are to be
evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles travell ed (VMT). The new guidelines became
effective statewide on July 1, 2020. GHD has assisted the City in establishing a VMT Policy, which
the City has adopted on September 8, 2020, and establishes the thresholds of significance and
screening criteria for VMT. Per the City’s Policy, and consistent with OPR’s Technical Advisory on
Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, the target for VMT reduction is 15% below baseline for
residential and office projects, and no net increase in total regional VMT for retail, industrial, and
other projects. The City’s baseline VMT and significance thresholds are listed below.
Baseline Residential VMT per capita: 20.2
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per capita: 17.2
Baseline Office VMT per employee: 14.0
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per employee: 11.9
Retail, Industrial, & Other: No Net increase in total regional VMT
Mixed-Use: Evaluate components independently considering internal capture, and compare to
the corresponding threshold. Alternatively, analyze only the project’s the dominant use.
Redevelopment: If a project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds above
apply.
A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if
proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective
thresholds recommended above.
Screening Criteria
The City has also identified screening thresholds for projects that are presumed to be less than
significant impact. The following are examples (not inclusive) of land use and transportation projects
that are identified exempt by OPR, therefore should not require VMT analysis:
A) Small Projects – less than 110 vehicle trips per day
B) Projects that are within ½ mile of a transit stop at the intersection of two transit routes with 15
minute headways or less, unless the project:
Item 9.b. - Page 375
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 13
i) Has floor-area-ratio of less than 0.75;
ii) Includes more parking than required by the City’s zoning code;
iii) Is inconsistent with the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, City Zoning Code, or
City Land Use Policies, including the City’s General Plan or any applicable Specific Plan ;
or
iv) Replaces affordable housing with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units.
C) Local-serving retail projects, which are generally defined as projects within the City that are
less than 50,000 square feet in size. The determination of whether a retail project is local-
serving or regional-serving shall be made by City staff on a case by case basis to determine
whether they are likely to attract regional trips. For instance, auto dealerships and specialty
retailers may propose less than 50,000 square feet of retail space but be de emed regionally
serving.
D) Transportation projects that are expected to reduce or have no impact on VMT will not
require a quantitative analysis. These projects include, but are not limited to, road diets,
roundabouts, roadway rehabilitation and maintenance, safety improvements that do not
substantially increase auto capacity, installation or reconfiguration of lanes not for through
traffic, timing of traffic signals, removal of on-street parking, addition or enhancement of
pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities and services.
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations
Although VMT will be used to determine CEQA transportation impacts, the City intends, by policy, to
continue to use Level of Service as a metric to evaluate traffic operations to assess need, type, and
timing of transportation improvements.
Traffic operations were quantified through the determination of "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of
Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade "A" through
"F" is assigned to an intersection, or roadway segment, representing progressively worsening traffic
conditions. LOS "A" represents free-flow operating conditions and LOS "F" represents over-capacity
conditions. Levels of Servic e was calculated for all intersection control types, and freeway ramp
merge and diverge sections using the methods documented in the Transportation Research Board
Publication Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016
(HCM 6).
2.2.1 Intersection Operations
The Synchro 10 (Trafficware) software program was used to implement the HCM 6 analysis
methodologies for signalized and stop-controlled intersections. Intersection Level of Service (LOS)
was calculated for all control types using the methods documented in HCM 6, excluding the
clustered intersections and locations with non-NEMA-standard phasing, due to limitations within
HCM 6 methodology. The specific locations include the Brisco Road / US 101 partial interchange
and Brisco / El Camino Real, which used Synchro Timing methodology to determine intersection
Item 9.b. - Page 376
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 14
delay. For signalized or all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is
based on the calculated averaged delay for all approaches and movements. For two-way or side-
street stop controlled (TWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is based upon the calculated
average delay for all movements of the worst performing approach. The vehicular -based LOS
criteria for different types of intersection contro ls are presented in Table 2.1.
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
A supplemental traffic signal “warrant” analysis was completed. The term “signal warrants” refers to
the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or
ascertain the need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This
study employed the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the 2014 California
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014 CA MUTCD, Revision 5). The signal warrant
criteria are based upon several factors including volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic,
frequency of accidents, location of school areas etc. The CA MUTCD indicates that the installation
of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the signal warrants are met. The ultimate
decision to signalize an intersection should be determined after careful analysis of all intersection
and area characteristics.
This traffic operations analysis specifically utilized the Peak -Hour-Volume based Warrant 3 as one
representative type of traffic signal warrant analysis. Signal warrant analyses were only conducted
for non-signalized intersections which are projected to operate beyond the LOS thresholds. Section
3.1 of this Report further discusses which intersections are evaluated for the peak hour signal
warrant. The Signal Warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C.
Item 9.b. - Page 377
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 15
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections
Level of
Service
Type
of
Flow Delay Maneuverability
Stopped Delay/Vehicle
(sec)
Signalized
Un-
signalized
A Stable Flow Very slight delay. Progression is very
favorable, with most vehicles arriving
during the green phase not stopping at
all.
Turning movements are
easily made, and nearly
all drivers find freedom
of operation.
≤10.0 ≤10.0
B Stable Flow Good progression and/or short cycle
lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS
A, causing higher levels of average
delay.
Vehicle platoons are
formed. Many drivers
begin to feel somewhat
restricted within groups
of vehicles.
>10.0 >10.0
and and
≤20.0 ≤15.0
C Stable Flow Higher delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths.
Individual cycle failures may begin to
appear at this level. The number of
vehicles stopping is significant, although
many still pass through the intersection
without stopping.
Back-ups may develop
behind turning vehicles.
Most drivers feel
somewhat restricted
>20.0 >15.0
and and
≤35.0 ≤25.0
D Approaching Unstable Flow The influence of congestion becomes
more noticeable. Longer delays may
result from some combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle
lengths, or high volume-to-capacity
ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the
proportion of vehicles not stopping
declines. Individual cycle failures are
noticeable.
Maneuverability is
severely limited during
short periods due to
temporary back-ups.
>35.0 >25.0
and and
≤55.0 ≤35.0
E Unstable Flow Generally considered to be the limit of
acceptable delay. Indicative of poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high
volume-to-capacity ratios. Individual
cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
There are typically long
queues of vehicles
waiting upstream of the
intersection.
>55.0 >35.0
and and
≤80.0 ≤50.0
F Forced Flow Generally considered to be
unacceptable to most drivers. Often
occurs with over saturation. May also
occur at high volume-to-capacity ratios.
There are many individual cycle failures.
Poor progression and long cycle lengths
may also be major contributing factors.
Jammed conditions.
Back-ups from other
locations restrict or
prevent movement.
Volumes may vary
widely, depending
principally on the
downstream back-up
conditions.
>80.0 >50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016 (HCM 6)
Item 9.b. - Page 378
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 16
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations
Existing roadway LOS was determined on a daily basis with counts collected on weekdays in
November, 2019. The LOS for 37 roadway segments throughout Arroyo Grande were established
using the capacities in Table 2.2
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds
Note: All volumes are approximate and assume ideal roadway characteristics. Actual threshold volumes for
each Level of Service listed above may vary depending on a variety of factors including (but not limited to)
roadway curvature and grade, intersection or interchange spacing, driveway spacing, percentage of trucks and
other heavy vehicles, travel lane widths, signal timing characteristics, on-street parking, volume of cross traffic
and pedestrians, etc.
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters
This evaluation of Existing conditions incorporates appropriate heavy vehicle adjustment factors,
peak hour factors, and signal lost time factors and reports the resulting operational analysis as
estimated using the HCM 6 based analysis methodologies.
Table 2.3 presents the technical parameters that were utilized for the evaluation of the study
intersections and ramp segments for the analysis scenarios. All parameters not listed should be
assumed as default values or calculated based on parameters listed.
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters
Technical Parameter Assumption
1 Intersection Peak Hour Factor Based on counts, intersection overall
2 Intersection Heavy Vehicle % Based on counts, intersection overall, minimum 2%
3 Pedestrian & Bicycle Volumes Based on counts
4 Grades 2% or less, level terrain
5 Signal Timings Based on Caltrans and City signal timing plans
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies
City of Arroyo Grande
The City of Arroyo Grande’s current LOS policy is identified in the General Plan Circulation Element
(October 2001), and specifies the following minimum LOS standards for all streets and intersections
within the City’s jurisdiction:
CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)’C’ or better on all streets and controlled
intersections.
A B C D E
Four Lane Freeway 28,000 43,200 61,600 74,400 80,000
Two Lane Highway 2,400 4,800 7,900 13,500 22,900
Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 22,000 25,000 29,000 33,000 36,000
Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000
Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,500 18,000
Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
Two Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000
Roadway Type
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) – Total of Both Directions
Item 9.b. - Page 379
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 17
CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS ‘D’ at a minimum and plan improvement to
achieve LOS ‘C’ (Los ‘E’ or ‘F’ unacceptable = significant adverse impact unless
Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings approved). The design and
funding for such planned improvements shall be sufficiently definite to enable
construction within a reasonable period of time.
Based on the current City policy, LOS C will be utilized as the acceptable threshold for the
evaluation of intersection and roadway operations in this report .
It should be noted however, as part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to
change the LOS policy to the following:
CT3. Strive to attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS ‘D’ or better on all street
segments and controlled intersections.
CT3-1. New development that is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS E or below or further
exacerbate conditions already below LOS D should be conditioned to make
transportation improvements that offset the level degradation. Improvements to non -
automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or intersection may also be
considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
If the City decides to adopt this change in LOS policy to LOS D as the threshold, this will change
the findings of deficient locations identified within this report.
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
Bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS). LTS
must be calculated for roadway segments and intersections using the methods documented in the
paper, Low Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-
19, May 2012. Bicycle LTS quantifies the stress level of a given roadway segment by considering a
variety of criteria, including street width (number of lanes), speed limit or prevailing speed, presence
and width of bike lanes, and the presence and width of parking lanes. Bicycle LTS is a suitability
rating system of the safety, comfort, and convenience of transportation facilities from the
perspective of the user. Moreover, the methodology allows planning practitioners to assess gaps in
connectivity that may discourage active users from traversing roadways.
Bicycle LTS scores roadway facilities into one of four classifications or ratings for measuring the
effects of traffic-based stress on bicycle riders, with 1 being the lowest stress or most comfortable,
and 4 being the highest stress or least comfortable. Generally, LTS score of 1 indicates the facility
provides a traffic stress tolerable by most children and less experienced riders, such as multi-use
paths that are separated from motorized traffic. An LTS score of 4 indicates a stress level tolerable
by only the most experienced cyclists who are comfortable with high-volume and high-speed, mixed
traffic environments. The figure below presents the four scoring classifications, subsequent tables
show the criteria associated with determining the LTS score.
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions
Item 9.b. - Page 380
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 18
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria
The Bicycle LTS methodology is comprised of three scoring categories: roadway segments,
intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, and unsignalized intersection crossings. The
Bicycle LTS scoring criteria for intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, for roadway
segments with mixed traffic, and for roadway segments where bike lanes exist are provided in the
Tables below.
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes
Right-turn Lane Configuration
Right-turn
lane length
(ft)
Bike Lane
Approach
Alignment2
Vehicle Turning
Speed (mph)3 LTS Score
With Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 150 Straight ≤ 15 LTS 2
Single >150 Straight ≤ 20 LTS 3
Single Any Left ≤ 15 LTS 3
Single1 or Dual Exclusive/
Shared Any Any Any LTS 4
Without a Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 75 ≤ 15
(no effect
on LTS)
Single 75-150 ≤ 15 LTS 3
Otherwise LTS 4
1 Any other single right turn lane configuration not shown above.
2 The right turn criteria are based on whether the bike lane stays straight or shifts to the left.
3 This is vehicle speed at the corner, not the speed crossing the bike lane. Corner r adius can also be used
as a proxy for turning speeds.
4 There is no effect on LTS if the bikeway is physically separated from traffic, as on a shared -use path.
Item 9.b. - Page 381
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 19
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic
Street Width
Speed Limit 2-3 lanes 4-5 lanes 6+ lanes
Up to 25 mph LTS 1 or 21 LTS 3 LTS 4
30 mph LTS 2 or 31 LTS 4 LTS 4
35+ mph LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4
1Use lower value for streets without marked centerlines or classified as residential and
with fewer than 3 lanes; use higher value otherwise.
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes
Lane Factor
LTS Score
LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4
Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction) 1 (no effect) 2 or more (no effect)
Sum of bike lane and parking
lane width (includes marked
buffer and paved gutter)
15 ft. or
more 14 or 14.5 ft.2 13.5 ft. or less (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed
25 mph or
less 30 mph 35 mph
40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas) rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Not Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction) 1
2, if directions
are separated
by a raised
median
more than 2,
or 2 without a
separating
median (no effect)
Bike Lane Width (includes
marked buffer and paved
gutter) 6 ft. or more 5.5 ft. or less (no effect) (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed
30 mph or
less (no effect) 35 mph
40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas) rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Note: 1 (no effect) = factor does not trigger an increase to this level of traffic stress.
2 If speed limit < 25 mph or Class = residential, then any width is acceptable for LTS 2.
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy
As part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to adopt the following Policy
related to thresholds for Bicycle LTS:
Item 9.b. - Page 382
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 20
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
approaches or crossings that already exceed LTS 3 at intersections with Class II or Class III
facilities.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
segments that already exceed LTS 3 on Class II or Class III routes.
This Report contains the analysis of Bicycle LTS of arterial and collector roadways, and approaches
of major intersections to review current bicycle connectivity throughout the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 383
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 21
3. Existing Traffic Operations
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour turning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019 and Thursday, November 21, 2019.
These counts were collected while school was in session. The AM peak hour is defined as the one
continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and the PM peak hour
is defined as the one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM
under typical weekday conditions.
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies
Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations were quantified using
existing traffic volumes, lane geometrics, and intersection controls. Figure 3.1 presents the existing
lane geometrics and intersection control types that are currently in place at the study intersections.
Figure 3.2 presents the existing weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
Item 9.b. - Page 384
Item 9.b. - Page 385
Item 9.b. - Page 386
Item 9.b. - Page 387
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 24
Table 3.1 presents a summary of the LOS and delay (in sec/veh) at each study intersection under
Existing conditions.
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 James Way & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 29.4 C 18.6 B -
2 James Way & Rodeo Dr AWSC C 8.3 A 9.1 A -
3 James Way & Tally Ho Rd AWSC C 8.6 A 8.8 A -
4 W Branch St / US 101 NB Ramp & Oak Park Ave Signal C 8.3 A 10.6 B -
5 El Camino Real & Oak Park Ave Signal C 12.1 B 13.4 B -
6 W Branch St & Camino Mercado / US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.1 B 17.4 B -
7 W Branch St & Rancho Parkway Signal C 6.4 A 8.3 A -
8 W Branch St & Brisco Rd Signal C 12.0 B 22.9 C -
9 US 101 NB Ramps & Brisco Rd Signal C 41.2 D 51.6 D -
10 El Camino Real & Brisco Rd Signal C 43.8 D 51.8 D -
11 W Branch St & Rodeo Dr TWSC C 11.8 B 10.8 B -
12 El Camino Real & US 101 SB Ramps / Halcyon Rd Signal C 19.9 B 23.1 C -
13 E Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 16.2 B 22.9 C -
14 E Grand Ave & Courtland St Signal C 9.7 A 11.2 B -
15 E Grand Ave & Elm St Signal C 9.6 A 12.2 B -
16 E Grand Ave & Brisco Rd TWSC C 12.8 B 18.8 C -
17 E Grand Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 23.2 C 23.6 C -
18 E Grand Ave & El Camino Real TWSC C 50.6 F 41.1 E No
19 E Grand Ave & US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 9.7 A 13.2 B -
20 E Grand Ave & US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 11.3 B 28.0 C -
21 E Grand Ave / E Branch St & W Branch St TWSC C 104.0 F 111.5 F Yes
22 E Branch St & Wesley St / Traffic Way Signal C 17.7 B 17.1 B -
23 E Branch St & Nevada St / Bridge St TWSC C 42.8 E 23.0 C Yes
24 E Branch St & Short St none C -----
25 E Branch St & Mason St Signal C 11.3 B 11.1 B -
26 E Branch St / Huasna Rd & Corbett Canton Rd / Stanley
Ave
AWSC C 21.2 C 20.3 C -
27 S Traffic Way & Traffic Way / US 101 Ramps TWSC C 11.2 B 12.8 B -
28 Fair Oaks Ave & Traffic Way Signal C 13.5 B 12.7 B -
29 Fair Oaks Ave & US 101 SB Ramp / Orchard Ave AWSC C 39.8 E 16.9 C Yes
30 Fair Oaks Ave & Valley Rd Signal C 12.2 B 8.1 A -
31 Fair Oaks Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 54.2 D 17.0 B -
32 Farroll Ave & Halcyon Rd TWSC C 109.0 F 37.9 E No
33 The Pike & Halcyon Rd AWSC C 22.3 C 13.3 B -
#Intersection
Control
Type1,2
Target
LOS
AM Peak PM Peak
Notes:
1. AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control; RNDBT = Roundabout
2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for AWSC,
3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3
4. Bold = Unacceptable Conditions
5. OVR = Delay over 300 seconds
Warrant
3 Met?
Item 9.b. - Page 388
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 25
As presented in Table 3.1, the following study intersections operate at unacceptable LOS during the
AM or PM peak hours under Existing conditions:
9 – US 101 Northbound Ramps & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
10 – El Camino Real & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
18 – East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
31 – Fair Oaks Avenue & Halcyon Road (at LOS D)
32 – Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road
Of the locations listed above, several are unsignalized intersections that meet peak hour traffic
signal warrant criteria, as follows:
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
New daily roadway traffic counts were taken in November 2019, two weekday counts at each
location, and compared to daily roadway counts taken in May 2012. Figure 3.3 presents the existing
daily roadway volumes at the study intersections.
Item 9.b. - Page 389
Item 9.b. - Page 390
Item 9.b. - Page 391
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 27
Table 3.2 presents a summary of the prior 2012 average daily traffic (ADT) and current 2019
roadway volumes and LOS at each roadway segment.
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
As presented in Table 3.2, all study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing
Conditions. There are no roadway segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
2012
#Street Segment Facility Type Past ADT Average ADT LOS
1 E. Grand Avenue west of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 21,630 19,770 A
2 E. Grand Avenue east of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,600 19,220 A
3 E. Grand Avenue west of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,630 15,710 A
4 E. Grand Avenue east of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 19,610 17,400 A
5 E. Grand Avenue east of US 101 NB Ramps Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 24,090 19,650 A
6 East Branch Street east of Traffic Way Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,490 13,700 C
7 East Branch Street east of Crown Hill Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 11,410 10,980 C
8 Huasna Road east of SR 227 Two Lane Collector 6,600 8,190 C
9 Huasna Road east of City Limits Two Lane Collector - 5,080 A
10 SR 227 south of Tally Ho Road Two Lane Highway 3,300 3,860 B
11 SR 227 south of Royal Oak Place Two Lane Highway 1,880 1,950 A
12 Corbert Canyon Road north of SR 227 Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 1,500 3,610 A
13 North Halcyon Road north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,900 9,740 B
14 Elm Street south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 10,250 A
15 El Camino Real north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 2,310 A
16 S. Halcyon Road south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 17,280 14,360 A
17 S. Halcyon Road north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 12,920 A
18 S. Halcyon Road south of The Pike Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 6,700 8,530 A
19 Fair Oaks Avenue east of S. Halcyon Road Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,220 8,800 A
20 Fair Oaks Avenue east of Valley Road Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,800 11,350 A
21 Valley Road south of Fair Oaks Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 5,900 7,620 A
22 Traffic Way south of Branch Street Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 13,180 10,770 A
23 West Branch Street north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 3,900 3,180 A
24 West Branch Street west of Brisco Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 13,900 12,810 A
25 West Branch Street east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,000 13,540 C
26 Rancho Pkwy. north of W. Branch Street Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,400 8,390 A
27 Old Oak Park north of Noyes Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,090 1,470 A
28 Noyes Road north of Old Oak Park Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,960 6,210 A
29 Oak Park Boulevard south of El Camino Real Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 20,400 16,060 A
30 Oak Park Boulevard south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,490 11,030 A
31 Oak Park Boulevard north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,850 9,350 A
32 James Way west of Oak Park Boulevard Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 7,710 6,160 A
33 James Way east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 6,340 6,110 A
34 James Way west of Talley Ho Road Two Lane Collector 3,470 3,570 A
35 El Camino Real west of Brisco Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,630 4,610 A
36 Farroll Avenue east of Oak Park Street Two Lane Collector 4,820 4,850 A
37 Branch Mill Road east of E. Cherry Avenue Two Lane Collector 1,710 1,690 A
2019
Item 9.b. - Page 392
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 28
3.3 Truck Routes
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles
through and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum
annoyance to residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for
large trucks, known as STAA trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on t he
National Network including the Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 highway
through the City of Arroyo Grande and statewide is a National Truck Network. California State
Route 1 is a California Legal Truck Network, north of City of Arroyo Grande passing through the
San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access Arroyo Grande is SR 227. SR 227 north of
Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck Network and the California Legal Advisory
Truck Route. The following list of streets is the approved Truck Routes in Arroyo Grande:
Barnett Street, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Branch Mill Road, from East Cherry Avenue to the Easterly City Limit
Brisco Road, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Corbett Canyon Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
East Branch Street, from Highway 101 Overpass to East Branch Street/Crown Hill
East Cherry Avenue, from Traffic Way to Branch Mill Road
East Grand Avenue, from Highway 101 Overpass to the W esterly City Limit
El Camino Real, from Oak Park Boulevard to Barnett Street
Fair Oaks Avenue, from Halcyon Road to Traffic Way
Halcyon Road, from El Camino Real to the Southerly City Limit
Huasna Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
Nelson Street, from Traffic Way to South Mason Street
Oak Park Boulevard, from El Camino Real to City Limit
South Elm Street, from East Grand Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
South Mason Street, from Nelson Street to East Branch Street
The Pike, from the Westerly City Limit to Halcyon Road
Traffic Way, from East Branch Street to Highway 101
Valley Road, from Fair Oaks Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
Figure 3.4 presents a map of approved truck routes, provided by the City.
Item 9.b. - Page 393
FIGURE 3.4
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.4_TruckRoutes.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 09:46
TRUCK ROUTES
Item 9.b. - Page 394
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 30
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, presented in Figure 3.5.
The plan includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to
complete the partial network already in place in the City and County. The plan encourages the use
of walking and bicycling. The following functional classifications of bicycle facilities are utilized within
this document.
Class I Bike Path. Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-
of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic
minimized. Class I bikeways must be compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA). These bikeways are intended to provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational
opportunities as compared to facilities that share right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane. Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on
each side of a street or highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike
lanes ranges between four and six feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curb and
gutter). Bike lanes are demarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route. Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the
same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs
and shared lane marking pavement stencils. While Class III routes do not provide measures of
separation, they have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law,
bicycles are allowed on all roadways in California except on freeways when a suitable alternate
route exists. However, Class III bikeways serve to identify roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway. (No Bikeway Designation). A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not
officially designated as a bikeway. This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and
recreation. In some instances, entire street systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient
bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In other
cases, prior to designation as a bikeway, routes may need improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Separated Bikeways. Known as separated bikeways or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways
provide a separate travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the
roadway and are protected from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may
include, but is not limited to, grade separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical
barriers, or on-street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Highway Design Manual (HDM, July
2020). It is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as Class I, II,III, and IV should not be
construed as a hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other. Each class of bikeway has
its appropriate application.
Item 9.b. - Page 395
FIGURE 3.5
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.5_BikeMasterPlan.mxdPrint date: 30 Sep 2020 - 08:41
2012 BICYCLE & TRAILSMASTER PLAN
Item 9.b. - Page 396
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 32
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities” (2012) and National Association of City Transportation Officials
“Urban Bikeway Design Guide” are used as resources to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Bicycle Boulevard. Bicycle Boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in
order to prioritize bicycle safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
Slow traffic speed and low volume.
Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the
roadway is a priority route for bicyclists.
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For
instance, diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block, but discourage
through traffic by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also ca lm traffic and improve
pedestrian safety as well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle Boulevards are generally applicable to
local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a
designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane
and/or parking lane. A buffered bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered
preferential lanes (section 3D-01). Buffered bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the
traveled way, allow room for bicyclists to pass without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and
can be used to provide a buffer between on-street parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes
are ideal for streets with extra lanes or extra lane width, and along roadways with higher travel
speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green Colored Bike Facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle
lane through an intersection or transition trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane
markings. The Federal Highway Administration has issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15,
2011 for the optional use of green colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.)
Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the
crosswalk at signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to
motorists by getting ahead of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle
incursion into crosswalks. Bike Boxes also improve safety for conflicts with right-turning vehicles
when the traffic signal turns green. Bike boxes can be utilized to facilitate left turn positioning and
gives priority to cyclists.
Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”) help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use the
full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane
markings help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and
Item 9.b. - Page 397
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 33
a bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily
recommended on low-speed streets.
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as
Class II and Class III bikeways. The city also has short segments of off-street trails typically
consisting of soft surface (decomposed granite) materials. The trails are typically situated in open
space along a creek tributary. The two exceptions are trails located along Equestrian Way and
Grace Lane which are decomposed granite paths located behind the curb. These do not meet Class
I Bike Path standards (10-foot paved path with 2-foot shoulders, or 12-foot paved path).
Figure 3.6 presents the existing sidewalk inventory, provided by the City. There are gaps in the
sidewalk network; a Pedestrian Safety Review conducted by ITS Berkeley in 2010 and the Draft
Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan identifies some areas where there are opportunities for
improvement. The ITS study focused on key intersections throughout the City and suggested
recommendations that could improve the pedestrian safety crossing large streets with many lanes
of traffic. The Draft Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan focused on multimodal improvements
along the Halcyon Road corridor, connecting Arroyo Grande Hospital, residences, and the
elementary school. Locations near and between residences, schools, parks, retail centers, and City
services should provide adequate sidewalks and marked crossings.
Figure 3.7 presents the existing bikeway by classification along arterial and collector roadways
throughout the City. There are gaps in the network of bicycle facilities. Arterials and collectors that
are north-south roadways which do not have bicycle facilities, include portions of Elm Street,
Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road, Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park Boulevard.
Arterials and collectors that are east-west roadways which do not have bicycle facilities include
portions of Farroll Avenue, E. Grand Avenue, E. Branch Street, and E. Cherry Avenue. Subsequent
Bicycle LTS analysis is included.
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the
City for active transportation modes. As part of this Circulation Element update, roadway facilities
will be identified where it is possible to modify the existing cross-section and increase the active
transportation components for pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed Draft Circulation
Element Policies are requirements to prepare a Pedestrian Master Plan and update the existing
Bicycle and Trails Master Plan. It is proposed for the bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment
of bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) will be required to specifically evaluate the performance of
the existing bicycle system and to help identify bicycle facility improvements.
Item 9.b. - Page 398
FIGURE 3.6
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.6_SidewalkInventory.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 10:33
SIDEWALK INVENTORY
Item 9.b. - Page 399
Fair Oaks
Avenue
James Wa
y
R o d e o D riveEl C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike ValleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill R o adFarroll Avenue
Brisc
o
Road Rancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h S treetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest
B
r
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Cherry
Ave
n
ue
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
Courtland Street£¤101
£¤101
FIGURE 3.7
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/28/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.7_AGExBikeways.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 11:47
Legend
US 101
City Limits
Roads
Bike Facility
Class I
Class II
Class III
Gap
Bike Lane Gap
Directional Gap
Directional Gap
Bike Lane Fading
Severe Bike Lane
Fading
EXISTING BIKEWAYSAND GAPS MAP
Item 9.b. - Page 400
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 36
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis
Mineta Transportation Institute criteria was applied to roadway segments with bike lanes (with and
without on-street parking) and roadway segments without bike lanes (mixed traffic segments) to
determine existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress, presented in Figure 3.8. As shown, the majority of
segments along major roads (arterials and collectors) within the City of Arroyo Grande can be
considered high stress (LTS 3 or 4). Even with the presence of bike lanes, the high stress nature of
roadway segments within the City are primarily due to roadway speed limits of 35 miles per hour or
greater, and roadways with three or more total travel lanes. For those roadways with speed limits
lower than 35 mph, lack of adequate bike lane striping or physical separation between cyclists and
vehicles (i.e., buffers) results in high stress conditions. In addition, lack of adequate bicycle
protection (i.e., bike pockets) at intersections with lengthy vehicle right turn pockets, or gaps in bike
lane striping at intersection approaches, result in high stress conditions at all intersections along
major roads within the City of Arroyo Grande.
Other factors were noted as contributing to high stress conditions, including quality and condition of
existing bike lane striping and gaps in striping along segments on either side of the roadway.
Segments with significant bike lane striping fading along existing Class II bicycle routes were noted
at the following locations:
West Branch Street between Oak Park Boulevard and Camino Mercado
El Camino Real between Hillcrest Drive and Brisco Road
Oak Park Boulevard Between Ash Street and The Pike
The Pick between Oak Park Boulevard and Elm Street
Valley Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Castillo Del Mar
Major gaps along existing Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike
lanes, or bike lanes only in one direction) occur at the following locations:
East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and Grande Foods Market
Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
Vehicle on-street parking is also a contributor to high stress conditions for cyclists, and is allowed
on the majority of the City’s arterials and collectors.
LTS inputs and scores are provided in Appendix D.
Item 9.b. - Page 401
Fair Oaks
Avenue
James Wa
y
R o d e o D riveEl C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike ValleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill R o adFarroll Avenue
Brisc
o
Road Rancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h S treetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest
B
r
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Cherry
Ave
n
ue
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
W
a
y
Courtland Street£¤101
£¤101
FIGURE 3.8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/28/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.8_AGBikeLTS_rev2.mxdPrint date: 30 Sep 2020 - 08:36
Legend
LTS
1 (Low Stress)
2 (Low-Medium
Stress)
3 (Medium-High
Stress)
4 (High Stress)
US 101
City Limits
Roads
MAJOR ROADS BICYCLELEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS (LTS)
Item 9.b. - Page 402
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 38
3.6 Public Transportation
The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCoTransit),
a branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SoCo Transit will merge with
SLORTA early 2021. Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 serve major arterial roadways in the City as shown
in Figure 3.9. The Avila-Pismo Trolley (not shown on Figure) connects to SoCo Transit Routes at
the Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town Center/Walmart, and
Ramona Gardens Park, and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium Outlets.
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande
The following Route descriptions, and the above Figure, are from the South County Transit Short-
Range Transit Plan (December 23, 2019).
Route 21 provides hourly service between 6:29 AM and 7:29 PM on Weekdays, 7:29 AM and 7:29
PM on Saturdays, and 7:29 AM and 6:29 PM on Sundays. The route consists of a large clockwise
loop traveling south on James Way and West Branch serving Arroyo Grande, west on Grand
Avenue serving Grover Beach, and north on Price Street and US 101 to complete a smaller
counter-clockwise loop serving Pismo and Shell Beach. This route connects with RTA Route 10 at
the top of the hour at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets (Pismo Beach Outlets), and with Routes
24, 27, and 28 at Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in Grover Beach at 29 minutes after the
hour.
Route 24 provides service hourly from 6:29 AM to 7:29 PM on weekdays, 7:29 AM to 7:29 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:29 AM to 6:29 PM on Sundays. This loop route serves the core of Pismo Beach,
Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande primarily in a counter -clockwise direction. It is largely aligned
with Route 21, except that Route 24 adds service to downtown Arroyo Grande but does not serve
Item 9.b. - Page 403
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 39
the Shell Beach area of Pismo Beach. From the Pismo Beach Outlets, the route travels northwest
towards Pismo Beach circling south down Highway 1 to Ramona Garden Park Transit C enter in
Grover Beach. The route then travels east on Grand Avenue, north towards Arroyo Grande, and
west looping back towards the Town Center/Walmart stop before returning to the Pismo Beach
Outlets.
Route 27 provides hourly service from 6:03 AM to 8:13 PM on weekdays only. This route travels in
clockwise direction serving Arroyo Grande, Oceano and the eastern portions of Grover Beach. This
route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Gardens at 29 minutes after the hour and with
Route 28 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Route 28 provides hourly service from 6:20 AM to 8:14 PM on weekdays, 7:32 AM to 8:14 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:32 AM to 7:14 PM on Sundays. This route travels in a counter-clockwise direction
serving the same route as Route 27 in reverse order (except for one block around Long Branch
Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard). This route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Garden
Park at 29 minutes after the hour and with Route 27 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Avila-Pismo Trolley runs April through September during holidays, weekends, and Fridays. Hourly
service is generally provided between 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM with hours extending to 9:00 PM during
June, July, and August. The trolley connects with SoCo Transit Routes 21 and 24 and RTA 10 at
the Pismo Beach Outlets at the top of each hour. No fare is charged on this service.
RTA Route 10 provides hourly regional service between San Luis Obispo to Santa Maria. SoCo
Transit is connected to other cities by RTA Route 10. RTA Route 10 makes stops in Arroyo Grande
at E. Grand Avenue at El Camino Real and El Camino Real at Halcyon Park and Ride.
3.7 Rail
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The
nearest Amtrak station is located in City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of the City of Arroyo
Grande. The primary access to the station is on W. Grand Avenue east of Highway 1. The SoCo
Transit Bus Route 21 provides service to the railway station for City of Arroyo Grande.
3.8 Air
Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. The SoCo Transit Bus route 21
provides service to this airport for City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational
activities and is accessible by Highway 1 via W. Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the
City of San Luis Obispo about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by two commercial
airlines providing services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Francisco, and
Seattle. It is also home to full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is
located on the west side of SR 227, about 2 miles east of US 101.
Item 9.b. - Page 404
Arroyo Grande Circulation Element | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Martin Inouye
Martin.Inouye@ghd.com
Todd Tregenza
Todd.Tregenza@ghd.com
916.782.8688
Item 9.b. - Page 405
APPENDIX B
Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Policy Consistency Tables
Item 9.b. - Page 406
Item 9.b. - Page 407
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-1
Table B-1. Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Consistency with the Clean Air Plan
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
T-2B. Regional Transit Improvements.
Improving transit service and facilities can
attract individuals to use public transit
instead of a private automobile. As transit
ridership increases, roadway congestion
and emissions decrease.
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and
revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network of
complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements. Consider alternative improvements to traditional
street, highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards,
which maximize access to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent
mobility to all roadway users. These improvements may include treatments that
improve the safety and/or comfort of active transportation and transit users, such as
consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets), green paint for conflict markings,
buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two-stage turns, and other alternative
striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City Council
approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT5. Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation
system and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such
as safe and uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of
greenhouse as, air, and noise pollution, and access bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
facilities.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development. Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments”
and coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family
residential and special needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and
near Office, Regional Commercial, Business Park, and major Community Facility
areas.
CT5-2.1 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that
serve regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial areas
and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street missed use and
commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way and
Rancho Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and
W. Branch Street corridors.
CT5-9 Travel Demand Management. Consider ways to shift travel demand away
from the peak period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies,
especially in situations where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators
(e.g., large retail developments on highway corridor). Strategies to consider include:
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
designed to improve transit service and
facilities. Implementation of these policies,
along with various other policies contained
in the GPCEU, would support
implementation of measure T-2B.
Item 9.b. - Page 408
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-2
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
(a) Requiring employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use;
(b) Requiring shuttle service to major events and destinations;
(c) Requiring events to occur at off-peak hours;
(d) Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large
shopping or office centers; and
(e) Performing periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control
system with emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to
optimize flow along arterial corridors.
CT12. Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit
operators and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of
all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators. In cooperation with the Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit
system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or
disabled persons.
CT12-2.1. The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on
arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments
CT12-2.2. Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement
transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
CT12-3 Employers. The City should encourage major employers to promote use of
public transit and/or provide van/carpools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex
time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
Item 9.b. - Page 409
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-3
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
CT12-5 Marketing. Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing
and promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit
services available for local and regional trips.
T-3. Bicycling and Bikeway
Enhancements. This measure improves air
quality in two ways. First, it supports the
Voluntary Trip Reduction Program (T1C) by
providing a safe and inexpensive way for
employees to commute to work or school.
In addition, bike infrastructure
improvements will increase safety and
convenience for those commuters not
affected by T1C. The measure also
facilitates cycling for shopping and other trip
purposes.
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and
revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network of
complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements. Consider alternative improvements to traditional
street, highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards,
which maximize access to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent
mobility to all roadway users. These improvements may include treatments that
improve the safety and/or comfort of active transportation and transit users, such as
consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets), green paint for conflict markings,
buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two-stage turns, and other alternative
striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City Council
approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT5 Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation
system and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such
as safe and uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of
greenhouse as, air, and noise pollution, and access bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
facilities.
CT8 Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle
Improvements Map (Figure 3-3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s
Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities,
improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the
Bicycle & Trails Master Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization. Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all
areas of the City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize
connections with schools, parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1. The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle
facilities as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity. New development that lacks connectivity to
the existing bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
designed to improve promote bicycle
access within the community and
surrounding areas. Implementation of
these policies, along with various other
policies contained in the GPCEU, would
support implementation of measure T-3.
Item 9.b. - Page 410
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-4
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
missing offsite gaps per the City’s Bicycle and Trails Master plan to the maximum
extent feasible. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-2.1 New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure.
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance. Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan and
proposed improvements (Figure 3-3 and 3-4) in accordance with the City’s Standard
Specifications & Engineering Standards, State Engineering Standards &
Specifications, and the National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO)
Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
CT8-3.1. Update the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan, to incorporate pedestrian travel, in accordance with State
guidelines and industry best practices.
CT8-3.2. Ensure that the future updates to the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master
Plan maintains consistency with the requirements of the Streets and Highway
Code in order to be eligible for further funding for improvements from the State,
such as the Active Transportation Program (ATP).
CT8-4 Class I Bike Path. An essential part of developing a low-stress bicycle
network, these off-street paths and trails are designated for both pedestrian and
bicycle use.
CT8-5 Class II Bike lanes. On-Street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated
from automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, class II bike lanes
shall be provided to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto
lanes. When Class II bike lanes exceed LTS 3 (or operate low-stress network LTS
standard), the facility shall be converted to protected Class IV bikeway or a parallel
Class I to the maximum extent feasible.
CT8-6 Class III Bike Route. On-street auto lanes shared by both bicycles and
automobiles. In order to increase awareness and visibility of bicyclists sharing the
roadway with motorized vehicles, Class III bicycle facilities shall include respective
signage (Bikes May Use Full Lane) and markings such as shared lane markings
(sharrows) to the maximum extent feasible. When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS
3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the facility shall be converted to
dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Bike Boulevard. On local collectors where Class II bike lanes are not
present, on local streets where LTS 3 is exceeded, Class III bike routes should be
upgraded to the maximum extent feasible with features commensurate with a bicycle
boulevard. When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress
network LTS standard), the facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if
determined feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes. On-street separated bikeways reserved for
use by bicyclists only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and
sidewalks. Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or
two-way facilities on one side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete
curbs, landscaping, parking lanes, bollards, or other vertical elements.
Item 9.b. - Page 411
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-5
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
CT9. Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better
on all bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress network.
CT9-1 Designation of LTS Standards. The City shall designate and adopt context-
specific LTS standards that exceed the general LTS 3 goal, including designation of a
low-stress bicycle network of complimentary LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities, as part of an
Active Transportation Plan, and/or through Safe Routes to School Plan(s).
CT9-2 Degradation of LTS. New development which is projected to degrade bicycle
LTS below the designated standard, or further exacerbate conditions already below
the standard shall be required to make transportation improvements that offset the
level of degradation to the maximum extent feasible.
CT10-2.1. New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan. Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
into a Citywide Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode improvement
plan and policies.
CT11. Create safe and inviting environments for students, families, and staff to walk,
bicycle, and use public transportation to and from school.
CT11-1 Develop Safe Routes to School Plan(s). Develop a focused Safe Routes to
School Plan (or Plans) for all K-12 schools in Arroyo Grande to improve safe and
convenient walking and biking to school.
CT11-2 Designate Low-Stress Bicycle Network. Designate a low-stress bicycle
network that supports safe bicycle access to schools for all ages and abilities. A
network of LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities should be designated in the vicinity of schools
when preparing and updating Safe Routes to School Plans and/or the City’s Active
Transportation Plan.
CT11-3 Prioritize Active Transportation Network Improvements. Prioritize the
closure of gaps in the pedestrian network (sidewalks, crosswalks) and low-stress
bicycle network. Seek connections and paths between homes and schools, especially
where dead-end streets, cul-de-sacs, and other street patterns impede circulation.
Identify, improve, and formalize “shortcuts” and “goat paths” where feasible and
implement wayfinding.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of
all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
Item 9.b. - Page 412
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-6
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
T-4. Park and Ride Lots. Designed to
support the Trip Reduction Program, Park
and Ride (P&R) lots provide a staging area
for ridesharing activities
CT2. Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and
the City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1. Reduce VMT. Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of
significance, as established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation
impacts under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
CT12. Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit
operators and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of
all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators. In cooperation with the Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit
system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or
disabled persons.
CT12-2.1. The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on
arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments
CT12-2.2. Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement
transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
that support ride sharing and coordination
with other agencies, such as the SLORTA
and other transit operators, to promote
vehicle trip reduction. Implementation of
these policies, along with various other
policies contained in the GPCEU, would
support implementation of measure T-4.
Item 9.b. - Page 413
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-7
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
CT12-3 Employers. The City should encourage major employers to promote use of
public transit and/or provide van/carpools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex
time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
T-6. Traffic Flow Improvements. The goal
of this measure is to improve the road
system and infrastructure in a way that
increases its efficiency, reduces emissions,
and supports the other Transportation
Control Measures in this Plan. Peak hour
traffic management should also increase
pedestrian and bicyclist safety.
CT1. Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map
(Circulation Element Update Figure 2-2) as development occurs and as part of the
City’s Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation
facilities, improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance
with the Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards. Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and
State’s adopted Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each
classification. Variations and modifications in Standards and planned alignments may
be permitted with City Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director
approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1. Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards
appropriate to a designated connected system of “Scenic Streets & Highways”
for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT1-1.2. Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be
consistent with the Proposed Standard Cross Sections shown in Table 2-2
(reference).
CT1-2 Intersections. Roundabouts should be considered when evaluating new or
modified intersection controls as an alternative to intersection signalization. Protected
active transportation intersection elements should be considered when intersections
are improved along a protected (Class I or Class IV) bikeway route.
CT1-3 State Facilities. State facilities are to be designed and constructed per
Caltrans design standards or as mutually approved.
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets. 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn
lane, access management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike &
pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features:
minimum 110’ right of way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets. 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional
landscaped parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, some transit and other design features; minimum 86’ of right-of-way.
CT1-6 Collector Streets. 2 lanes with or without turn lane; access management, bike
and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features,
optional landscaped parkways & on-street parking where feasible; minimum 78’ of
right-of-way.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
designed to reduce vehicle congestion and
improve vehicle flow within the community.
Additional measures have also been
included to increase pedestrian and
bicyclist safety. Implementation of these
policies, along with various other policies
contained in the GPCEU, would support
implementation of measure T-6.
Item 9.b. - Page 414
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-8
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
CT1-7 Local Collector Streets. 2 lanes without a turn lane; bike and pedestrian
facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways and on-street parking where feasible; minimum 60’ right-of-way.
CT1-8 Local Streets. 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-
de-sac, or other special conditions; minimum 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and
revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network of
complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT1-9.1. Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience
of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of
consideration to automobiles.
CT1-9.2. Use roadway rehabilitation and maintenance projects as opportunities
to introduce or enhance multimodal facilities and amenities by making the best
use of available right of way, including narrowing travel lanes to standard
dimensions, striping new or enhanced bikeways, adding or enhancing
crosswalks, improving intersection markings, and other transportation “best
practices.”
CT1-9.3. Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects by closing gaps in
multimodal networks and enhancing the quality of multimodal facilities and
amenities.
CT1-9.4. Improve the existing street network to minimize nonmotorized and
transit travel times and improve the mobility experience of transit, bicycle, and
walking trips between new projects and surrounding land uses in an effort to
reduce vehicle trips.
CT1-9.5. Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists all
skill levels and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other mobility
limitations.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements. Consider alternative improvements to traditional
street, highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards,
which maximize access to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent
mobility to all roadway users. These improvements may include treatments that
improve the safety and/or comfort of active transportation and transit users, such as
consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets), green paint for conflict markings,
buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two-stage turns, and other alternative
Item 9.b. - Page 415
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-9
Applicable SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with SLOAPCD CAP
Transportation Control Measures
striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City Council
approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT1-11 Auto Circulation. Provide efficient citywide automobile circulation by
maintaining and, where necessary, improving local and regional roadway facilities.
CT1-12 Signal Operations. Provide and maintain coordinated traffic control systems
that move traffic within and through the City in an efficient and orderly manner.
Upgrade systems as technology evolves.
CT1-13 Safety. Maintain and periodically update a local roadway safety plan
consistent with state and federal Highway Safety Improvement Program requirements.
CT1-14 Access Management. Maintain and periodically update a local roadway
safety plan consistent with state and federal Highway Safety Improvement Program
requirements.
CT2. Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and
the City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1. Reduce VMT. Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of
significance, as established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation
impacts under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
Item 9.b. - Page 416
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-10
Table B-2. Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Consistency with the SLOCOG 2014 RTP/SCS
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
SCS 1. Improve mobility through a
combination of strategies and investments
to accommodate anticipated growth in
transportation demand and reduce current
and projected levels of congestion.
CT1. Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map
(Circulation Element Update Figure 2-2) as development occurs and as part of the
City’s Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation
facilities, improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance
with the Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards. Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and
State’s adopted Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each
classification. Variations and modifications in Standards and planned alignments may
be permitted with City Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director
approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1. Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards
appropriate to a designated connected system of “Scenic Streets & Highways”
for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT1-1.2. Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be
consistent with the Proposed Standard Cross Sections shown in Table 2-2
(reference).
CT1-2 Intersections. Roundabouts should be considered when evaluating new or
modified intersection controls as an alternative to intersection signalization. Protected
active transportation intersection elements should be considered when intersections
are improved along a protected (Class I or Class IV) bikeway route.
CT1-3 State Facilities. State facilities are to be designed and constructed per
Caltrans design standards or as mutually approved.
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets. 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn
lane, access management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike &
pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features:
minimum 110’ right of way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets. 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional
landscaped parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, some transit and other design features; minimum 86’ of right-of-way.
CT1-6 Collector Streets. 2 lanes with or without turn lane; access management, bike
and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features,
optional landscaped parkways & on-street parking where feasible; minimum 78’ of
right-of-way.
CT1-7 Local Collector Streets. 2 lanes without a turn lane; bike and pedestrian
facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways and on-street parking where feasible; minimum 60’ right-of-way.
CT1-8 Local Streets. 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-
de-sac, or other special conditions; minimum 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
and measures designed to implement
transportation improvements to address
existing and future planned growth.
Implementation of these measures, as well
as various other policies contained in the
GPCEU, would support implementation of
measure SCS 1.
Item 9.b. - Page 417
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-11
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed
and revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network
of complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements. Consider alternative improvements to traditional
street, highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards,
which maximize access to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent
mobility to all roadway users. These improvements may include treatments that
improve the safety and/or comfort of active transportation and transit users, such as
consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets), green paint for conflict markings,
buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two-stage turns, and other alternative
striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City Council
approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT5 Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation
system and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such
as safe and uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of
greenhouse as, air, and noise pollution, and access bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
facilities.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development. Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments”
and coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family
residential and special needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and
near Office, Regional Commercial, Business Park, and major Community Facility
areas.
CT5-2.1 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that
serve regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial areas
and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street missed use and
commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way and
Rancho Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and
W. Branch Street corridors.
CT5-9 Travel Demand Management. Consider ways to shift travel demand away
from the peak period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies,
especially in situations where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators
(e.g., large retail developments on highway corridor). Strategies to consider include:
(a) Requiring employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use;
(b) Requiring shuttle service to major events and destinations;
(c) Requiring events to occur at off-peak hours;
Item 9.b. - Page 418
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-12
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
(d) Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large
shopping or office centers; and
(e) Performing periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control
system with emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to
optimize flow along arterial corridors.
CT8. Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle
Improvements Map (Figure 3-3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s
Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities,
improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the
Bicycle & Trails Master Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization. Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all
areas of the City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize
connections with schools, parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1. The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle
facilities as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity. New development that lacks connectivity to
the existing bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete
missing offsite gaps per the City’s Bicycle and Trails Master plan to the maximum
extent feasible. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-2.1. New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure.
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance. Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan and
proposed improvements (Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4) in accordance with the City’s
Standard Specifications & Engineering Standards, State Engineering Standards &
Specifications, and the National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO)
Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
CT8-3.1. Update the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan, to incorporate pedestrian travel, in accordance with State
guidelines and industry best practices.
CT8-3.2. Ensure that the future updates to the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master
Plan maintains consistency with the requirements of the Streets and Highway
Code in order to be eligible for further funding for improvements from the State,
such as the Active Transportation Program (ATP).
CT8-4 Class I Bike Path. An essential part of developing a low-stress bicycle
network, these off-street paths and trails are designated for both pedestrian and
bicycle use.
CT8-5 Class II Bike lanes. On-Street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated
from automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, class II bike lanes
shall be provided to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto
lanes. When Class II bike lanes exceed LTS 3 (or operate low-stress network LTS
standard), the facility shall be converted to protected Class IV bikeway or a parallel
Class I to the maximum extent feasible.
Item 9.b. - Page 419
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-13
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT8-6 Class III Bike Route. On-street auto lanes shared by both bicycles and
automobiles. In order to increase awareness and visibility of bicyclists sharing the
roadway with motorized vehicles, Class III bicycle facilities shall include respective
signage (Bikes May Use Full Lane) and markings such as shared lane markings
(sharrows) to the maximum extent feasible. When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS
3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the facility shall be converted to
dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Bike Boulevard. On Local Collectors where Class II bike lanes are
not present, on local streets where LTS 3 is exceeded, Class III bike routes should be
upgraded to the maximum extent feasible with features commensurate with a bicycle
boulevard. When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress
network LTS standard), the facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if
determined feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes. On-street separated bikeways reserved for
use by bicyclists only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and
sidewalks. Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or
two-way facilities on one side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete
curbs, landscaping, parking lanes, bollards, or other vertical elements.
CT9. Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better
on all bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress network.
CT9-1 Designation of LTS Standards. The City shall designate and adopt context-
specific LTS standards that exceed the general LTS 3 goal, including designation of a
low-stress bicycle network of complimentary LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities, as part of an
Active Transportation Plan, and/or through Safe Routes to School Plan(s).
CT9-2 Degradation of LTS. New development which is projected to degrade bicycle
LTS below the designated standard, or further exacerbate conditions already below
the standard shall be required to make transportation improvements that offset the
level of degradation to the maximum extent feasible.
CT10-2.1. New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall
not obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan. Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
into a Citywide Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode improvement
plan and policies.
CT11. Create safe and inviting environments for students, families, and staff to walk,
bicycle, and use public transportation to and from school.
CT11-1 Develop Safe Routes to School Plan(s). Develop a focused Safe Routes to
School Plan (or Plans) for all K-12 schools in Arroyo Grande to improve safe and
convenient walking and biking to school.
CT11-2 Designate Low-Stress Bicycle Network. Designate a low-stress bicycle
network that supports safe bicycle access to schools for all ages and abilities. A
network of LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities should be designated in the vicinity of schools
when preparing and updating Safe Routes to School Plans and/or the City’s Active
Transportation Plan.
Item 9.b. - Page 420
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-14
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT11-3 Prioritize Active Transportation Network Improvements. Prioritize the
closure of gaps in the pedestrian network (sidewalks, crosswalks) and low-stress
bicycle network. Seek connections and paths between homes and schools, especially
where dead-end streets, cul-de-sacs, and other street patterns impede circulation.
Identify, improve, and formalize “shortcuts” and “goat paths” where feasible and
implement wayfinding.
CT12. Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit
operators and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance
of all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators. In cooperation with the Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit
system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or
disabled persons.
CT12-2.1. The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on
arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments
CT12-2.2. Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement
transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
CT12-3 Employers. The City should encourage major employers to promote use of
public transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex
time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
Item 9.b. - Page 421
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-15
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT12-5 Marketing. Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing
and promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit
services available for local and regional trips.
SCS 2. Facilitate the development and
economic viability of communities in ways
that reduce trips and travel distances.
CT2. Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and
the City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1. Reduce VMT. Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of
significance, as established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation
impacts under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance
of all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators. In cooperation with the Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit
system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or
disabled persons.
CT12-2.1. The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on
arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments
CT12-2.2. Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement
transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
CT12-3 Employers. The City should encourage major employers to promote use of
public transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex
time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
and measures designed to facilitate
improvements that would reduce VMT.
Implementation of these measures, as well
as various other policies contained in the
GPCEU, would support implementation of
measure SCS 2.
Item 9.b. - Page 422
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-16
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
SCS 3. Maintain and improve the regional
transportation system in a manner which
assists development and implementation of
local general plans that support livable
community concepts and efforts.
CT1. Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map
(Circulation Element Update Figure 2-2) as development occurs and as part of the
City’s Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation
facilities, improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance
with the Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards. Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and
State’s adopted Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each
classification. Variations and modifications in Standards and planned alignments may
be permitted with City Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director
approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1. Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards
appropriate to a designated connected system of “Scenic Streets & Highways”
for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT1-1.2. Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be
consistent with the Proposed Standard Cross Sections shown in Table 2-2
(reference).
CT1-2 Intersections. Roundabouts should be considered when evaluating new or
modified intersection controls as an alternative to intersection signalization. Protected
active transportation intersection elements should be considered when intersections
are improved along a protected (Class I or Class IV) bikeway route.
CT1-3 State Facilities. State facilities are to be designed and constructed per
Caltrans design standards or as mutually approved.
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets. 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn
lane, access management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike &
pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features:
minimum 110’ right of way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets. 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional
landscaped parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, some transit and other design features; minimum 86’ of right-of-way.
CT1-6 Collector Streets. 2 lanes with or without turn lane; access management, bike
and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features,
optional landscaped parkways & on-street parking where feasible; minimum 78’ of
right-of-way.
CT1-7 Local Collector Streets. 2 lanes without a turn lane; bike and pedestrian
facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways and on-street parking where feasible; minimum 60’ right-of-way.
CT1-8 Local Streets. 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-
de-sac, or other special conditions; minimum 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed
and revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
and measures to improve regional
transportation. Implementation of these
measures, as well as various other policies
contained in the GPCEU, would support
implementation of measure SCS 3.
Item 9.b. - Page 423
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-17
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
of complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT1-9.1. Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience
of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of
consideration to automobiles.
CT1-9.2. Use roadway rehabilitation and maintenance projects as opportunities
to introduce or enhance multimodal facilities and amenities by making the best
use of available right of way, including narrowing travel lanes to standard
dimensions, striping new or enhanced bikeways, adding or enhancing
crosswalks, improving intersection markings, and other transportation “best
practices.”
CT1-9.3. Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects by closing gaps in
multimodal networks and enhancing the quality of multimodal facilities and
amenities.
CT1-9.4. Improve the existing street network to minimize nonmotorized and
transit travel times and improve the mobility experience of transit, bicycle, and
walking trips between new projects and surrounding land uses in an effort to
reduce vehicle trips.
CT1-9.5. Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists all
skill levels and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other mobility
limitations.
CT1-10 Alternative Improvements. Consider alternative improvements to traditional
street, highway, and intersection construction that may vary from City standards,
which maximize access to active transportation modes and/or provide equivalent
mobility to all roadway users. These improvements may include treatments that
improve the safety and/or comfort of active transportation and transit users, such as
consideration of travel lane reductions (road diets), green paint for conflict markings,
buffered bicycle lanes, bicycle boxes for two-stage turns, and other alternative
striping, signage, or physical design. Alternatives may be permitted with City Council
approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where delegated.
CT1-11 Auto Circulation. Provide efficient citywide automobile circulation by
maintaining and, where necessary, improving local and regional roadway facilities.
CT1-12 Signal Operations. Provide and maintain coordinated traffic control systems
that move traffic within and through the City in an efficient and orderly manner.
Upgrade systems as technology evolves.
CT1-13 Safety. Maintain and periodically update a local roadway safety plan
consistent with state and federal Highway Safety Improvement Program
requirements.
Item 9.b. - Page 424
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-18
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT1-14 Access Management. Minimize, to the maximum extent feasible, the number
of access points along arterial roadways, including by consolidating or relocating
driveways to provide for more efficient traffic movement.
CT2. Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and
the City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1 Reduce VMT. Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of
significance, as established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation
impacts under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
SCS 4. Reduce vehicle miles of travel
related emissions by encouraging the use
of public transit and other alternative forms
of transportation and by supporting and
encouraging the adoption of general plans
and zoning that promote more compact
communities.
SCS 6. Provide more transportation
choices. Develop safe, reliable and
economical transportation choices to
decrease household transportation costs,
reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign
oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and promote public health.
CT2. Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and
the City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1. Reduce VMT. Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of
significance, as established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating transportation
impacts under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
CT12. Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit
operators and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance
of all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators. In cooperation with the Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit
system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or
disabled persons.
CT12-2.1. The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on
arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in connection
with new developments
CT12-2.2. Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement
transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
and measures to promote alternative
means of transportation and reduce VMT.
Implementation of these measures, as well
as various other policies contained in the
GPCEU, would support implementation of
measures SCS 4 and SCS 6.
Item 9.b. - Page 425
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-19
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT12-3 Employers. The City should encourage major employers to promote use of
public transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex
time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
SCS 13. Maintain and enhance quality
aesthetic experiences along transportation
corridors and surrounding landscapes
through mitigation planting, urban
streetscape improvements, removal of
billboards, and other visual enhancements.
CT1-1 Standards. Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and
State’s adopted Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each
classification. Variations and modifications in Standards and planned alignments may
be permitted with City Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director
approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1. Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards
appropriate to a designated connected system of “Scenic Streets & Highways”
for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT1-1.2. Update City’s Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies to be
consistent with the Proposed Standard Cross Sections shown in Table 2-2
(reference).
CT5-4 Community Design. Utilize the circulation system as a positive element of
community design, including street trees and landscaped parkways and medians,
special streetscape features in Mixed Use corridors and Village Core, and
undergrounding of utilities, particularly along major streets.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
and measures to improve the circulation
system, including specific design
guidelines and landscaping standards.
Implementation of these measures, as well
as various other policies contained in the
GPCEU, would support implementation of
measure SCS 13.
TL-3. Expand Transit Network. Work with
the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) and
transit service providers to expand the local
transit network (i.e., additional routes or
stops, and/or expanded hours of operation)
based on the greatest demand for service.
TL-4. Increase Transit Service
Frequency/Speed. Work with the RTA and
transit services providers to increase transit
service frequency (i.e., reducing headways)
by identifying routes where increased bus
frequency would improve service.
CT2. Maintain & reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with SB 743 and
the City’s adopted Policy.
CT2-1 Reduce VMT. Periodically update VMT baselines and thresholds of
significance, as established in the City’s VMT Policy, for evaluating
transportation impacts under CEQA pursuant to SB 743.
CT12. Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit
operators and providers.
CT12-1 Transit Stops. Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance
of all residential and non-residential uses within the City.
CT12-1.1. New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit
stops shall be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum
¼ mi walking distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum
extent feasible.
CT12-1.2. Where transit stop locations conflict with protected bikeways, consider
“best practices” referenced in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Urban
Street Design Guide, and/or Transit Street Design Guide, such as floating transit
islands, to minimize conflicts between modes.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
and measures designed to improve transit
service and facilities. Implementation of
these policies, along with various other
policies contained in the GPCEU, would
support implementation of measures TL-3
and TL-4.
Item 9.b. - Page 426
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-20
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT12-1.3. Along high-quality transit routes, improve stops to include stop
elements such as transit shelters, bicycle parking, lighting, and level boarding,
consistent with “best practices” referenced in the NACTO Transit Street Design
Guide, Urban Bikeway Design Guide, and/or Urban Street Design Guide.
CT12-2 Transit Providers/Operators. In cooperation with the Regional Transit
Authority (RTA) or other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit
system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or
disabled persons.
CT12-2.1. The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on
arterial and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments
CT12-2.2. Work with transit operators to identify opportunities to implement
transit intelligent transportation systems (ITS) elements such as transit signal
priority, queue jump, and live passenger information and wayfinding.
CT12-3 Employers. The City should encourage major employers to promote use of
public transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex
time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT12-4 School Districts. Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and
other educational institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system,
including parking and loading areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit
providers, public parks, and maintenance and storage facilities, and coordination with
safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
TL-1. Bicycle Network. Continue to
improve and expand the City’s bicycle
network and infrastructure.
TL-2. Pedestrian Network. Continue to
improve and expand the City’s pedestrian
network.
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed
and revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network
of complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT1-9.1. Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience
of pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of
consideration to automobiles.
CT1-9.2. Use roadway rehabilitation and maintenance projects as opportunities
to introduce or enhance multimodal facilities and amenities by making the best
use of available right of way, including narrowing travel lanes to standard
dimensions, striping new or enhanced bikeways, adding or enhancing
crosswalks, improving intersection markings, and other transportation “best
practices”.
Consistent. The GPCEU guiding policies
include numerous implementing policies
designed to promote improved bicycling
and pedestrian access within the
community and surrounding areas.
Implementation of these policies, along
with various other policies contained in the
GPCEU, would support implementation of
measures TL-1 and TL-2.
Item 9.b. - Page 427
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-21
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT1-9.3. Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects by closing gaps in
multimodal networks and enhancing the quality of multimodal facilities and
amenities.
CT1-9.4. Improve the existing street network to minimize nonmotorized and
transit travel times and improve the mobility experience of transit, bicycle, and
walking trips between new projects and surrounding land uses in an effort to
reduce vehicle trips.
CT1-9.5. Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists all
skill levels and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other mobility
limitations.
CT8. Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle
Improvements Map (Figure 3-3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s
Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities,
improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the
Bicycle & Trails Master Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization. Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all
areas of the City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize
connections with schools, parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1. The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle
facilities as part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity. New development that lacks connectivity to
the existing bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete
missing offsite gaps per the City’s Bicycle and Trails Master plan to the maximum
extent feasible. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-2.1. New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure.
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance. Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan and
proposed improvements (Figure 3-3 and Figure 3-4) in accordance with the City’s
Standard Specifications & Engineering Standards, State Engineering Standards &
Specifications, and the National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO)
Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
CT8-3.1. Update the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in the form of an Active
Transportation Plan, to incorporate pedestrian travel, in accordance with State
guidelines and industry best practices.
CT8-3.2. Ensure that the future updates to the adopted Bicycle & Trails Master
Plan maintains consistency with the requirements of the Streets and Highway
Code in order to be eligible for further funding for improvements from the State,
such as the Active Transportation Program (ATP).
CT8-4 Class I Bike Path. An essential part of developing a low-stress bicycle
network, these off-street paths and trails are designated for both pedestrian and
bicycle use.
Item 9.b. - Page 428
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-22
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT8-5 Class II Bike lanes. On-Street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated
from automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, class II bike lanes
shall be provided to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto
lanes. When Class II bike lanes exceed LTS 3 (or operate low-stress network LTS
standard), the facility shall be converted to protected Class IV bikeway or a parallel
Class I to the maximum extent feasible.
CT8-6 Class III Bike Route. On-street auto lanes shared by both bicycles and
automobiles. In order to increase awareness and visibility of bicyclists sharing the
roadway with motorized vehicles, Class III bicycle facilities shall include respective
signage (Bikes May Use Full Lane) and markings such as shared lane markings
(sharrows) to the maximum extent feasible. When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS
3 (or operative low-stress network LTS standard), the facility shall be converted to
dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Bike Boulevard. On Local Collectors where Class II bike lanes are
not present, on local streets where LTS 3 is exceeded, Class III bike routes should be
upgraded to the maximum extent feasible with features commensurate with a bicycle
boulevard. When Class III bike facilities exceed LTS 3 (or operative low-stress
network LTS standard), the facility shall be converted to dedicated Class II lanes if
determined feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes. On-street separated bikeways reserved for
use by bicyclists only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and
sidewalks. Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or
two-way facilities on one side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete
curbs, landscaping, parking lanes, bollards, or other vertical elements.
CT9. Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better
on all bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress network.
CT9-1 Designation of LTS Standards. The City shall designate and adopt context-
specific LTS standards that exceed the general LTS 3 goal, including designation of a
low-stress bicycle network of complimentary LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities, as part of an
Active Transportation Plan, and/or through Safe Routes to School Plan(s).
CT9-2 Degradation of LTS. New development which is projected to degrade bicycle
LTS below the designated standard, or further exacerbate conditions already below
the standard shall be required to make transportation improvements that offset the
level of degradation to the maximum extent feasible.
CT10-2.1. New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall
not obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan. Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan
into a Citywide Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode improvement
plan and policies.
CT11. Create safe and inviting environments for students, families, and staff to walk,
bicycle, and use public transportation to and from school.
Item 9.b. - Page 429
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-23
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
CT11-1 Develop Safe Routes to School Plan(s). Develop a focused Safe Routes to
School Plan (or Plans) for all K-12 schools in Arroyo Grande to improve safe and
convenient walking and biking to school.
CT11-2 Designate Low-Stress Bicycle Network. Designate a low-stress bicycle
network that supports safe bicycle access to schools for all ages and abilities. A
network of LTS 1 and LTS 2 facilities should be designated in the vicinity of schools
when preparing and updating Safe Routes to School Plans and/or the City’s Active
Transportation Plan.
CT11-3 Prioritize Active Transportation Network Improvements. Prioritize the
closure of gaps in the pedestrian network (sidewalks, crosswalks) and low-stress
bicycle network. Seek connections and paths between homes and schools, especially
where dead-end streets, cul-de-sacs, and other street patterns impede circulation.
Identify, improve, and formalize “shortcuts” and “goat paths” where feasible and
implement wayfinding.
TL-6. Parking Supply Management.
Reduce parking requirements in areas such
as the downtown where a variety of uses
and services are planned in close proximity
to each other and to transit.
TL-7. Public Parking Pricing. Establish
market-based pricing for public parking
spaces, where appropriate.
CT4. Establish and manage on street parking to serve the primary purposes of the
uses of each street while balancing the interferences that on-street parking may have
on the primarily purposes of those streets.
CT4-1 On-Street Parking. The City shall manage curb parking in business &
commercial districts to provide for high turnover & short-term use to those visiting
businesses and public facilities.
CT4-1.1. Management of on-street parking shall not preclude consideration of
converting on-street parking spaces to parklets.
CT4-2 Village Core Parking Lots. Develop adequate public or shared off-street
parking lots conveniently located behind and beside buildings in the Village Core and
East Grand Avenue corridor, consistent with area design guidelines.
CT4-3 Parking in-lieu districts. Support parking district(s) to collect in-lieu fees from
new development to construct public parking where parking requirements cannot be
met.
CT4-4 Parking in Industrial Areas. Encourage secure off-street parking for tractor-
trailer rigs in industrial land use areas where feasible.
CT4-5 Parking in Agricultural Areas. Discourage on-street parking in Agricultural
areas to enhance visibility and minimize trespassing.
Consistent. The GPCEU policies include
numerous measures that support parking
supply management, including use of
alternative parking strategies, travel
demand management strategies, and a
parking incentive program (in-lieu fees).
Implementation of these policies, along
with various other policies contained in the
GPCEU, would support implementation of
measures TL-6 and TL-7.
TL-8. Electric Vehicle Network and
Alternative Fueling Stations. Continue to
work with the APCD, Central Coast Clean
Cities Coalition, and neighboring
jurisdictions to create and implement the
electric vehicle readiness plan.
TL-9. Smart Growth. Facilitate mixed-use,
higher density, and infill development near
existing or planned transit stops, in existing
CT1-9 Complete Streets. Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to
enable safe access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit
riders of all ages and abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed
and revised for design, construction, operation and maintenance to achieve a network
of complete streets. Optional features include landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the
movement of vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit,
Consistent. The GPCEU policies include
numerous measures that support
coordination with other agencies, such as
the SLORTA, related to smart growth and
the promotion of alternative means of
transportation. Implementation of these
policies, along with various other policies
contained in the GPCEU, would support
Item 9.b. - Page 430
City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element Update
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
B-24
Applicable 2014 SCS Policies Proposed General Plan Circulation Element Update Guiding Policies Consistency with 2014 SCS Policies
community centers/downtown, and in other
designated areas.
bicyclists, and pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification
and adjacent land use.
CT5. Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation
system and existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such
as safe and uncongested neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of
greenhouse as, air, and noise pollution, and access bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
facilities.
CT5-1 Government Code Consistency. Provide and maintain a citywide circulation
system that is correlated with planned land uses in the City and surrounding areas in
the region consistent with Government Code §65302.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development. Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments”
and coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family
residential and special needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and
near Office, Regional Commercial, Business Park, and major Community Facility
areas.
CT5-2.1. Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that
serve regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial areas
and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street missed use and
commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2. Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way and
Rancho Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and
W. Branch Street corridors.
CT5-3 High Density Development. Consider higher density allowance and reduced
parking requirements within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating
Development Code.
implementation of measures TL-8 and
TL-9.
Item 9.b. - Page 431
APPENDIX C
Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis and TAZ Modelling Output Files
Item 9.b. - Page 432
Item 9.b. - Page 433
Memorandum
The Power of Commitment
11144936 1
12 April 2021
To Emily Creel, SWCA Environmental Consultants
Copy to
From Rosanna Southern, EIT
Todd Tregenza, AICP
Tel 916-782-8688
Subject Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Methodology for IS/MND Project no. 11144936
Introduction
This memorandum has been prepared to present a brief summary of the methodology for evaluating the
change in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for the update of the City of Arroyo Grand e Circulation Element. This
memorandum will serve as technical documentation within the environmental document , pursuant to SB 743.
Under SB 743, automobile delay, traditionally measured as level of service (LOS), is no longer considered as
the metric for environmental transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), but
rather VMT. VMT measures the number and length of vehicle trips made on a daily basis. VMT is a useful
indicator of overall land use and transportation efficiency, where the most efficient system is one that minimizes
VMT by encouraging shorter vehicle trip lengths, more walking and biking, or increased carpooling and transit.
Methodology
The net change in total VMT Citywide has been evaluated for the proposed Ci rculation Element against the
baseline conditions and against the “base” forecasted scenario utilizing the San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments (SLOCOG) Regional Travel Demand Model VMT post-processor. The model’s VMT post-
processor includes residential VMT, work VMT, and retail VMT. The SLOCOG model forecast land use data
was modified to include approved/pending development projects in coordination with City staff. To estimate
total VMT for each scenario, a boundary-based VMT assessment was conducted. The boundary-based
methodology is quantified by the length of the vehicle trips that occur within the City region. Project impacts on
transportation are determined based on an increase in total VMT with the proposed plan. This methodology is
consistent with the Office of Planning and Research’s Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts
in CEQA (OPR Technical Advisory, December 2018) and CEQA Guidelines.
Results
The list below describes the scenarios analyzed. Table 1 presents the summary of the VMT results.
• “2015 Base” scenario represents existing land uses and existing transportation network
• “2015 + AG CEU” scenario represents existing land uses with the proposed Circulation Element
improvements
• “2045 Base” scenario represent 30-year RTP/SCS scenario
• “2045 + AG CEU” represent 30-year RTP/SCS scenario plus the proposed Circulation Element
improvements
Item 9.b. - Page 434
The Power of Commitment
11144936 2
Table 1 VMT Results Summary
Year/Land Use
Scenario
Network Scenario Net VMT
2015 2015 Base 296,012
2015 2015 + AG CEU 294,717
Net VMT Difference -1,294
2045 2045 Base 340,173
2045 2045 + AG CEU 339,391
Net VMT Difference -783
The VMT results show a net decrease in both base and forecast years with the proposed Circulation Element
improvements, and therefore does not have a significant impact on transportation. Additionally, the model does
not reflect the proposed Circulation Element’s full potential to decrease VMT related to proposed active
transportation policies (i.e. complete streets policies, bicycle/pedestrian improvements, safe routes to school,
etc.)
Item 9.b. - Page 435
2015_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
101 208.87 7.03 55.62 271.52
102 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
103 0.00 220.26 567.23 787.48
104 418.07 222.97 1740.49 2381.54
105 1110.37 754.66 3233.32 5098.35
106 2958.97 65.07 569.10 3593.14
107 2172.16 4.05 231.59 2407.80
108 1740.38 6.63 210.58 1957.59
109 0.00 3768.59 7637.24 11405.83
110 2780.21 10.29 344.29 3134.79
111 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
112 1150.43 14.39 179.39 1344.22
113 58.01 282.70 2694.60 3035.30
115 579.75 0.00 55.09 634.84
116 1037.18 5.20 121.90 1164.28
117 1047.41 55.63 349.27 1452.31
118 1801.48 259.53 1051.75 3112.76
119 633.25 6.77 90.19 730.21
120 551.20 2.01 60.72 613.94
121 97.64 1.96 17.60 117.20
122 7.59 161.69 813.79 983.07
123 1799.05 39.17 598.53 2436.74
124 433.96 4.03 56.18 494.18
125 4043.50 75.77 770.07 4889.34
126 0.00 27.13 166.36 193.48
127 928.26 1.67 92.17 1022.10
128 2880.71 3.32 272.16 3156.19
129 594.84 0.00 53.62 648.46
130 1273.51 28.88 251.92 1554.32
131 775.51 344.38 1754.16 2874.05
132 4851.32 89.54 879.64 5820.50
133 1364.49 2.85 136.41 1503.75
134 204.51 231.54 1057.02 1493.07
135 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
136 572.75 0.00 51.21 623.96
137 207.76 124.28 599.15 931.20
138 703.88 66.87 1049.73 1820.48
139 1205.09 9.00 153.36 1367.45
140 160.37 19.23 105.48 285.07
141 951.14 39.71 269.21 1260.05
142 718.09 56.26 312.04 1086.39
143 1369.82 9.71 168.01 1547.54
144 2414.78 89.55 631.73 3136.06
145 623.42 9.17 98.12 730.71
146 691.55 69.40 542.76 1303.71
147 1120.95 1.87 110.00 1232.82
148 3237.15 4.13 320.72 3562.00
149 2453.68 22.54 330.05 2806.27
150 0.00 227.16 531.96 759.12
151 1233.18 1.13 120.13 1354.43
152 3246.53 28.13 445.98 3720.64
Page 1 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 436
2015_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
153 2196.04 21.57 343.01 2560.62
154 3085.02 8.00 338.73 3431.74
155 1128.73 2.76 117.79 1249.27
156 942.89 0.00 86.08 1028.98
157 924.46 53.55 356.34 1334.35
158 1746.74 3.19 186.96 1936.89
159 313.70 20.52 139.60 473.82
160 386.43 2.82 52.11 441.36
161 792.18 27.80 246.08 1066.05
162 83.04 0.00 6.17 89.20
163 578.52 1.97 70.76 651.25
164 369.13 0.00 39.23 408.36
165 2747.60 24.57 423.56 3195.73
166 1096.88 0.00 109.20 1206.08
167 1676.17 7.81 209.87 1893.85
168 3657.38 22.35 469.70 4149.44
169 851.22 7.03 118.03 976.28
170 135.03 46.33 336.55 517.91
171 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
172 494.38 135.43 816.46 1446.27
173 1788.66 24.87 285.63 2099.16
174 530.45 0.00 54.02 584.47
175 320.89 61.91 709.73 1092.54
176 459.67 11.82 94.40 565.89
177 560.06 24.36 160.31 744.74
178 238.67 275.16 1117.98 1631.81
179 902.73 0.00 89.38 992.12
180 423.06 6.61 70.68 500.35
181 1212.43 3.10 138.15 1353.68
182 195.08 0.00 18.77 213.85
183 351.64 0.00 34.49 386.13
184 282.47 254.19 1039.57 1576.23
185 447.35 0.00 43.98 491.32
186 260.04 1.66 33.01 294.70
187 0.00 456.34 2114.24 2570.58
188 1000.96 7.41 128.05 1136.41
189 108.70 883.94 5285.64 6278.27
190 0.00 25.03 414.94 439.97
191 597.14 14.97 130.46 742.57
192 180.20 0.00 17.26 197.47
193 100.97 229.53 917.19 1247.69
194 83.75 344.43 1862.67 2290.86
195 201.35 349.82 1508.69 2059.87
196 529.55 0.00 52.16 581.72
197 289.98 282.73 1178.50 1751.21
198 0.00 481.80 1574.61 2056.41
199 106.13 58.21 475.94 640.28
200 0.00 88.43 394.91 483.34
201 1435.97 3.60 161.94 1601.51
202 2457.26 13.82 307.73 2778.80
203 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Page 2 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 437
2015_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
204 388.29 222.68 1496.98 2107.94
205 255.77 187.57 817.47 1260.82
206 1158.86 0.00 108.92 1267.77
207 1427.57 39.56 298.20 1765.33
208 395.27 261.50 1079.30 1736.06
209 421.63 159.97 1120.57 1702.17
210 190.80 265.98 1369.58 1826.37
211 3355.61 875.47 4197.20 8428.29
212 2565.28 216.60 1220.17 4002.06
213 0.00 363.34 1771.30 2134.64
214 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
215 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
216 12.71 0.00 2.28 14.99
217 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
218 851.64 7.79 128.84 988.27
219 52.29 0.00 3.86 56.15
220 1378.98 74.18 446.83 1899.99
221 4954.12 83.83 1033.14 6071.10
222 2296.87 0.00 242.30 2539.17
223 2600.56 17.56 347.96 2966.08
224 12.14 298.24 1330.30 1640.69
225 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
226 2130.36 2.59 227.36 2360.31
227 1869.42 0.00 183.13 2052.55
228 1954.26 5.70 218.82 2178.79
229 101.65 0.00 8.68 110.33
230 261.02 0.00 24.99 286.01
231 2493.49 15.68 320.21 2829.38
232 1843.22 2.61 190.90 2036.73
233 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
234 365.59 10.65 86.82 463.06
235 1873.63 26.03 350.42 2250.08
236 1908.42 14.43 237.36 2160.22
237 237.17 0.00 23.12 260.30
238 1003.76 1.50 107.29 1112.55
239 244.57 0.00 23.03 267.60
240 994.27 0.00 97.41 1091.68
241 1483.87 18.12 226.52 1728.51
242 0.00 47.64 196.87 244.50
243 399.95 0.00 38.10 438.06
244 338.99 0.00 32.70 371.70
245 507.76 23.96 155.39 687.11
246 1576.22 4.85 181.18 1762.25
247 2692.83 28.83 431.47 3153.12
248 994.98 3.00 114.18 1112.16
249 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
250 0.00 871.69 5192.93 6064.63
251 0.00 159.49 727.87 887.36
252 0.00 98.34 407.61 505.95
253 1182.09 1.70 125.07 1308.87
254 0.00 1138.42 11818.17 12956.59
Page 3 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 438
2015_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
255 366.39 0.00 36.54 402.93
256 4786.10 15.20 549.30 5350.60
257 0.00 644.53 4092.01 4736.55
258 918.15 82.85 417.61 1418.61
259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
260 0.00 117.68 580.17 697.85
261 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
262 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
263 1704.01 9.69 213.70 1927.40
264 289.21 0.00 28.90 318.11
265 13.73 0.00 2.52 16.25
266 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267 1348.75 11.90 200.80 1561.44
268 2748.03 440.51 2122.16 5310.70
269 386.59 14.68 105.45 506.72
270 2844.87 127.87 888.28 3861.01
271 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272 5933.61 82.48 1023.03 7039.12
273 1158.85 2.41 124.72 1285.98
274 103.79 0.00 10.42 114.22
275 749.15 0.00 72.66 821.81
276 12.35 6.34 20.43 39.12
278 868.78 59.37 343.93 1272.08
892 795.65 16.91 148.76 961.32
Total VMT 170,487 18,947 106,577 296,012
Page 4 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 439
2015_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
101 210.01 7.08 56.59 273.68
102 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
103 0.00 219.18 566.17 785.35
104 409.16 220.80 1723.79 2353.75
105 1087.98 750.58 3239.27 5077.83
106 2897.81 64.97 566.05 3528.82
107 2154.74 4.05 232.49 2391.28
108 1772.32 6.62 211.63 1990.56
109 0.00 3771.93 7547.74 11319.66
110 2715.73 10.02 335.25 3061.00
111 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
112 1165.78 14.40 179.69 1359.87
113 58.09 280.68 2685.53 3024.30
115 586.65 0.00 55.16 641.81
116 1035.96 5.18 121.97 1163.12
117 1048.70 55.15 348.71 1452.56
118 1820.40 259.70 1053.59 3133.69
119 639.29 6.74 90.29 736.32
120 555.94 2.01 60.86 618.81
121 97.84 1.96 17.60 117.40
122 7.62 160.84 812.27 980.74
123 1802.78 39.26 598.94 2440.99
124 434.64 4.02 56.22 494.87
125 4065.66 75.99 772.98 4914.63
126 0.00 27.01 165.98 192.98
127 929.63 1.67 92.34 1023.64
128 2884.51 3.30 272.48 3160.29
129 596.41 0.00 53.66 650.07
130 1280.13 28.86 252.22 1561.21
131 780.33 344.76 1757.43 2882.51
132 4859.44 89.23 879.84 5828.50
133 1366.28 2.84 136.52 1505.63
134 204.49 230.96 1055.62 1491.08
135 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
136 574.55 0.00 51.22 625.77
137 205.67 123.13 593.98 922.77
138 696.23 66.01 1039.08 1801.32
139 1193.34 8.97 153.33 1355.64
140 157.79 19.08 105.19 282.07
141 939.86 39.45 267.48 1246.79
142 710.77 56.04 311.12 1077.93
143 1343.53 9.70 167.49 1520.72
144 2354.72 89.29 628.84 3072.85
145 614.75 9.09 97.68 721.52
146 682.58 68.76 538.38 1289.72
147 1096.93 1.86 109.42 1208.21
148 3220.75 4.11 321.88 3546.73
149 2426.73 22.64 328.87 2778.24
150 0.00 225.47 527.76 753.23
151 1221.64 1.12 120.69 1343.45
152 3183.96 28.02 445.18 3657.15
Page 1 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 440
2015_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
153 2168.75 21.53 344.18 2534.46
154 3079.50 8.02 340.03 3427.56
155 1110.19 2.76 117.52 1230.47
156 943.17 0.00 86.35 1029.51
157 925.97 53.52 357.00 1336.49
158 1747.53 3.19 187.09 1937.81
159 315.71 20.67 141.47 477.85
160 399.81 2.86 53.63 456.30
161 791.43 27.43 242.59 1061.45
162 82.77 0.00 6.07 88.84
163 577.18 1.95 70.40 649.53
164 367.65 0.00 39.02 406.67
165 2741.64 24.42 420.84 3186.90
166 1095.14 0.00 109.10 1204.24
167 1677.02 7.81 209.58 1894.42
168 3659.94 22.37 469.53 4151.85
169 849.92 7.03 117.90 974.85
170 134.18 45.84 335.67 515.70
171 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
172 490.49 134.01 806.96 1431.46
173 1778.08 24.50 281.38 2083.96
174 528.93 0.00 52.96 581.89
175 318.39 61.25 695.49 1075.12
176 457.90 11.62 93.30 562.81
177 556.01 23.81 157.86 737.68
178 237.99 274.78 1110.04 1622.81
179 894.81 0.00 88.10 982.91
180 421.05 6.54 69.96 497.55
181 1211.23 3.04 136.86 1351.13
182 194.18 0.00 18.53 212.72
183 349.95 0.00 34.31 384.26
184 281.17 253.26 1034.95 1569.38
185 442.73 0.00 42.96 485.69
186 260.00 1.66 32.94 294.60
187 0.00 449.52 2097.96 2547.48
188 997.67 7.36 127.42 1132.44
189 108.45 886.12 5271.59 6266.16
190 0.00 25.00 413.79 438.79
191 596.82 14.95 130.52 742.29
192 179.97 0.00 17.19 197.17
193 100.95 229.46 921.16 1251.57
194 83.39 344.34 1855.73 2283.46
195 201.17 350.37 1513.89 2065.43
196 529.68 0.00 52.03 581.71
197 290.56 283.05 1179.62 1753.23
198 0.00 482.75 1572.60 2055.35
199 105.90 58.41 476.38 640.69
200 0.00 88.45 395.00 483.45
201 1429.42 3.56 158.24 1591.22
202 2458.72 13.83 307.69 2780.25
203 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Page 2 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 441
2015_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
204 392.12 220.97 1492.47 2105.56
205 247.80 186.56 812.50 1246.86
206 1134.50 0.00 108.72 1243.22
207 1394.57 39.35 297.17 1731.08
208 394.44 260.02 1075.33 1729.78
209 413.38 158.49 1109.81 1681.67
210 186.43 265.21 1365.99 1817.63
211 3305.84 868.67 4171.42 8345.94
212 2555.39 215.28 1217.46 3988.14
213 0.00 361.36 1773.08 2134.44
214 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
215 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
216 12.18 0.00 2.13 14.31
217 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
218 828.03 7.58 124.25 959.87
219 53.29 0.00 3.87 57.16
220 1375.57 75.10 451.69 1902.36
221 4783.96 81.24 989.27 5854.47
222 2215.86 0.00 232.12 2447.97
223 2502.65 17.01 337.62 2857.28
224 12.20 300.63 1317.53 1630.36
225 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
226 2114.20 2.57 227.98 2344.75
227 1819.53 0.00 178.77 1998.30
228 1950.99 5.71 218.55 2175.25
229 101.71 0.00 8.68 110.38
230 260.64 0.00 24.97 285.60
231 2494.74 15.67 320.00 2830.41
232 1839.78 2.61 190.50 2032.88
233 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
234 364.95 10.67 86.77 462.40
235 1872.81 26.06 351.09 2249.97
236 1908.36 14.46 236.12 2158.94
237 237.64 0.00 23.07 260.71
238 1001.85 1.50 107.04 1110.40
239 243.39 0.00 22.97 266.36
240 994.48 0.00 97.08 1091.56
241 1485.20 18.10 226.68 1729.98
242 0.00 47.53 196.31 243.84
243 398.60 0.00 38.02 436.61
244 338.36 0.00 32.64 371.00
245 508.10 24.00 155.34 687.44
246 1577.18 4.86 181.16 1763.20
247 2693.65 28.83 430.84 3153.33
248 995.41 3.00 114.13 1112.54
249 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
250 0.00 868.78 5194.06 6062.83
251 0.00 159.41 730.12 889.53
252 0.00 98.74 408.61 507.35
253 1182.87 1.70 125.18 1309.75
254 0.00 1135.65 11869.72 13005.38
Page 3 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 442
2015_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
255 365.59 0.00 36.51 402.10
256 4799.70 15.18 549.95 5364.83
257 0.00 644.41 4092.02 4736.43
258 923.09 82.85 417.52 1423.46
259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
260 0.00 117.70 581.09 698.78
261 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
262 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
263 1709.48 9.64 213.94 1933.06
264 288.84 0.00 28.87 317.71
265 13.79 0.00 2.52 16.32
266 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267 1351.68 11.89 201.25 1564.81
268 2751.31 441.69 2127.54 5320.55
269 386.90 14.69 105.44 507.03
270 2851.04 127.79 888.92 3867.74
271 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272 5947.56 82.34 1023.65 7053.55
273 1163.68 2.41 124.86 1290.94
274 104.94 0.00 10.56 115.50
275 748.35 0.00 72.57 820.92
276 12.31 6.32 20.20 38.83
278 870.20 59.16 343.76 1273.12
892 796.41 16.95 148.86 962.23
Total VMT 169,543 18,904 106,271 294,717
Page 4 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 443
2045_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
101 307.30 6.82 77.43 391.55
102 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
103 0.00 222.69 605.80 828.50
104 395.81 328.79 2383.45 3108.05
105 1349.22 768.04 3571.24 5688.49
106 2865.14 66.86 625.15 3557.15
107 2151.86 4.11 257.26 2413.23
108 1673.48 6.76 227.26 1907.49
109 0.00 3492.49 7797.34 11289.83
110 2755.83 10.31 383.02 3149.15
111 0.00 101.29 861.85 963.14
112 1150.15 14.61 194.92 1359.68
113 68.08 294.76 2950.70 3313.55
115 758.43 0.00 79.84 838.27
116 1006.24 5.28 132.94 1144.47
117 1025.52 56.38 376.25 1458.15
118 2300.83 361.28 2501.35 5163.46
119 603.14 6.84 95.32 705.30
120 525.95 2.04 64.34 592.33
121 92.71 2.00 18.71 113.42
122 61.73 262.44 1721.01 2045.18
123 1689.23 40.23 648.87 2378.33
124 412.22 4.13 59.96 476.31
125 3789.63 76.85 817.75 4684.23
126 0.00 27.82 184.83 212.65
127 876.55 1.70 98.16 976.41
128 2769.34 3.41 294.78 3067.52
129 593.10 0.00 60.16 653.26
130 1201.79 29.47 269.68 1500.94
131 745.85 387.27 2240.50 3373.62
132 4652.66 92.26 962.86 5707.78
133 1387.57 2.92 155.83 1546.33
134 194.13 237.35 1146.28 1577.76
135 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
136 541.33 0.00 54.11 595.44
137 697.69 125.52 699.85 1523.05
138 753.41 67.13 1137.38 1957.92
139 1347.39 9.19 186.00 1542.58
140 574.96 19.47 158.59 753.02
141 1066.36 40.44 307.30 1414.09
142 1311.81 57.42 399.16 1768.39
143 1335.87 9.93 184.46 1530.26
144 2302.71 92.00 684.96 3079.67
145 610.81 9.32 106.53 726.66
146 656.06 70.07 596.55 1322.68
147 1084.89 1.91 120.30 1207.10
148 3420.90 4.20 392.22 3817.32
149 2434.56 22.99 369.65 2827.20
150 0.00 230.64 566.25 796.89
151 1235.91 1.15 136.03 1373.09
152 3095.63 28.55 481.67 3605.84
Page 1 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 444
2045_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
153 2096.74 21.98 379.51 2498.22
154 2929.30 8.17 363.34 3300.81
155 1053.36 2.81 128.30 1184.47
156 913.07 0.00 94.33 1007.40
157 878.22 54.67 384.29 1317.17
158 1663.90 3.23 197.05 1864.18
159 598.87 20.37 189.36 808.60
160 367.02 2.72 55.26 425.00
161 807.75 170.32 858.90 1836.97
162 2353.86 0.00 279.17 2633.03
163 544.81 1.93 76.65 623.39
164 370.82 0.00 44.04 414.86
165 2564.03 24.23 458.70 3046.96
166 1113.90 0.00 123.20 1237.10
167 1606.79 7.82 230.52 1845.13
168 3684.30 22.33 522.77 4229.40
169 818.81 6.99 130.90 956.69
170 398.69 73.25 595.74 1067.68
171 1223.47 0.00 137.03 1360.50
172 657.92 147.49 979.65 1785.07
173 1742.55 24.16 310.02 2076.74
174 528.34 0.00 59.65 587.98
175 426.22 60.78 753.13 1240.12
176 442.64 11.50 99.37 553.52
177 533.26 23.81 170.10 727.17
178 496.59 295.46 1404.58 2196.63
179 1059.28 0.00 115.70 1174.98
180 476.46 6.48 82.77 565.71
181 1188.48 3.01 150.87 1342.36
182 186.76 0.00 19.87 206.62
183 401.36 0.00 41.92 443.28
184 460.23 281.59 1338.81 2080.63
185 423.62 0.00 46.88 470.50
186 288.38 1.64 39.47 329.48
187 386.90 447.31 2275.74 3109.95
188 1064.57 7.26 146.09 1217.92
189 414.64 1006.85 6688.79 8110.28
190 0.00 24.51 439.24 463.75
191 602.01 14.64 142.45 759.10
192 290.07 0.00 31.72 321.79
193 231.12 245.51 1145.71 1622.34
194 167.75 353.89 2079.07 2600.71
195 321.16 341.24 1614.71 2277.11
196 508.60 0.00 55.56 564.16
197 848.24 306.32 1532.89 2687.45
198 0.00 477.21 1663.70 2140.91
199 1015.49 586.75 4066.75 5668.99
200 0.00 87.82 427.90 515.73
201 1689.50 3.53 212.31 1905.35
202 2369.84 13.73 332.74 2716.31
203 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Page 2 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 445
2045_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
204 371.89 223.76 1583.47 2179.12
205 241.71 192.16 881.64 1315.51
206 1239.22 0.00 129.56 1368.78
207 1537.87 45.19 372.74 1955.79
208 381.62 364.24 1833.70 2579.56
209 510.78 176.93 1310.05 1997.76
210 523.58 297.40 1735.20 2556.18
211 3242.35 1083.12 5536.43 9861.89
212 2563.14 221.56 1340.28 4124.99
213 0.00 414.73 2276.87 2691.60
214 588.81 0.00 68.39 657.20
215 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
216 150.57 0.00 17.05 167.62
217 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
218 822.40 7.69 140.02 970.10
219 50.42 414.65 1784.44 2249.52
220 1340.69 73.19 475.79 1889.67
221 4719.52 113.33 1283.82 6116.67
222 2207.56 0.00 257.49 2465.06
223 2500.13 17.69 372.56 2890.39
224 11.80 298.28 1415.41 1725.50
225 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
226 2146.51 2.63 258.86 2408.00
227 1802.09 0.00 201.83 2003.91
228 1968.29 5.69 252.08 2226.06
229 98.13 0.00 9.37 107.50
230 251.34 0.00 26.91 278.25
231 2478.87 15.63 352.66 2847.17
232 1761.95 2.58 202.68 1967.21
233 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
234 373.75 10.59 96.57 480.91
235 2002.76 25.90 397.48 2426.14
236 1817.75 14.21 252.09 2084.05
237 507.84 0.00 55.41 563.25
238 1009.97 1.49 120.56 1132.03
239 231.26 0.00 24.12 255.38
240 974.13 0.00 105.35 1079.48
241 1456.18 17.98 244.72 1718.87
242 0.00 46.73 206.97 253.70
243 377.88 0.00 40.13 418.01
244 322.14 0.00 34.15 356.29
245 537.25 23.84 172.39 733.48
246 1595.02 4.81 200.95 1800.78
247 2546.27 28.84 468.83 3043.94
248 958.11 2.98 125.32 1086.42
249 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
250 0.00 866.47 5446.50 6312.97
251 90.00 230.51 1210.47 1530.98
252 0.00 97.45 432.58 530.03
253 1176.90 1.69 139.53 1318.13
254 0.00 1133.20 12646.97 13780.17
Page 3 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 446
2045_Base
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
255 572.12 0.00 63.68 635.81
256 4769.96 15.32 613.72 5399.00
257 0.00 868.14 8326.67 9194.81
258 867.78 83.45 439.24 1390.47
259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
260 0.00 118.51 623.89 742.40
261 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
262 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
263 1686.86 9.69 233.50 1930.06
264 400.33 0.00 44.47 444.80
265 13.08 0.00 2.68 15.76
266 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267 1325.56 11.96 221.56 1559.09
268 2596.82 617.60 3133.79 6348.21
269 402.27 14.71 116.86 533.83
270 3309.19 128.60 1113.72 4551.51
271 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272 5823.40 83.96 1153.14 7060.50
273 1132.92 2.43 135.73 1271.09
274 2994.98 0.00 388.73 3383.71
275 758.13 0.00 82.42 840.55
276 11.97 6.31 21.87 40.15
278 838.75 60.82 369.03 1268.59
892 739.62 17.33 153.16 910.10
Total VMT 182,816 21,416 135,941 340,173
Page 4 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 447
2045_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
101 306.14 6.85 77.18 390.17
102 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
103 0.00 222.49 605.90 828.39
104 391.97 325.67 2373.56 3091.20
105 1343.69 762.37 3583.54 5689.60
106 2844.39 66.67 623.65 3534.71
107 2151.33 4.09 259.10 2414.53
108 1703.47 6.74 229.17 1939.39
109 0.00 3487.00 7712.89 11199.89
110 2692.38 10.03 370.78 3073.19
111 0.00 101.23 860.32 961.55
112 1159.65 14.61 195.36 1369.62
113 68.18 292.07 2923.60 3283.85
115 765.52 0.00 80.01 845.54
116 1008.62 5.26 133.12 1147.00
117 1027.34 55.87 374.89 1458.10
118 2314.30 360.98 2505.78 5181.06
119 608.55 6.81 95.38 710.73
120 530.15 2.04 64.51 596.70
121 92.91 1.99 18.72 113.62
122 61.78 261.30 1714.70 2037.78
123 1691.27 40.33 649.39 2380.99
124 412.92 4.13 60.00 477.05
125 3808.18 77.29 823.69 4709.16
126 0.00 27.59 184.39 211.98
127 877.88 1.71 98.28 977.87
128 2770.52 3.39 294.87 3068.79
129 593.79 0.00 60.28 654.07
130 1211.57 29.36 270.33 1511.25
131 747.09 388.85 2254.19 3390.13
132 4657.98 91.81 962.19 5711.97
133 1389.32 2.92 155.99 1548.23
134 194.38 236.98 1146.42 1577.78
135 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
136 542.80 0.00 54.16 596.96
137 701.22 124.49 696.92 1522.64
138 747.76 66.19 1125.56 1939.51
139 1348.39 9.15 186.51 1544.06
140 571.97 19.23 157.85 749.05
141 1056.01 40.12 305.73 1401.85
142 1310.97 57.36 399.54 1767.87
143 1330.60 9.92 184.54 1525.06
144 2273.51 91.48 682.18 3047.17
145 606.03 9.24 106.15 721.41
146 661.08 69.65 592.19 1322.92
147 1069.49 1.90 119.78 1191.17
148 3442.95 4.18 392.06 3839.20
149 2419.66 22.91 369.89 2812.46
150 0.00 228.64 562.60 791.23
151 1235.29 1.14 136.98 1373.41
152 3042.47 28.55 481.63 3552.65
Page 1 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 448
2045_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
153 2055.97 21.95 380.03 2457.95
154 2931.60 8.22 365.47 3305.29
155 1044.02 2.81 128.34 1175.17
156 914.42 0.00 94.69 1009.11
157 880.55 54.60 385.23 1320.38
158 1658.99 3.24 196.96 1859.19
159 590.68 20.99 187.61 799.28
160 379.77 2.78 56.54 439.10
161 803.29 170.61 852.62 1826.51
162 2360.99 0.00 275.68 2636.67
163 543.50 1.93 76.17 621.60
164 370.57 0.00 43.83 414.40
165 2558.07 24.13 456.64 3038.84
166 1113.50 0.00 123.03 1236.53
167 1632.16 7.80 229.98 1869.94
168 3685.49 22.31 521.48 4229.29
169 817.67 6.98 130.56 955.21
170 395.36 73.14 595.88 1064.38
171 1220.83 0.00 136.38 1357.21
172 653.71 147.45 978.02 1779.18
173 1736.85 24.14 306.10 2067.09
174 530.11 0.00 59.26 589.37
175 424.50 60.70 751.94 1237.14
176 442.48 11.45 98.91 552.84
177 531.06 23.54 168.14 722.74
178 494.16 295.64 1402.03 2191.83
179 1053.64 0.00 114.46 1168.10
180 474.14 6.47 82.70 563.31
181 1181.73 3.02 149.76 1334.51
182 186.10 0.00 19.69 205.79
183 399.20 0.00 41.94 441.15
184 457.65 279.84 1333.80 2071.28
185 421.78 0.00 45.62 467.41
186 287.94 1.64 39.13 328.71
187 384.74 447.92 2275.58 3108.25
188 1064.99 7.23 145.81 1218.03
189 413.53 1010.29 6676.56 8100.38
190 0.00 24.53 438.31 462.83
191 606.29 14.56 142.36 763.21
192 287.37 0.00 31.39 318.76
193 230.56 245.32 1147.28 1623.15
194 167.06 355.02 2068.72 2590.79
195 320.21 340.19 1614.55 2274.95
196 508.61 0.00 55.21 563.82
197 845.57 306.03 1532.03 2683.63
198 0.00 477.04 1658.45 2135.49
199 1011.54 585.36 4051.50 5648.40
200 0.00 87.51 426.87 514.38
201 1685.72 3.53 206.93 1896.18
202 2370.25 13.74 331.80 2715.79
203 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Page 2 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 449
2045_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
204 375.36 222.24 1579.52 2177.13
205 236.10 191.07 876.92 1304.09
206 1241.60 0.00 130.28 1371.88
207 1527.94 45.00 373.77 1946.72
208 383.91 361.94 1828.91 2574.76
209 505.03 175.94 1304.68 1985.65
210 516.90 296.18 1732.12 2545.19
211 3247.94 1075.63 5517.56 9841.13
212 2585.25 219.86 1338.95 4144.06
213 0.00 413.08 2277.95 2691.02
214 563.26 0.00 66.63 629.89
215 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
216 147.79 0.00 16.11 163.89
217 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
218 808.47 7.49 133.81 949.77
219 51.48 414.50 1795.28 2261.26
220 1338.06 73.94 480.31 1892.30
221 4647.77 110.03 1237.19 5994.99
222 2180.87 0.00 248.89 2429.75
223 2459.46 17.12 359.41 2835.99
224 11.90 298.77 1405.40 1716.08
225 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
226 2157.35 2.60 260.75 2420.70
227 1778.32 0.00 198.15 1976.47
228 1964.45 5.67 251.44 2221.57
229 98.20 0.00 9.34 107.54
230 250.96 0.00 26.85 277.81
231 2423.50 15.62 351.70 2790.82
232 1758.36 2.59 202.02 1962.97
233 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
234 372.84 10.58 96.35 479.76
235 2003.69 25.93 397.26 2426.88
236 1810.53 14.24 250.58 2075.34
237 506.87 0.00 55.22 562.09
238 1007.98 1.49 120.21 1129.69
239 230.77 0.00 24.06 254.84
240 973.43 0.00 104.42 1077.85
241 1457.10 17.99 244.34 1719.43
242 0.00 46.97 206.70 253.66
243 377.40 0.00 40.00 417.40
244 321.52 0.00 34.08 355.59
245 537.39 23.84 172.16 733.39
246 1595.75 4.82 200.59 1801.15
247 2540.31 28.86 467.91 3037.08
248 958.50 2.98 125.14 1086.63
249 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
250 0.00 863.19 5441.56 6304.75
251 90.35 231.07 1209.72 1531.15
252 0.00 97.73 433.79 531.52
253 1182.04 1.69 139.49 1323.22
254 0.00 1128.37 12608.60 13736.97
Page 3 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 450
2045_AG_CEU
Zone1 RES_VMT OFF_VMT RET_VMT Total VMT
255 574.67 0.00 63.69 638.36
256 4787.52 15.31 614.65 5417.47
257 0.00 872.38 8363.14 9235.52
258 872.06 83.55 440.24 1395.85
259 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
260 0.00 118.77 626.50 745.27
261 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
262 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
263 1692.55 9.70 233.88 1936.13
264 399.64 0.00 44.37 444.02
265 13.11 0.00 2.68 15.79
266 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
267 1325.70 11.99 222.32 1560.02
268 2589.20 620.30 3138.06 6347.56
269 401.31 14.70 116.69 532.70
270 3318.36 128.39 1113.91 4560.65
271 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
272 5826.56 83.64 1153.26 7063.47
273 1133.68 2.44 135.75 1271.88
274 2982.71 0.00 392.03 3374.74
275 758.13 0.00 82.25 840.38
276 11.94 6.32 21.78 40.05
278 840.03 60.70 369.28 1270.00
892 739.39 17.32 153.19 909.89
Total VMT 182,408 21,371 135,612 339,391
Page 4 of 4
Item 9.b. - Page 451
APPENDIX D
Species Lists
Item 9.b. - Page 452
Item 9.b. - Page 453
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 1/19
IPaC resource list
This report is an automatically generated list of species and other resources such as critical habitat
(collectively referred to as trust resources) under the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (USFWS)
jurisdiction that are known or expected to be on or near the project area referenced below. The list
may also include trust resources that occur outside of the project area, but that could potentially be
directly or indirectly a ected by activities in the project area. However, determining the likelihood
and extent of e ects a project may have on trust resources typically requires gathering additional
site-speci c (e.g., vegetation/species surveys) and project-speci c (e.g., magnitude and timing of
proposed activities) information.
Below is a summary of the project information you provided and contact information for the USFWS
o ce(s) with jurisdiction in the de ned project area. Please read the introduction to each section
that follows (Endangered Species, Migratory Birds, USFWS Facilities, and NWI Wetlands) for
additional information applicable to the trust resources addressed in that section.
Location
San Luis Obispo County, California
Local o ce
Ventura Fish And Wildlife O ce
(805) 644-1766
(805) 644-3958
2493 Portola Road, Suite B
Ventura, CA 93003-7726
U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServiceIPaC
Item 9.b. - Page 454
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 2/19
Endangered species
This resource list is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an analysis of
project level impacts.
The primary information used to generate this list is the known or expected range of each species.
Additional areas of in uence (AOI) for species are also considered. An AOI includes areas outside of
the species range if the species could be indirectly a ected by activities in that area (e.g., placing a
dam upstream of a sh population even if that sh does not occur at the dam site, may indirectly
impact the species by reducing or eliminating water ow downstream). Because species can move,
and site conditions can change, the species on this list are not guaranteed to be found on or near
the project area. To fully determine any potential e ects to species, additional site-speci c and
project-speci c information is often required.
Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act requires Federal agencies to "request of the Secretary
information whether any species which is listed or proposed to be listed may be present in the area
of such proposed action" for any project that is conducted, permitted, funded, or licensed by any
Federal agency. A letter from the local o ce and a species list which ful lls this requirement can
only be obtained by requesting an o cial species list from either the Regulatory Review section in
IPaC (see directions below) or from the local eld o ce directly.
For project evaluations that require USFWS concurrence/review, please return to the IPaC website
and request an o cial species list by doing the following:
1. Draw the project location and click CONTINUE.
2. Click DEFINE PROJECT.
3. Log in (if directed to do so).
4. Provide a name and description for your project.
5. Click REQUEST SPECIES LIST.
Listed species and their critical habitats are managed by the Ecological Services Program of the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the sheries division of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA Fisheries ).
Species and critical habitats under the sole responsibility of NOAA Fisheries are not shown on this
list. Please contact NOAA Fisheries for species under their jurisdiction.
1. Species listed under the Endangered Species Act are threatened or endangered; IPaC also shows
species that are candidates, or proposed, for listing. See the listing status page for more
information. IPaC only shows species that are regulated by USFWS (see FAQ).
2. NOAA Fisheries, also known as the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), is an o ce of the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration within the Department of Commerce.
The following species are potentially a ected by activities in this location:
Mammals
1
2
NAME STATUS
Item 9.b. - Page 455
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 3/19
Birds
Reptiles
Giant Kangaroo Rat Dipodomys ingens
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6051
Endangered
NAME STATUS
California Clapper Rail Rallus longirostris obsoletus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4240
Endangered
California Condor Gymnogyps californianus
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8193
Endangered
California Least Tern Sterna antillarum browni
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8104
Endangered
Least Bell's Vireo Vireo bellii pusillus
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5945
Endangered
Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4467
Threatened
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Empidonax traillii extimus
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6749
Endangered
Western Snowy Plover Charadrius nivosus nivosus
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8035
Threatened
Item 9.b. - Page 456
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 4/19
Amphibians
Fishes
Insects
Crustaceans
NAME STATUS
Blunt-nosed Leopard Lizard Gambelia silus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/625
Endangered
NAME STATUS
California Red-legged Frog Rana draytonii
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2891
Threatened
California Tiger Salamander Ambystoma californiense
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2076
Threatened
NAME STATUS
Tidewater Goby Eucyclogobius newberryi
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/57
Endangered
NAME STATUS
Kern Primrose Sphinx Moth Euproserpinus euterpe
Wherever found
There is proposed critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/7881
Threatened
NAME STATUS
Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp Branchinecta lynchi
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/498
Threatened
Item 9.b. - Page 457
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 5/19
Flowering Plants
NAME STATUS
California Jewel ower Caulanthus californicus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4599
Endangered
Chorro Creek Bog Thistle Cirsium fontinale var. obispoense
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5991
Endangered
Gambel's Watercress Rorippa gambellii
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4201
Endangered
La Graciosa Thistle Cirsium loncholepis
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6547
Endangered
Marsh Sandwort Arenaria paludicola
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2229
Endangered
Nipomo Mesa Lupine Lupinus nipomensis
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5480
Endangered
Pismo Clarkia Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5936
Endangered
Salt Marsh Bird's-beak Cordylanthus maritimus ssp. maritimus
Wherever found
No critical habitat has been designated for this species.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/6447
Endangered
Item 9.b. - Page 458
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 6/19
Critical habitats
Potential e ects to critical habitat(s) in this location must be analyzed along with the endangered
species themselves.
THERE ARE NO CRITICAL HABITATS AT THIS LOCATION.
Migratory birds
The birds listed below are birds of particular concern either because they occur on the USFWS Birds
of Conservation Concern (BCC) list or warrant special attention in your project location. To learn
more about the levels of concern for birds on your list and how this list is generated, see the FAQ
below. This is not a list of every bird you may nd in this location, nor a guarantee that every bird on
this list will be found in your project area. To see exact locations of where birders and the general
public have sighted birds in and around your project area, visit the E-bird data mapping tool (Tip:
enter your location, desired date range and a species on your list). For projects that occur o the
Atlantic Coast, additional maps and models detailing the relative occurrence and abundance of bird
Spreading Navarretia Navarretia fossalis
Wherever found
There is nal critical habitat for this species. The location of the
critical habitat is not available.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1334
Threatened
Certain birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle
Protection Act .
Any person or organization who plans or conducts activities that may result in impacts to migratory
birds, eagles, and their habitats should follow appropriate regulations and consider implementing
appropriate conservation measures, as described below.
1. The Migratory Birds Treaty Act of 1918.
2. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940.
Additional information can be found using the following links:
Birds of Conservation Concern http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/
birds-of-conservation-concern.php
Measures for avoiding and minimizing impacts to birds
http://www.fws.gov/birds/management/project-assessment-tools-and-guidance/
conservation-measures.php
Nationwide conservation measures for birds
http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/pdf/management/nationwidestandardconservationmeasures.pdf
1
2
Item 9.b. - Page 459
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 7/19
species on your list are available. Links to additional information about Atlantic Coast birds, and
other important information about your migratory bird list, including how to properly interpret and
use your migratory bird report, can be found below.
For guidance on when to schedule activities or implement avoidance and minimization measures to
reduce impacts to migratory birds on your list, click on the PROBABILITY OF PRESENCE SUMMARY at
the top of your list to see when these birds are most likely to be present and breeding in your
project area.
NAME BREEDING SEASON (IF A
BREEDING SEASON IS INDICATED
FOR A BIRD ON YOUR LIST, THE
BIRD MAY BREED IN YOUR
PROJECT AREA SOMETIME WITHIN
THE TIMEFRAME SPECIFIED,
WHICH IS A VERY LIBERAL
ESTIMATE OF THE DATES INSIDE
WHICH THE BIRD BREEDS
ACROSS ITS ENTIRE RANGE.
"BREEDS ELSEWHERE" INDICATES
THAT THE BIRD DOES NOT LIKELY
BREED IN YOUR PROJECT AREA.)
Allen's Hummingbird Selasphorus sasin
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9637
Breeds Feb 1 to Jul 15
Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but
warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential
susceptibilities in o shore areas from certain types of development
or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1626
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Black Oystercatcher Haematopus bachmani
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9591
Breeds Apr 15 to Oct 31
Black Skimmer Rynchops niger
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5234
Breeds May 20 to Sep 15
Black Turnstone Arenaria melanocephala
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds elsewhere
Item 9.b. - Page 460
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 8/19
California Thrasher Toxostoma redivivum
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Jan 1 to Jul 31
Clark's Grebe Aechmophorus clarkii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Jan 1 to Dec 31
Common Yellowthroat Geothlypis trichas sinuosa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/2084
Breeds May 20 to Jul 31
Costa's Hummingbird Calypte costae
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9470
Breeds Jan 15 to Jun 10
Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos
This is not a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) in this area, but
warrants attention because of the Eagle Act or for potential
susceptibilities in o shore areas from certain types of development
or activities.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/1680
Breeds Jan 1 to Aug 31
Lawrence's Gold nch Carduelis lawrencei
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9464
Breeds Mar 20 to Sep 20
Long-billed Curlew Numenius americanus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/5511
Breeds elsewhere
Marbled Godwit Limosa fedoa
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9481
Breeds elsewhere
Nuttall's Woodpecker Picoides nuttallii
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9410
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 20
Item 9.b. - Page 461
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 9/19
Oak Titmouse Baeolophus inornatus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9656
Breeds Mar 15 to Jul 15
Rufous Hummingbird selasphorus rufus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8002
Breeds elsewhere
Short-billed Dowitcher Limnodromus griseus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9480
Breeds elsewhere
Song Sparrow Melospiza melodia
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
Breeds Feb 20 to Sep 5
Spotted Towhee Pipilo maculatus clementae
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) only in particular Bird
Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the continental USA
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/4243
Breeds Apr 15 to Jul 20
Tricolored Blackbird Agelaius tricolor
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/3910
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Whimbrel Numenius phaeopus
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9483
Breeds elsewhere
Willet Tringa semipalmata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds elsewhere
Wrentit Chamaea fasciata
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
Breeds Mar 15 to Aug 10
Yellow-billed Magpie Pica nuttalli
This is a Bird of Conservation Concern (BCC) throughout its range in
the continental USA and Alaska.
https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/9726
Breeds Apr 1 to Jul 31
Item 9.b. - Page 462
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 10/19
Probability of Presence Summary
The graphs below provide our best understanding of when birds of concern are most likely to be
present in your project area. This information can be used to tailor and schedule your project
activities to avoid or minimize impacts to birds. Please make sure you read and understand the FAQ
"Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report" before using or attempting to
interpret this report.
Probability of Presence ()
Each green bar represents the bird's relative probability of presence in the 10km grid cell(s) your
project overlaps during a particular week of the year. (A year is represented as 12 4-week months.)
A taller bar indicates a higher probability of species presence. The survey e ort (see below) can be
used to establish a level of con dence in the presence score. One can have higher con dence in the
presence score if the corresponding survey e ort is also high.
How is the probability of presence score calculated? The calculation is done in three steps:
1. The probability of presence for each week is calculated as the number of survey events in the
week where the species was detected divided by the total number of survey events for that
week. For example, if in week 12 there were 20 survey events and the Spotted Towhee was
found in 5 of them, the probability of presence of the Spotted Towhee in week 12 is 0.25.
2. To properly present the pattern of presence across the year, the relative probability of presence
is calculated. This is the probability of presence divided by the maximum probability of presence
across all weeks. For example, imagine the probability of presence in week 20 for the Spotted
Towhee is 0.05, and that the probability of presence at week 12 (0.25) is the maximum of any
week of the year. The relative probability of presence on week 12 is 0.25/0.25 = 1; at week 20 it is
0.05/0.25 = 0.2.
3. The relative probability of presence calculated in the previous step undergoes a statistical
conversion so that all possible values fall between 0 and 10, inclusive. This is the probability of
presence score.
To see a bar's probability of presence score, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
Breeding Season ()
Yellow bars denote a very liberal estimate of the time-frame inside which the bird breeds across its
entire range. If there are no yellow bars shown for a bird, it does not breed in your project area.
Survey E ort ()
Vertical black lines superimposed on probability of presence bars indicate the number of surveys
performed for that species in the 10km grid cell(s) your project area overlaps. The number of
surveys is expressed as a range, for example, 33 to 64 surveys.
To see a bar's survey e ort range, simply hover your mouse cursor over the bar.
No Data ()
A week is marked as having no data if there were no survey events for that week.
Survey Timeframe
Surveys from only the last 10 years are used in order to ensure delivery of currently relevant
information. The exception to this is areas o the Atlantic coast, where bird returns are based on all
years of available data, since data in these areas is currently much more sparse.
Item 9.b. - Page 463
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 11/19
no data survey e ort breeding season probability of presence
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Allen's
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Bald Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable (This is
not a Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) in
this area, but
warrants attention
because of the
Eagle Act or for
potential
susceptibilities in
o shore areas
from certain types
of development or
activities.)
Black
Oystercatcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Black Skimmer
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Item 9.b. - Page 464
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 12/19
Black Turnstone
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
California Thrasher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Clark's Grebe
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Common
Yellowthroat
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Costa's
Hummingbird
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Item 9.b. - Page 465
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 13/19
Golden Eagle
Non-BCC
Vulnerable (This is
not a Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) in
this area, but
warrants attention
because of the
Eagle Act or for
potential
susceptibilities in
o shore areas
from certain types
of development or
activities.)
Lawrence's
Gold nch
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Long-billed Curlew
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
SPECIES JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
Marbled Godwit
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Item 9.b. - Page 466
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 14/19
Nuttall's
Woodpecker
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Oak Titmouse
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Rufous
Hummingbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Short-billed
Dowitcher
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Song Sparrow
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Item 9.b. - Page 467
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 15/19
Spotted Towhee
BCC - BCR (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC) only
in particular Bird
Conservation
Regions (BCRs) in
the continental
USA)
Tricolored
Blackbird
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Whimbrel
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Willet
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Wrentit
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Item 9.b. - Page 468
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 16/19
Yellow-billed
Magpie
BCC Rangewide
(CON) (This is a
Bird of
Conservation
Concern (BCC)
throughout its
range in the
continental USA
and Alaska.)
Tell me more about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds.
Nationwide Conservation Measures describes measures that can help avoid and minimize impacts to all birds at
any location year round. Implementation of these measures is particularly important when birds are most likely to
occur in the project area. When birds may be breeding in the area, identifying the locations of any active nests and
avoiding their destruction is a very helpful impact minimization measure. To see when birds are most likely to
occur and be breeding in your project area, view the Probability of Presence Summary. Additional measures or
permits may be advisable depending on the type of activity you are conducting and the type of infrastructure or
bird species present on your project site.
What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring in my speci ed location?
The Migratory Bird Resource List is comprised of USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) and other species
that may warrant special attention in your project location.
The migratory bird list generated for your project is derived from data provided by the Avian Knowledge Network
(AKN). The AKN data is based on a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen science datasets and is
queried and ltered to return a list of those birds reported as occurring in the 10km grid cell(s) which your project
intersects, and that have been identi ed as warranting special attention because they are a BCC species in that
area, an eagle (Eagle Act requirements may apply), or a species that has a particular vulnerability to o shore
activities or development.
Again, the Migratory Bird Resource list includes only a subset of birds that may occur in your project area. It is not
representative of all birds that may occur in your project area. To get a list of all birds potentially present in your
project area, please visit the AKN Phenology Tool.
What does IPaC use to generate the probability of presence graphs for the migratory birds potentially
occurring in my speci ed location?
The probability of presence graphs associated with your migratory bird list are based on data provided by the
Avian Knowledge Network (AKN). This data is derived from a growing collection of survey, banding, and citizen
science datasets .
Probability of presence data is continuously being updated as new and better information becomes available. To
learn more about how the probability of presence graphs are produced and how to interpret them, go the
Probability of Presence Summary and then click on the "Tell me about these graphs" link.
How do I know if a bird is breeding, wintering, migrating or present year-round in my project area?
To see what part of a particular bird's range your project area falls within (i.e. breeding, wintering, migrating or
year-round), you may refer to the following resources: The Cornell Lab of Ornithology All About Birds Bird Guide, or
(if you are unsuccessful in locating the bird of interest there), the Cornell Lab of Ornithology Neotropical Birds
guide. If a bird on your migratory bird species list has a breeding season associated with it, if that bird does occur
in your project area, there may be nests present at some point within the timeframe speci ed. If "Breeds
elsewhere" is indicated, then the bird likely does not breed in your project area.
Item 9.b. - Page 469
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 17/19
What are the levels of concern for migratory birds?
Migratory birds delivered through IPaC fall into the following distinct categories of concern:
1. "BCC Rangewide" birds are Birds of Conservation Concern (BCC) that are of concern throughout their range
anywhere within the USA (including Hawaii, the Paci c Islands, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands);
2. "BCC - BCR" birds are BCCs that are of concern only in particular Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) in the
continental USA; and
3. "Non-BCC - Vulnerable" birds are not BCC species in your project area, but appear on your list either because of
the Eagle Act requirements (for eagles) or (for non-eagles) potential susceptibilities in o shore areas from
certain types of development or activities (e.g. o shore energy development or longline shing).
Although it is important to try to avoid and minimize impacts to all birds, e orts should be made, in particular, to
avoid and minimize impacts to the birds on this list, especially eagles and BCC species of rangewide concern. For
more information on conservation measures you can implement to help avoid and minimize migratory bird
impacts and requirements for eagles, please see the FAQs for these topics.
Details about birds that are potentially a ected by o shore projects
For additional details about the relative occurrence and abundance of both individual bird species and groups of
bird species within your project area o the Atlantic Coast, please visit the Northeast Ocean Data Portal. The Portal
also o ers data and information about other taxa besides birds that may be helpful to you in your project review.
Alternately, you may download the bird model results les underlying the portal maps through the NOAA NCCOS
Integrative Statistical Modeling and Predictive Mapping of Marine Bird Distributions and Abundance on the Atlantic
Outer Continental Shelf project webpage.
Bird tracking data can also provide additional details about occurrence and habitat use throughout the year,
including migration. Models relying on survey data may not include this information. For additional information on
marine bird tracking data, see the Diving Bird Study and the nanotag studies or contact Caleb Spiegel or Pam
Loring.
What if I have eagles on my list?
If your project has the potential to disturb or kill eagles, you may need to obtain a permit to avoid violating the
Eagle Act should such impacts occur.
Proper Interpretation and Use of Your Migratory Bird Report
The migratory bird list generated is not a list of all birds in your project area, only a subset of birds of priority
concern. To learn more about how your list is generated, and see options for identifying what other birds may be
in your project area, please see the FAQ "What does IPaC use to generate the migratory birds potentially occurring
in my speci ed location". Please be aware this report provides the "probability of presence" of birds within the 10
km grid cell(s) that overlap your project; not your exact project footprint. On the graphs provided, please also look
carefully at the survey e ort (indicated by the black vertical bar) and for the existence of the "no data" indicator (a
red horizontal bar). A high survey e ort is the key component. If the survey e ort is high, then the probability of
presence score can be viewed as more dependable. In contrast, a low survey e ort bar or no data bar means a lack
of data and, therefore, a lack of certainty about presence of the species. This list is not perfect; it is simply a starting
point for identifying what birds of concern have the potential to be in your project area, when they might be there,
and if they might be breeding (which means nests might be present). The list helps you know what to look for to
con rm presence, and helps guide you in knowing when to implement conservation measures to avoid or
minimize potential impacts from your project activities, should presence be con rmed. To learn more about
conservation measures, visit the FAQ "Tell me about conservation measures I can implement to avoid or minimize
impacts to migratory birds" at the bottom of your migratory bird trust resources page.
Item 9.b. - Page 470
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 18/19
Facilities
National Wildlife Refuge lands
Any activity proposed on lands managed by the National Wildlife Refuge system must undergo a
'Compatibility Determination' conducted by the Refuge. Please contact the individual Refuges to
discuss any questions or concerns.
THERE ARE NO REFUGE LANDS AT THIS LOCATION.
Fish hatcheries
THERE ARE NO FISH HATCHERIES AT THIS LOCATION.
Wetlands in the National Wetlands Inventory
Impacts to NWI wetlands and other aquatic habitats may be subject to regulation under Section 404
of the Clean Water Act, or other State/Federal statutes.
For more information please contact the Regulatory Program of the local U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers District.
Please note that the NWI data being shown may be out of date. We are currently working to update
our NWI data set. We recommend you verify these results with a site visit to determine the actual
extent of wetlands on site.
This location overlaps the following wetlands:
FRESHWATER EMERGENT WETLAND
PEM1C
PEM1A
PEM1B
FRESHWATER FORESTED/SHRUB WETLAND
PFO1C
PSS1A
PFOA
PFO1A
PSS/FOC
PSSA
PSSC
PSSCh
PFOCh
Item 9.b. - Page 471
4/1/2021 IPaC: Explore Location resources
https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/location/C2KS6O6HLJEZDII6ID7IKFAHFU/resources 19/19
Data limitations
The Service's objective of mapping wetlands and deepwater habitats is to produce reconnaissance level
information on the location, type and size of these resources. The maps are prepared from the analysis of high
altitude imagery. Wetlands are identi ed based on vegetation, visible hydrology and geography. A margin of error
is inherent in the use of imagery; thus, detailed on-the-ground inspection of any particular site may result in
revision of the wetland boundaries or classi cation established through image analysis.
The accuracy of image interpretation depends on the quality of the imagery, the experience of the image analysts,
the amount and quality of the collateral data and the amount of ground truth veri cation work conducted.
Metadata should be consulted to determine the date of the source imagery used and any mapping problems.
Wetlands or other mapped features may have changed since the date of the imagery or eld work. There may be
occasional di erences in polygon boundaries or classi cations between the information depicted on the map and
the actual conditions on site.
Data exclusions
Certain wetland habitats are excluded from the National mapping program because of the limitations of aerial
imagery as the primary data source used to detect wetlands. These habitats include seagrasses or submerged
aquatic vegetation that are found in the intertidal and subtidal zones of estuaries and nearshore coastal waters.
Some deepwater reef communities (coral or tuber cid worm reefs) have also been excluded from the inventory.
These habitats, because of their depth, go undetected by aerial imagery.
Data precautions
Federal, state, and local regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over wetlands may de ne and describe wetlands in a
di erent manner than that used in this inventory. There is no attempt, in either the design or products of this
inventory, to de ne the limits of proprietary jurisdiction of any Federal, state, or local government or to establish
the geographical scope of the regulatory programs of government agencies. Persons intending to engage in
activities involving modi cations within or adjacent to wetland areas should seek the advice of appropriate federal,
state, or local agencies concerning speci ed agency regulatory programs and proprietary jurisdictions that may
a ect such activities.
PSSCx
PSSAh
FRESHWATER POND
PUBHx
PUBFh
PUBF
RIVERINE
R4SBA
R3UBH
R4SBCx
R4SBJ
R4SBAx
R4SBC
R5UBF
A full description for each wetland code can be found at the National Wetlands Inventory website
Item 9.b. - Page 472
Scientific_Name Common_Name Occ_Number Federal_Status State_Status Rare_Plant_Rank CDFW_Status
Anniella pulchra Northern California legless lizard 172 None None SSC
Anniella pulchra Northern California legless lizard 173 None None SSC
Anniella pulchra Northern California legless lizard 171 None None SSC
Arctostaphylos pilosula Santa Margarita manzanita 31 None None 1B.2
Arctostaphylos pilosula Santa Margarita manzanita 32 None None 1B.2
Bombus caliginosus obscure bumble bee 164 None None
Bombus caliginosus obscure bumble bee 165 None None
Castilleja densiflora var. obispoensis San Luis Obispo owl's-clover 19 None None 1B.2
Chenopodium littoreum coastal goosefoot 5 None None 1B.2
Chorizanthe rectispina straight-awned spineflower 21 None None 1B.3
Chorizanthe rectispina straight-awned spineflower 26 None None 1B.3
Chorizanthe rectispina straight-awned spineflower 22 None None 1B.3
Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Pismo clarkia 7 Endangered Rare 1B.1
Clarkia speciosa ssp. immaculata Pismo clarkia 8 Endangered Rare 1B.1
Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population 249 None None
Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population 251 None None
Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population 320 None None
Danaus plexippus pop. 1 monarch - California overwintering population 399 None None
Emys marmorata western pond turtle 1143 None None SSC
Emys marmorata western pond turtle 1165 None None SSC
Horkelia cuneata var. sericea Kellogg's horkelia 48 None None 1B.1
Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata southern curly-leaved monardella 29 None None 1B.2
Monardella sinuata ssp. sinuata southern curly-leaved monardella 38 None None 1B.2
Nasturtium gambelii Gambel's water cress 16 Endangered Threatened 1B.1
Oncorhynchus mykiss irideus pop. 9 steelhead - south-central California coast DPS 17 Threatened None
Rana draytonii California red-legged frog 319 Threatened None SSC
Rana draytonii California red-legged frog 418 Threatened None SSC
Rana draytonii California red-legged frog 459 Threatened None SSC
Taxidea taxus American badger 200 None None SSC
California Natural Diversity Database Output: City of Arroyo Grande
Item 9.b. - Page 473
Multimodal
Transportation Impact
Study Guidelines
May 2021
EXHIBIT C
Item 9.b. - Page 474
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2: TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS .............................. 3
Impact Analysis Requirement Triggers ....................................................................................... 4
Memorandum of Assumptions ...................................................................................................... 5
Study Area ............................................................................................................................................ 5
Traffic Data Collection ...................................................................................................................... 5
Trip Generation ................................................................................................................................... 6
Trip Distribution & Assignment ..................................................................................................... 6
CHAPTER 3: CEQA TRANSPORTATION IMPACT ANALYSIS ............................................. 7
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) ......................................................................................................... 8
Safety ..................................................................................................................................................... 11
Induced Travel ................................................................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER 4: LOCAL TRANSPORTATION POLICY ANALYSIS .......................................... 13
Transportation Analysis Scenarios .............................................................................................. 14
Technical Analysis Parameters ..................................................................................................... 14
Item 9.b. - Page 475
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 1
Chapter 1:
Introduction
Item 9.b. - Page 476
Chapter 1: Introduction
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 2
The City of Arroyo Grande’s General Plan Circulation Element establishes key transportation policies to
accommodate growth and achieving a multimodal community with a system of complete streets. These
Multimodal Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines establish a consistent means for assessing
potential multimodal transportation impacts of proposed projects such as development, land use &
zoning designation changes, specific plans & amendments, general plan amendments, and transportation
infrastructure modifications or expansions.
These guidelines establish standards for technical studies consistent with the latest applicable planning
and engineering methodologies, standards, and analysis procedures. These guidelines will also establish
protocol for pre-approval of project-specific technical assumptions in a Memorandum of Assumptions
(MOA) with the intent of streamlining applicant-side workflow by avoiding duplicative work between draft
and final multimodal transportation impact study submissions. The goal of these guidelines and
procedures is for resulting multimodal traffic impact studies to provide comprehensive, clear, and
consistent analyses for all projects within the City. Development applications will not be deemed
complete until a final approved multimodal transportation impact study is received by the City.
These guidelines have been prepared in conformance with Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), whereas Level of
Service (LOS) as a function of automobile delay is no longer considered a significant impact and Vehicle
Miles of Travel (VMT) is now established as the measure of assessing transportation impact under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). SB 743 however does not preclude local agencies from
retaining LOS as local policy outside of CEQA. To this end the City of Arroyo Grande has adopted local
General Plan policies for motor vehicle LOS, bicycle level of traffic stress, pedestrian connectivity, transit
proximity, and neighborhood volume thresholds. Although these measures are not subject to CEQA or
considered measures of impacts under SB 743, they are policy measures that should be studied for
general plan consistency and compliance.
The following provides the framework of a Multimodal Transportation Impact Study document , including
the Table of Contents, and outlines within each section the requested information that needs to be
provided for an informative multimodal transportation analysis and disclosure of transportation impacts.
Item 9.b. - Page 477
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 3
Chapter 2:
Transportation Impact
Analysis Requirements
Item 9.b. - Page 478
Chapter 2: Transportation Impact Analysis Requirements
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 4
Transportation impact studies may be required by the City to adequately assess impacts or policy
inconsistencies of a development proposal, changes in land use designations through a zoning or General
Plan amendment, or modification or expansion of transportation infrastructure. The CEQA Transportation
Impact Analysis section of a Transportation Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) will typically be incorporated
into the “Circulation” section of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Local Transportation Policy
Analysis section of a TIAR is considered as local policy review apart and not subject to CEQA pursuant to
Senate Bill (SB) 743. Local Transportation Policy Analysis is used to inform the City if and how a project is
inconsistent with adopted Transportation Policy; the City may adopt conditions of approval to offset
policy inconsistencies through its legislative authority. If an EIR is not required, a stand-alone TIAR may
still be required by the City. The final decision on the type and scope of a TIAR will be determined by the
City.
Due to potential conflicts, applicants (excluding public agencies) are not permitted to commission and
direct the preparation of a TIAR. Funding for TIAR’s are the applicant’s responsibility, however the studies
shall be prepared independent of the applicant. Applicants shall deposit the necessary funding and fees
for the City to commission & direct the preparation of TIAR’s. A certified professional Transportation
Planner, or registered professional Traffic or Civil Engineer must prepare all TIAR studies with adequate
experience in Transportation Planning & Engineering.
Impact Analysis Requirement Triggers
A complete TIAR study will typically be required for a project when the projected trip generation during
any peak hour is equal to or greater than 20 trips. This criterion specifically applies to Local
Transportation Policy Analysis and does not preclude the need to evaluate transportation impacts under
CEQA pursuant to SB 743, which have different screening criteria as described in Chapter 3. The amount
of traffic generated by the project shall be calculated using the methodology and guidelines of the latest
edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. The table below
provides examples of development types that would typically generate 20 peak hour trips and require a
TIAR.
Table 2-1: Example 20+ Peak Hour Trip Development Scenarios
1. 20 Single Family Units 2. 35 Multi-Family Units
3. 33 Room Hotel 4. 2,560 Sq. Ft. Restaurant
5. 5,240 Sq. Ft. Retail 6. 17,240 Sq. Ft. Office
7. 28,570 Sq. Ft. Industrial
Sources:
1. Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, 2017.
The City reserves its authority to require a TIAR for projects with a peak hour trip generation of less than
20 trips typically because of, but not limited to, safety and/or access concerns, community circulation
concerns to the project, or when existing service levels on area streets are at or approaching
unacceptable levels.
Item 9.b. - Page 479
Chapter 2: Transportation Impact Analysis Requirements
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 5
Memorandum of Assumptions
Upon determining that a TIAR is required, a project applicant must submit a project description including
access points, land use types, and land use quantities that will be the foundation of the study. If the
project description is later changed, any progress maybe invalidated, and the study would have to start
over based on the new project description. Before technical analysis may commence an MOA must be
submitted to the City for approval. The MOA shall include basic study parameters and assumptions,
including the scope of the TIAR study area, proposed analysis scenarios, proposed data collection efforts,
proposed project trip generation, proposed project trip distribution and assignment, and technical
analysis parameters and methodologies. The MOA shall also include a summary of existing transportation
conditions, and proposed methodology for developing future volumes in the Short-Term Conditions (if
necessary) and Cumulative Conditions analyses.
Following submittal, the City will review the MOA and submit comments to the applicant, indicating
approval of or rejection of submitted content. The consultant will then have an opportunity to modify
assumptions and methodologies prior to proceeding with the Technical Analysis and submitting a Draft
TIAR. The MOA process provides the consultant pre-approval of many technical assumptions prior to
completing a Draft TIAR and provides the City a chance to review important assumptions that will be used
in the forthcoming Draft TIAR.
Study Area
The scope of a TIAR study should be determined by which intersections or roadway segments may be
impacted by project-generated traffic. As a general guideline, any roadway segment or intersection
through which the project will generate twenty (20) or more peak hour trips will be included in the
analysis. In addition, all project access points shall be included in the study. Additional facilities may be
studied based on circumstances unique to the site. Consultants should consult and advise the City early
regarding any additional study locations based on local or site-specific issues.
Traffic Data Collection
At minimum, AM and PM weekday peak hour conditions must be analyzed at all study intersections and
average daily traffic conditions must be analyzed at all study roadway segment locations. In some cases,
the City may also require midday peaks, school-related afternoon peak periods, as well as weekend peak
hour, and/or daily conditions. New traffic data must be collected at all study intersections during these
peak hour and daily time frames, unless recent traffic data from within two (2) years of initiating the TIAR
is available. The City Community Development Department may allow the use of older traffic data if the
applicant can quantitatively demonstrate that traffic conditions have either not significantly changed
since the date the older counts were collected or that the older counts can be manually adjusted to
reflect current year conditions.
New AM and PM peak hour traffic counts must be collected on a typical weekday (on a Tuesday,
Wednesday, or Thursday of a week without holidays, large special events, or disruptive construction
Item 9.b. - Page 480
Chapter 2: Transportation Impact Analysis Requirements
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 6
activity) between 7:00 – 9:00 AM and between 4:00 – 6:00 PM respectively. If a school-related peak hour
is required, verify the drop-off and pick-up period with the school schedule and collect accordingly. If a
weekend peak hour analysis is required, weekend traffic data should be collected between 11:00 AM –
1:00 PM. A peak hour is defined as the highest continuous hour of traffic, as measured in 15-minute
increments, of a two-hour data collection sample. Roadway geometrics should be collected at the time of
traffic data collection or via aerial photography, as built plans, and site visits.
Trip Generation
A summary table listing each type of land use, corresponding size, the average trip generation rates used
(total daily traffic, AM and PM weekday peak hours, and weekend peak hour if needed), and the resulting
total trips generated must be provided for the proposed project. A similar trip generation table must be
provided for the approved/pending projects (provided by the City Community Development Department)
that were determined necessary for the Short-Term Conditions analysis scenario. Trip generation rates
must be calculated using the latest edition of the ITE Trip Generation Manual. At the City’s discretion, the
applicant may alternatively use driveway count data from similar existing uses to develop trip generation
rates if no published rates are available for the proposed use. Pass-by, link-diverted, and internal capture
may be considered subject to City approval.
Trip Distribution & Assignment
The estimated percentage distribution of the proposed project’s generated trips, to destinations both
within and outside the City, must be clearly stated in the report. The San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments (SLOCOG) Regional Travel Demand Model should be used to develop trip distribution,
although market studies, employee address lists, driveway counts at adjacent uses, or other information
concerning origin of trip attractions to the proposed development, may be used to generate or refine trip
distribution projections. At the City’s discretion, the City’s local travel demand model may be utilized, if it
is updated to current conditions and made available to the public. A map showing the percentage of the
proposed project’s generated daily traffic through vicinity roadways must also be pr ovided. The
distribution estimates shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department.
The directions of approach and departure of the proposed project’s generated trips, via the area’s street
system through project driveways and all study intersections, must be presented in the report. The
technical analysis steps, basic methods, and assumptions used in this work must be clearly stated and
approved by the City. The assumed trip distribution and assignment must represent the most logically
travelled route for drivers accessing the proposed project. These routes should be developed using the
SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand Model and refined by observation of travel patterns to and from
existing land uses in the study area.
Item 9.b. - Page 481
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 7
Chapter 3:
CEQA Transportation
Impact Analysis
Item 9.b. - Page 482
Chapter 3: CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 8
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
For purposes of transportation analysis, VMT refers to the amount and distance of automobile travel
attributable to a project. Baseline VMT is established as the Countywide average including incorporated
cities as calculated by the SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand Model (regional average).
The baseline VMT per Capita is 20.2, and baseline VMT per Employee is 14.0.
Baseline VMT metrics may be updated periodically, at the City’s discretion, for a variety of reasons, such
as to maintain an accurate reflection of existing land use or travel conditions, to coincide with changes to
VMT analysis best practices, and to reflect updates to the SLOCOG Regional Transportation Plan/
Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) and/or regional model. Project applicants may also elect to
calculate the baseline VMT metric utilizing a different methodology or data source, upon demonstrating a
need to update the values presented in this document due to changes in existing land use or travel
conditions, and upon providing substantial evidence that the baseline VMT calculation follows guidance
from OPR and is defensible under CEQA, including accounting for full trip lengths, not restricted to
jurisdictional boundaries, and accounting for vehicle trips to and from the County.
The VMT threshold for residential and non-residential land use projects shall comply with the 15% below
baseline thresholds as set in this document, and the VMT threshold for retail, industrial, or other projects
shall comply with the zero-net increase in total regional VMT threshold as set in this document.
Projects Assumed to be Less Than Significant.
The California Office of Planning & Research Technical Advisory has established the following thresholds
under which development projects are presumed to have less than significant impacts on vehicle miles
traveled. Projects that meet any of these criteria are assumed to have a less than significant impact and
do not require CEQA review as it relates to transportation.
A) Project is consistent with the Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or General Plan and
generates fewer than 110 daily trips based on the most current edition of the Institute of
Traffic Engineer’s Trip Generation Manual.
B) Projects that are within ½ mile of a transit stop at the intersection of two transit routes with 15
minute or less headways. Unless the project:
a. Has a floor to area ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75, or
b. Includes more parking than required under the City’s zoning code, or
c. Is inconsistent with the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, City Zoning Code, or
City Land Use Policies (i.e. General Plan or Specific Plan), or
d. Replaces affordable housing with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units.
Item 9.b. - Page 483
Chapter 3: CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 9
C) Project is Locally-serving retail defined as retail project within an urban environment of less
than 50,000 square feet. However, retail projects of less than 50,000 square feet may still be
regionally serving (i.e., auto dealerships & specialty retailers), therefore each project should be
considered on a case-by-case basis by City staff to determine if they are likely to attract
regional trips. The City should consider project-specific information such as market surveys or
economic impact analysis that may more accurately determine market geography.
D) Transportation projects that are expected to reduce or have no impact on VMT will not require
a quantitative VMT analysis. These projects include, but are not limited to, road diets (traffic
lane reductions/narrowing), roundabouts, roadway rehabilitation and maintenance, safety
improvements that do not substantially increase auto capacity, installation or reconfiguration
of lanes not for through traffic (addition of left/right turn lanes, etc.), timing of traffic signals,
removal of on-street parking, addition or enhancement of pedestrian, bicycle and transit
facilities and services.
Residential Based Land Use
Project VMT per capita shall be calculated by performing a run of the SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand
Model and comparing the total regional residential VMT with and without project to determine total
project VMT. Total project VMT then shall be divided by the proposed dwelling units multiplied by the
City’s average persons per household from the US Census (2.54 Average Persons Per Household).
VMT per Capita =Total Regional VMT for Home Based Trips
(Proposed Dwelling Units) 𝑥 (Avg.Persons per Household)
Significance Criteria: Project VMT per capita exceeds (17.2) 15% below the existing regional average VMT
per capita.
Employment Based Land Use
Project VMT per capita shall be calculated by performing a run of the SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand
Model and comparing the total regional work VMT with and without project to determine total project
VMT. Total project VMT then shall be divided by the proposed square feet divided by the average square
feet per worker.
VMT per Employee =Total Regional VMT for Home Based Work Trips
(Proposed Office Sq.Ft.) / (Avg.Sq.Ft.per Worker)
Significance Criteria: Project VMT per employee exceeds (11.9) 15% below the existing regional average
VMT per employee.
For purposes of calculating work square footage to employee ratios on a project-by-project basis, the
American Community Survey and employment density shown in Table 3-1 below should be considered.
The City retains discretion for determining the appropriate ratio assumptions for each project application.
Item 9.b. - Page 484
Chapter 3: CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 10
Table 3-1: Example Employment Density
Source: Employment Density Report Table 1A, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), 2001.
Retail, Industrial, & Other
Project VMT per capita shall be calculated by performing a run of the SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand
Model and comparing the total regional VMT with and without project to determined total project VMT.
Significance Criteria: Project VMT results in a total net increase of the regional VMT.
Transportation Projects
For transportation projects that increase auto capacity, such as the addition of through lanes on existing
or new highways, which would likely lead to a measurable and substantial increase in VMT, quantitative
analysis is required to calculate the amount of additional vehicle travel anticipated. For transportation
projects that have already been evaluated for VMT at a programmatic level, such as within a General Plan
or Specific Plan, the City may tier from that analysis. For transportation projects located within the City
that are anticipated to increase vehicle travel, the VMT threshold of significance shall be evaluated and
determined on a case-by-case basis, while ensuring that the analysis addresses:
A) Direct, indirect and cumulative effects of the transportation project, including potential for
induced demand (CEQA Guidelines §15064(d) and (h));
B) Near-term and long-term effects of the transportation project (CEQA Guidelines §§15063(a)(1),
15126. 2(a));
C) The transportation project’s consistency with state greenhouse gas reduction goals (Pub. Res.
Code §21099);
Item 9.b. - Page 485
Chapter 3: CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 11
D) The impact of the transportation project on the development of multimodal transportation
networks (Pub. Res. Code §21099); and
E) The impact of the transportation project on the development of a diversity of land uses (Pub.
Res. Code §21099).
Mixed-Use Projects
Each proposed use will be analyzed separately and compared to the corresponding threshold.
Alternatively, the City may consider only the project’s dominant use where doing so will not
underestimate potential transportation impacts resulting from the project. In the analysis of each use, a
project should take credit for internal capture.
Safety
Intersections
For each of the study intersections an assessment of geometric and operational conditions, turn pocket
queues, and review of the City’s Local Roadway Safety Plan shall be conducted.
Significance Criteria:
A) Introduction of geometric or operational elements which are inconsistent with adopted local
and state design standards & policies.
B) Project traffic exceeds intersection turn pocket storage length(s) or exacerbates already
exceeded turn pocket storage lengths.
C) Project traffic added to intersections identified in the City’s adopted Local Roadway Safety Plan
and found to potentially exacerbate the identified collision pattern.
Segments
For each of the study segments and project frontages an assessment of geometry, access, and review of
the City’s Local Roadway Safety Plan shall be conducted.
Significance Criteria:
A) Introduction of geometric or operational elements which are inconsistent with adopted local
and state design standards & policies.
B) Project access points on collectors and arterials are within the functional area of adjacent
signalized intersections.
C) Project traffic added to intersections identified in the City’s adopted Local Roadway Safety Plan
and found to potentially exacerbate the identified collision pattern.
Item 9.b. - Page 486
Chapter 3: CEQA Transportation Impact Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 12
Safety Mitigation Measures
• Geometric or Operational Modifications
• Extension of turn pockets
• Modification of Access Points and/or Turning Movement Restrictions
• Implementation of Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) recommendations
Induced Travel
Significance Criteria: Project introduces roadway improvements which in and of themselves increase net
vehicle trip frequency and distance, improved travel time allows driving to substitute for non -travel
activities, excluding travel shifted from other times and routes.
Induced Travel Mitigation Measures
Project Infrastructure Modification
Item 9.b. - Page 487
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 13
Chapter 4:
Local Transportation
Policy Analysis
Item 9.b. - Page 488
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 14
Transportation Analysis Scenarios
Typically, TIAR studies will require the analysis of three (3) conditions, with and without the proposed
Project. These conditions are: Existing Conditions, Short-Term Conditions, and Cumulative Conditions. At
the discretion of the City Community Development Department, fewer conditions may be allowed.
Additional scenarios may be required based on project characteristics, such as Project phasing, at the
discretion of the City.
Within each of the conditions, both AM and PM weekday peak hours must be analyzed at all study
intersections and average daily traffic conditions must be analyzed at all study roadway segments, noon
peak hour may also be required by the City when volumes are greater than AM or PM peaks. The City
Community Development Department may also require weekend peak hour and/or daily analysis if the
project is expected to generate significant weekend traffic. The following scenarios will typically be
required for analysis:
• Existing Conditions
• Existing Plus Project Conditions
• Short-Term with No Project Conditions
• Short-Term with Project Conditions
• Cumulative with No Project Conditions
• Cumulative with Project Conditions
Technical Analysis Parameters
The following section outlines the methodology and analysis parameters TIAR studies must use to
quantify traffic operations at study locations. This section also describes multi-modal analysis
methodologies TIAR studies must follow when quantifying non-vehicular mode service levels.
Intersections
Motor Vehicle Level of Service
Intersection traffic operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Service” (LOS).
Intersection LOS must be calculated for all intersection control types using the methods documented in
the latest edition of the Transportation Research Board Publication Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The
current edition of the HCM is the Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016 (if
intersection configuration is not supported by HCM 6, HCM 2000 methodologies may be used).
Intersection LOS provides a graduated description of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade
A through F is assigned to an intersection representing progressively worsening traffic conditions based
Item 9.b. - Page 489
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 15
on delay calculations. For signalized intersections, roundabouts, and All-Way-Stop-Controlled (AWSC)
intersections, intersection delays and LOS are average values for all intersection movements. For Two-
Way Stop-Controlled (TWSC) intersections, intersection delays and LOS are representative of the worst-
case intersection approach. The delay-based LOS criteria for different types of intersection control are
outlined in Table 4-1.
Table 4-1: Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections
Level of Service Roundabout Delay Signal Delay All-Way Stop Delay
A < 10.0 < 10.0 < 10.0
B >10 and < 15.0 >10 and < 20.0 >10 and < 15.0
C >15 and < 25.0 >20 and < 35.0 >15 and < 25.0
D >25 and < 35.0 >35 and < 55.0 >25 and < 35.0
E >35 and < 50.0 >55 and < 80.0 >35 and < 50.0
F > 50.0 > 80.0 > 50.0
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes intersection Level of Service to exceed or exacerbates already
exceeded intersection Level of Service below D.
Motor Vehicle Intersection Level of Service Conditions of Approval
• Intersection Improvements
• Improvements to adjacent Bicycle & Pedestrian facilities
• Improvement in Transit service
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
Intersection bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS).
Intersection LTS must be calculated for all intersection control types using the methods documented in
the paper, Low Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-19,
May 2012. Bicycle LTS quantifies the stress level of a given roadway segment by considering a variety of
criteria, including street width (number of lanes), speed limit or prevailing speed, presence and width of
bike lanes, and the presence and width of parking lanes. Bicycle LTS is a suitability rating system of the
safety, comfort, and convenience of transportation facilities from the perspective of the user. Moreover,
the methodology allows planning practitioners to assess gaps in connectivity that may discourage active
users from traversing roadways.
Bicycle LTS scores roadway facilities into one of four classifications or ratings for measuring the effects of
traffic-based stress on bicycle riders, with 1 being the lowest stress or most comfortable, and 4 being the
highest stress or least comfortable. Generally, LTS score of 1 indicates the facility provides a traffic stress
Item 9.b. - Page 490
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 16
tolerable by most children and less experienced riders, such as multi-use paths that are separated from
motorized traffic. An LTS score of 4 indicates a stress level tolerable by only the most experienced cyclists
who are comfortable with high-volume and high-speed, mixed traffic environments. The Figure below
presents the four scoring classifications, subsequent tables show the criteria associated with determining
the LTS score.
The Bicycle LTS methodology is comprised of three scoring categories: roadway segments, intersection
approaches where right turn lanes exist, and unsignalized intersection crossings. The Bicycle LTS scoring
criteria for intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, and for unsignalized intersection
crossings are provided below.
Table 4-2 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes
Right-turn Lane
Configuration
Right-turn
lane length
(ft)
Bike Lane
Approach
Alignment2
Vehicle Turning
Speed (mph)3 LTS Score
With Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 150 Straight ≤ 15 LTS 2
Single >150 Straight ≤ 20 LTS 3
Single Any Left ≤ 15 LTS 3
Single1 or Dual Exclusive/ Shared Any Any Any LTS 4
Without a Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 75 ≤ 15 (no effect
on LTS)
Single 75-150 ≤ 15 LTS 3
Otherwise LTS 4
1 Any other single right turn lane configuration not shown above.
2 The right turn criteria are based on whether the bike lane stays straight or shifts to the left.
3 This is vehicle speed at the corner, not the speed crossing the bike lane. Corner radius can also be used as a proxy for turning
speeds.
4 There is no effect on LTS if the bikeway is physically separated from traffic, as on a shared-use path.
Item 9.b. - Page 491
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 17
Table 4-3 LTS Criteria for Unsignalized Crossings Without a Median Refuge
Speed Limit of Street Being
Crossed
Width of Street Being Crossed
Up to 3 lanes 4-5 lanes 6+ lanes
Up to 25 mph LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 4
30 mph LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 4
35 mph LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4
40+ LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4
1 Refuge should be at least 10 feet to accommodate a wide range of bicyclists (i.e. bicycle with a trailer) for LTS 1, otherwise
LTS=2 for refuges 6 to <10 feet.
Table 4-4 LTS Criteria for Unsignalized Crossings With a Median Refuge
Speed Limit of Street Being
Crossed
Width of Street Being Crossed
Up to 2 lanes 4-5 lanes 6+ lanes
Up to 25 mph LTS 1 LTS 1 LTS 2
30 mph LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3
35 mph LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4
40+ LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4
1 Refuge should be at least 10 feet to accommodate a wide range of bicyclists (i.e. bicycle with a trailer) for LTS 1, otherwise
LTS=2 for refuges 6 to <10 feet.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates approaches or
crossings that already exceed LTS 3 at intersections with Class II or Class III facilities.
Bicycle Intersection Level of Traffic Stress Conditions of Approval
• Project Land use Modifications
• Improvements to Bicycle Facilities
Segments
Motor Vehicle Level of Service
Roadway segment traffic operations are quantified through a determination of LOS based on Average
Daily Traffic (ADT). The volume-based LOS criteria for different types of roadways are outlined in Table 4-
5.
Item 9.b. - Page 492
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 18
Table 4-5 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Roadways
Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (V/C) <0.6 0.6-0.7 0.7-0.8 0.8-0.9 0.9-1.0
Roadway Segment Type Max. Average Daily Traffic (ADT) For Given Service Level
LOS “A” LOS “B” LOS “C” LOS “D” LOS “E”
Six Lane Freeway 42,000 64,800 92,400 111,600 120,000
Four Lane Freeway 28,000 43,200 61,600 74,400 80,000
Four Lane Highway 4,800 9,600 15,800 27,000 45,800
Two Lane Highway 2,400 4,800 7,900 13,500 22,900
Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 22,000 25,000 29,000 33,000 36,000
Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000
Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,500 18,000
Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
Four Lane Collector 12,000 15,000 18,000 21,000 24,000
Two Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000
Note: All volumes are approximate and assume ideal roadway characteristics. Actual threshold volumes for each Level of
Service listed above may vary depending on a variety of factors including (but not limited to) roadway curvature and grade,
intersection or interchange spacing, driveway spacing, percentage of trucks and other heavy vehicles, travel lane widths, signal
timing characteristics, on-street parking, volume of cross traffic and pedestrians, etc.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project degrades segment Level of Service or exacerbates already degraded
segment level below LOS D.
Motor Vehicle Roadway Segment LOS Conditions of Approval
• Roadway Segment widening, channelization or other capacity or safety enhancing
improvements
• Improvements to adjacent Bicycle & Pedestrian facilities
• Improvement in Transit service
Pedestrians
Network Connectivity
Inconsistency Criteria: Project lacks connectivity to the existing pedestrian network beyond the project
frontage.
Sidewalk Buffer
Inconsistency Criteria: Project introduces un-buffered sidewalk on roadways with speed limits above 35
mph.
Item 9.b. - Page 493
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 19
Pedestrian Conditions of Approval
• Project Land use Modifications
• Improvements to Bicycle Facilities
Bicycles
Network Connectivity
Inconsistency Criteria: Project which fronts a planned bicycle network; omits planned network frontage
improvements, lacks connectivity to the planned bicycle network, or obstructs implementation of the
planned network.
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
The Bicycle LTS scoring criteria for roadway segments with bike lanes and for mixed traffic (no bi ke lanes)
are provided below.
Item 9.b. - Page 494
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 20
Table 4-6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes
Lane Factor LTS Score
LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4
Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction)
1 (no effect) 2 or more (no effect)
Sum of bike lane and parking lane
width (includes marked buffer
and paved gutter)
15 ft. or
more
14 or 14.5 ft.2 13.5 ft. or less (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed 25 mph or
less
30 mph 35 mph 40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas)
rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Not Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction)
1 2, if directions
are separated
by a raised
median
more than 2, or
2 without a
separating
median
(no effect)
Bike Lane Width (includes
marked buffer and paved gutter)
6 ft. or more 5.5 ft. or less (no effect) (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed 30 mph or
less
(no effect) 35 mph 40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas)
rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Note: 1 (no effect) = factor does not trigger an increase to this level of traffic stress.
2 If speed limit < 25 mph or Class = residential, then any width is acceptable for LTS 2.
Item 9.b. - Page 495
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 21
Table 4-7 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic
Street Width
Speed Limit 2-3 lanes 4-5 lanes 6+ lanes
Up to 25 mph LTS 1 or 21 LTS 3 LTS 4
30 mph LTS 2 or 31 LTS 4 LTS 4
35+ mph LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4
1Use lower value for streets without marked centerlines or classified as residential and with fewer than 3 lanes; use higher
value otherwise.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates segments that
already exceed LTS 3 on Class II or Class III routes.
Bicycle Roadway Segment Level of Traffic Stress Conditions of Approval
• Project Land use Modifications
• Improvements to Bicycle Facilities on Roadway Segments, including buffering, bike lane
widening, sharrows and other bicycle safety enhancements.
Transit
Inconsistency Criteria:
• Project Frontage or Frontages(s) to the Public Right of Way are more than ¼ mi along ADA
accessible pedestrian routes.
• Project lacks connectivity to the existing pedestrian network beyond the project frontage.
Transit Conditions of Approval
• Project Land use Modifications
• Improvements to Transit Stop Locations
Neighborhood Traffic
Inconsistency Criteria:
• Project traffic causes local residential streets to exceed or exacerbates streets that already
exceed 1,500 ADT.
• Project traffic causes collector residential streets to exceed or exacerbates streets that already
exceed 3,000 ADT.
Item 9.b. - Page 496
Chapter 4: Local Transportation Policy Analysis
City of Arroyo Grande | Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines | Page 22
Neighborhood Traffic Conditions of Approval
• Project Land use Modifications
• Project Site Plan Redesign to redistribute neighborhood traffic to below local residential and/or
collector roadway criteria.
• Introduce traffic calming measures as secondary options, to redistribute neighborhood traffic.
Item 9.b. - Page 497
ACTION MINUTES
MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020
ARROYO GRANDE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Martin called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Planning Commission: Commissioners Jamie Maraviglia, Andrea Montes, Ken Sage, Vice
Chair Frank Schiro and Chair Glenn Martin were present.
Staff Present: City Manager / Acting Community Development Director Whitney
McDonald, City Engineer Robin Dickerson and Assistant Planner
Patrick Holub were present.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Chair Martin led the flag salute.
4.AGENDA REVIEW
None.
5. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
None.
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
The Commission received two supplemental memorandums regarding item 9.a.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.a. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the October 6, 2020 Regular Planning
Commission meeting.
8.PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
9. NON-PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.a STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW AND RECEIVE COMMENT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
REGARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning Commission take public comment and
provide direction and input to staff regarding the Circulation Element Update.
City Manager / Acting Community Development Director Whitney McDonald introduced the
consultants.
Todd Tregenza, consultant, started the presentation, gave an overview of the updates made to the
Circulation Element and responded to Commissioner questions regarding VMT, LOS and bike routes.
Rosanna Southern, consultant, continued the presentation and gave an overview of the data that was
collected.
Attachment 2
Item 9.b. - Page 498
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 2
MINUTES
NOVEMBER 17, 2020
Chair Martin opened the public comment period.
Jim Guthrie questioned why the Fredericks property was not included in the analysis and why the
East Grand Avenue Master Plan and The Halcyon Complete Streets Plan are not being completed
prior to updating the Circulation Element.
Hearing no further public comment, Chair Martin closed the public comment period.
10. ADM INISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE NOVEMBER 3, 2020
Case No. Applicant Address Description Action Appeal
Deadline
TUP 20-020 Central Coast
CORSA
207 Nelson
Street
Car club event on June
12, 2021 7:00am to
3:00pm
A 11/23/2020
TUP 20-026 Hopper Family
Christmas
Trees
1587 El
Camino Real
Tree sales from
November 15th through
December 25th
A 11/23/2020
11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
Vice Chair Schiro informed the community that an outdoor dining tent will be placed on Short Street
for diners at Rooster Creek or Gina’s to utilize.
Commission Montes thanked Five Cities Fire and CalFire for putting out the fire.
12. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Manager / Acting Community Development Director McDonald:
1. Thanked the Planning Commissioners for a successful Zoom debut; and
2. Mentioned the changes made by the state, that she hopes everyone will stay safe through
the holidays and lent support to City businesses that will need to move operations outdoors.
13. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:28 p.m.
ATTEST:
PATRICK HOLUB GLENN MARTIN, CHAIR
ASSISTANT PLANNER
(Approved at PC Meeting 1-5-21)
Item 9.b. - Page 499
ACTION MINUTES
MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 2021
ARROYO GRANDE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Martin called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Planning Commission: Commissioners Jamie Maraviglia, Ken Sage, Jim Guthrie and Chair
Glenn Martin were present. Vice Chair Frank Schiro was absent.
Staff Present: Community Development Director Rob Fitzroy, City Engineer Robin
Dickerson, Associate Planner Andrew Perez and Assistant Planner
Patrick Holub were present.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Chair Martin led the flag salute.
4.AGENDA REVIEW
None.
5. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Laurel Runnels Moss spoke about the construction project at Castillo Del Mar and Valley Road and
expressed her concerns about the drainage for the roadway.
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
The Commission received one supplemental memo regarding item 9.a.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.a. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the March 2, 2021 Regular Planning
Commission meeting.
7.b. CONSIDERATION OF TIME EXTENSION 21-002 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-
005; ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARROYO GRANDE MUICIPAL
CODE; LOCATION 1495 EL CAMINO REAL; APPLICANT – SCOTT PACE; REPRESENTATIVE
–GREG SOTO
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution
approving Time Extension 21-002
Action: Commissioner Maraviglia moved and Commissioner Guthrie seconded the motion to
approve the Consent Agenda.
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Maraviglia, Guthrie, Sage and Martin
NOES: None
ABSENT: Schiro
Attachment 4
Item 9.b. - Page 500
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 2
MINUTES
APRIL 20, 2021
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
9. NON-PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.a CONSIDERATION OF A PROJECT STATUS UPDATE REGARDING THE CIRCULATION
ELEMENT UPDATE; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001 (Fitzroy)
Community Development Director Fitzroy introduced the item and the consultant team.
Todd Tregenza, GHD, provided the project status update and responded to Commissioner questions
regarding average daily trip numbers, levels of service at specific intersections and the location of
planned trails throughout the City.
Chair Martin opened the public comment period.
Laurel Runnels Moss spoke about the impacts the plan could have on her family’s property and
farming operations.
Seeing no further public comments, Chair Martin closed the public comment period.
10. ADM INISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE FEBRUARY 16, 2021
None.
11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
None.
12. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
Responding to a question from Chair Martin, Community Development Director Fitzroy informed the
Commission that there has not been a firm date selected for the return to in-person meetings, but
that it would likely be within the coming months.
13. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:04 p.m.
ATTEST:
PATRICK HOLUB GLENN MARTIN, CHAIR
ASSISTANT PLANNER
(Approved at PC Meeting 5-4-21)
Item 9.b. - Page 501
ACTION MINUTES
MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 2021
ARROYO GRANDE COUNCIL CHAMBERS
215 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Martin called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Planning Commission: Commissioners Jim Guthrie, Jamie Maraviglia, Ken Sage, Vice Chair
Schiro and Chair Glenn Martin were present.
Staff Present: City Manager Whitney McDonald, City Engineer Robin Dickerson,
Associate Planner Andrew Perez and Assistant Planner Patrick Holub
were present.
3.FLAG SALUTE
Chair Martin led the flag salute.
4.AGENDA REVIEW
Chair Martin recommended and the Commission agreed that item 7.b be pulled from the consent
agenda.
5. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
None.
6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
The Commission received one supplemental memo regarding item 8.a as well as received one email
after the start of the meeting in support of the project that was read into the record.
7. CONSENT AGENDA
7.a. CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the May 18, 2021 Regular Planning Commission
meeting.
Action: Commissioner Guthrie moved and Vice Chair Schiro seconded the motion to approve the
minutes of May 18, 2021.
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Guthrie, Schiro, Maraviglia, Sage and Martin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
7. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
7.b. CONSIDERATION OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 21-001; LOCATION – 811 EAST
CHERRY AVENUE; APPLICANT – KAREN ESTES, REPRESENTATIVE – TRISH HALL
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution
approving Lot Line Adjustment No. 21-001
Attachment 6
Item 9.b. - Page 502
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 2
MINUTES
JUNE 1, 2021
Associate Planner Perez responded to Commissioner questions regarding a structure over a property
line, necessary future improvements and construction occurring on East Cherry Avenue.
City Manager McDonald expressed a desire to have the City Attorney review the application and
recommended continuance of the item.
Action: Chair Martin moved and Vice Chair Schiro seconded the motion to continue item 7.b. to a
date uncertain.
AYES: Martin, Schiro, Maraviglia, and Sage
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
8.a CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION CASE 21-001; APPEAL OF
PLOT PLAN REVIEW 21-007 FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A VACATION RENTAL;
LOCATION – 341 ZOGATA WAY; APPELLANT – VICTOR AND JOAN MONTALBAN, ET. AL.
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution
denying Appeal Case No. 21-001 and approving Plot Plan Review 21-007.
Assistant Planner Holub presented the staff report and responded to Commissioner questions
regarding the downstairs guest room’s permitting status, performance standards, as well as the
potential for adding additional conditions.
Chair Martin opened the public hearing.
Sandy Simpson spoke against the project, reiterating her concerns from her letter.
Victor Montalban, appellant, spoke against the project and expressed his displeasure with the
approval process.
Joan Montalban, appellant, spoke against the project and expressed displeasure with the approval
process.
Don Simpson, Zogata Way, spoke against the project stating that it is not appropriate to have a
business in a residential neighborhood.
Steph Burkard spoke in support of the project.
Janice Reid spoke against the project stating her displeasure with the appeal process.
Hearing no further public comment, Chair Martin closed the public hearing.
Action: Vice Chair Schiro moved and Commissioner Guthrie seconded the motion to adopt a
Resolution denying Appeal Case No. 21-001 and approving Plot Plan Review 21-007.
Item 9.b. - Page 503
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 3
MINUTES
JUNE 1, 2021
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Schiro, Guthrie, Maraviglia, Sage and Martin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
8.b CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001, CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE, MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT GUIDELINES; LOCATION –
CITYWIDE
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution
recommending that the City Council adopt the 2021 Circulation Element Update, adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and adopt
the Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines attached to the proposed Resolution.
City Manager McDonald introduced the consultant team.
Todd Tregenza, consultant, presented the staff report and responded to Commissioner questions
regarding roadway widths, private versus public streets and flexibility in standard street designs.
City Engineer Dickerson responded to Commissioner questions regarding roadway widths and street
cross-sections.
Chair Martin opened the public hearing. Hearing no public comment, Chair Martin closed the public
hearing.
Action: Commissioner Guthrie moved and Vice Chair Schiro seconded the motion to adopt a
Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the 2021 Circulation Element Update, adopt
the Mitigated Negative Declaration in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), and adopt the Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines with the added
suggestion that equal consideration be given to minimum versus maximum width roadways.
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Guthrie, Schiro, Maraviglia, Sage and Martin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
9. NON-PUBLIC HEARINGS
CONSIDERATION OF A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEARS 2021/22 –
2025/26 CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN
Recommended Action: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution finding
that the Capital Improvement Program is consistent with the General Plan.
Assistant Planner Holub presented the staff report and responded to Commissioner questions
regarding General Plan policies.
Action: Chair Martin moved and Commissioner Sage seconded the motion to adopt a Resolution
finding that the Capital Improvement Program is consistent with the General Plan.
Item 9.b. - Page 504
PLANNING COMMISSION PAGE 4
MINUTES
JUNE 1, 2021
The motion passed on the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Martin, Sage, Guthrie, Maraviglia, and Schiro
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
10. ADM INISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE MAY 18, 2021
11. COMMISSION COMMUNICATIONS
Commissioner Guthrie mentioned that the public hearing was not opened for item 8.b.
Chair Martin opened the public hearing for item 8.b. Seeing no public comments, Chair Martin closed
the public hearing for item 8.b.
Vice Chair Schiro mentioned that the Arroyo Grande High School baseball finally lost a game and are
highly ranked in CIF.
Commissioner Maraviglia asked if the June 15th meeting would be held in person. Responding, City
Manager McDonald said that the City Council would be discussing in-person meetings on June 8th.
12. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None.
13. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
ATTEST:
PATRICK HOLUB GLENN MARTIN, CHAIR
ASSISTANT PLANNER
(Approved at PC Meeting 6-15-21)
Case No. Applicant Address Description Action Appeal
Deadline
PPR21-011 David Murray,
St. Barnabas
Church
301 Trinity
Ave
Construction of a 200sf
accessory storage
building in the PF zone
A 6/2/21
PPR21-012 Anthony
Viggiano
454 Spanish
Moss
Establishment of a
Vacation Rental in the
PD zone
A 6/2/21
Item 9.b. - Page 505
Objectives and Policies
Streets and Highways, Standards
Level of Service
Alternative Circulation/Transportation Systems
Transit & School Buses
Bike & Pedestrian
Recreation Trails
Truck & Emergency Routes
Scenic Routes
Coordinated Land Use and Circulation
Planning and Funding
Implementation Measures
CIRCULATION/TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT
Adopted by City Council, October 9, 2001
Attachment 8
Item 9.b. - Page 506
CE - 1
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Streets and Highways Standards
CT1. Plan and develop a coordinated and efficient, functional classification system
of local streets and highways throughout the community that designates the
purpose and physical characteristics of the roadway, composed of the five
categories.
CT1-1 State Freeway 101, 4 to 6 lane with interchange access: Caltrans design
standards or as mutually approved. Typically 120’ or more.
CT1-2 Major Arterial Street – 4 lane with or without median; City controlled access, on-
street parking optional; include bike lanes, sidewalks, transit turnouts and other
design features: 80’ – 104’ r of w.
CT1-3 State Highway 227 or Minor Arterial Streets – 2 to 4 lanes with or without
median/turn lane: State or City controlled access, on-street parking optional;
includes bike lanes, sidewalks, some transit and other design features: 64’ – 104’
r of w.
CT1-4 Collector Streets – 2 lanes with or without turn lane, controlled access, on-street
parking optional; includes bike lanes, sidewalks, some transit and other design
features: 84’ r of w.
CT 1-5 Local Streets – 2 lanes, access and on-street parking; includes some bike lanes,
sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or
other special conditions: 42’ – 60’ r of w.
CT1-6 All street standards shall be reviewed and revised as determined appropriate
including optional features such as landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the
City. Alternative local street standards for neo-traditional subdivisions or Planned
Developments/Specific Plans will also be considered.
Level of Service
CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)’C’ or better on all streets and
controlled intersections.
CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS ‘D’ at a minimum and plan
improvement to achieve LOS ‘C’ (Los ‘E’ or ‘F’ unacceptable = significant adverse
impact unless Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings
approved). The design and funding for such planned improvements shall be
sufficiently definite to enable construction within a reasonable period of time.
CT2-2 The City should conduct periodic traffic counts, monitor selected streets and
model arterial and collector street network to determine where LOS ‘C’ is not
attained and provide a current baseline for development project impact analyses.
Item 9.b. - Page 507
CE - 2
CT2-3 Require that General Plan Amendments, Rezoning Applications or development
projects involving 20 or more estimated peak hour trip additions provide traffic
studies according to City LOS policy, including subsequent amendments and
refinements.
CT2-3.1 Traffic studies shall include roadway capacity, safety and design analysis
using Highway Capacity Manual methodology.
CT2-3.2 Traffic studies shall describe possible mitigation measures available to
attain LOS ‘C’ or better and project-related methods of funding.
CT2-3.3 Public Works Director should meet with applicants prior to application to
discuss study scope, probable impacts and mitigation.
CT2-4 The City should periodically review LOS policy and actual system performance to
identify model deficiencies and consider Capital Improvement Programs,
mitigation measures and/or policy revision and refinement.
Item 9.b. - Page 508
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
2001 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
CIRCULATION - MAP 3
= Revised October 9, 2001
Highway/Arterial
Collector
Circulation Study Area
Pedestrian Area
Proposed Signal/Alternative
Priority 1 Transit Stops
Priority 2 Transit Stops
Signal/Intersection Alternative
T
T
T
TTT
T
T
T
T
T
T
T T
T
T T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
Path/Trail
Item 9.b. - Page 509
CE - 4
Circulation/Transportation Map-3
Scenic Routes
Bikeways and Pedestrian Facilities
Recreation Trails
(Refer to Parks and Recreation Element)
Item 9.b. - Page 510
CE - 5
Alternative Circulation and transportation Systems
CT3. Maintain and improve existing “multi-modal” circulation and transportation
systems and facilities, to maximize alternatives to new street and highway
construction.
CT3-1 In cooperation with SCAT and CCAT or other operators, provide for safe and
efficient transit system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth,
elderly, low-income or disabled persons.
CT3-1.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial
and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments.
CT3-1.2 The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public
transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip
reduction (flex time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand
management.
CT3-2 Cooperate with Lucia Mar Unified School District to plan improved school bus
transportation system, including parking and loading, maintenance and storage,
bike ad sidewalk access facilities.
CT3-2.1 Consider shared corporation yard to relocate existing maintenance and
storage from residential neighborhoods.
CT3-2.2 Program a priority system of school bus routes, stops/shelter, sidewalks
and bike lanes to serve schools and parks and link with other transit and
alternative transportation.
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.
CT3-3.1 Improve bike lanes and sidewalks serving all school, parks, and selected
transit and community facilities as priority system, including
neighborhood connections in addition to conventional streets.
CT3-3.2 Plan and prioritize Village Core and E. Grand Avenue Mixed Use corridor
improvements.
CT3-3.3 Update City Bikeway Plan to meet State guidelines to seek increase
regional and state funding assistance.
CT3-4.4 Plan and prioritize greenway trail network along Arroyo Grande, Tally Ho
and Meadow Creeks and linking with other open space or recreational
trails within the City and region.
CT3-4 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the
arterial and collector street network to minimize impact on local streets,
particularly residential neighborhoods.
Item 9.b. - Page 511
CE - 6
CT3-4.1 Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining Cities
designated routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT3-4.2 Emergency access design standards should limit cul-de-sac lengths,
provide a logical grid or connected system of local streets providing at
least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize through traffic
on local streets, particularly traversing single family residential
neighborhoods.
CT3-5 The City should designate a connected system of “scenic streets and highways”
and consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards appropriate to
this network for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT3-5.1 The basic scenic route system should include these streets and highways
as shown on the Circulation Element Map.
CT3-5.2 Discourage on-street parking in Agriculture areas to enhance visibility
and minimize trespassing.
CT3-5.3 Develop adequate public or shared off-street parking lots conveniently
located behind and beside buildings in Village Core and Mixed Use
Corridors, according to area design guidelines.
Coordinated Land Use and Circulation
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.
CT4-1 Promote “transit-oriented developments” and coordinated, compatible land use
pattern by encouraging multiple family residential and special needs housing in
Mixed Use Corridors, Village Core and near Office, Regional Commercial,
Business Park and major Community Facility areas.
CT4-1.1 Transit routes should serve E. Grand Avenue Mixed Use corridor, Village
Core, and West Branch street Regional Commercial areas.
CT4-1.2 Future transit loop to serve Halcyon/Fair Oaks, Offices, Village Core,
James Way and Rancho Parkway residential areas.
CT4-1.3 Consider higher density allowance and reduced parking requirements
within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating Development
Code.
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.
Item 9.b. - Page 512
CE - 7
Planning and Funding
CT5. Coordinate circulation and transportation planning and funding of collector
and arterial street and highway improvements with other local, County,
SLOCOG, State and federal agencies. Request County contribution to major
street improvement projects.
CT5-1 Update the Regional Transportation Plan to include the Circulation and
Transportation Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Update.
CT5-2 Request that Caltrans, SLOCOG and the County give high priority to
Brisco/Halcyon and Traffic Way/El campo interchange improvements to Freeway
101.
CT5-3 Ask the County to establish a “Road Impact Fee” within Arroyo Grande Fringe
and other non-Agriculture areas of the Arroyo Grande Area of Environmental
Concern, and add to the fees for South County/Nipomo Mesa area based on cost
studies for needed improvements (including portions of City street systems
impacted by regional traffic increases) to serve new development.
CT5-4 Review and revise City circulation and transportation impact fees associated with
new development in Arroyo Grande to assure either facility and system
improvements and/or in-lieu fee payments to maintain adequate facilities and
services at LOS ‘C’ to General Plan buildout, including regional traffic increase
and funding assistance.
CT5-5 Define and preserve “study area” corridors and alternatives for future freeway,
arterial and collector street connections, extensions, completions, reconstruction,
widening, frontage road alternatives or extensions, and/or other improvements
to Circulation and Transportation networks until cooperative resolution of
Element revisions and/or Capital Improvement Programs. (See PSR and other
study areas on Circulation Element).
CT5-5.1 Include Brisco/Halcyon Project Study Report (PSR), Traffic Way/El
Campo PSR and its western connection and other north, west and
eastside study areas.
CT5-5.2 Establish “plan lines” for widening, extension or realignment when
determined by design and environmental analysis, including proposed
funding and priority schedule estimates. (None adopted/Add to CE).
CT5-5.3 When new development occurs in vicinity of study areas or plan lines,
and where legally and financially feasible, require all or portion of rights-
of-way and improvements associated with new development.
CT5-6 Encourage Caltrans, SLOCOG and the County to refine and maintain a regional
traffic model to assist in regional and local circulation and transportation
planning, CIP funding and new development project environmental analysis.
CT5-6.1 Request that the Caltrans, County and SLOCOG evaluate Nipomo Mesa
cumulative growth and development impacts on Arroyo Grande area
circulation and transportation systems prior to Willow Road or other
interchange alternative construction.
Item 9.b. - Page 513
CE - 8
CT5-6.2 Request that the County, Caltrans and SLOCOG consider proportional
participation in projects involving regional traffic impacts.
CT5-7 Utilize assessment and improvement districts and other supplemental private
funding to correct local area deficiencies such as inadequate parking, transit and
streetscape enhancement or completion of local street or trail segments that
benefit the area.
Item 9.b. - Page 514