Loading...
CC 2023-03-14 Agenda Package_RevisedCITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA SUMMARY Tuesday, March 14, 2023, 6:00 p.m. *REVISED AGENDA SUMMARY In person at: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers 215 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 AND via Zoom at: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86752345420 Please click the link above to join the Zoom Meeting: Webinar ID: 867 5234 5420 Or by Telephone: 1-669-900-6833; 1-346-248-7799 This City Council meeting is being conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format. Members of the public may participate and provide public comment on agenda items during the meeting in person at the location identified above, by joining the Zoom meeting, or by submitting written public comments to the Clerk of the Council at publiccomment@arroyogrande.org. Meetings will be broadcast live on Channel 20 and streamed on the City’s website and www.slo-span.org. 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 3.MOMENT OF REFLECTION 4.FLAG SALUTE SOUTH COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY 5.AGENDA REVIEW 5.a Closed Session Announcements None. 5.b Ordinances read in title only None. 6.SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 6.a Introductions of New Firefighters - Cade Posner and Braden Jones (LIEBERMAN) 6.b City Manager Communications (McDONALD) Recommended Action: Receive correspondence/comments as presented by the City Manager and Provide direction, as necessary. 7.CITY COUNCIL REPORTS None. Reports are made during the Second Council Meeting each month. 8.COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. Members of the public may provide public comment in-person or remotely by joining the Zoom meeting utilizing one of the methods provided below. Please use the “raise hand” feature to indicate your desire to provide public comment. Click the link below to join the webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/86752345420; Webinar ID: 867 5234 5420 • Or by Telephone: 1-669-900-6833; 1-346-248-7799 Press * 9 to “raise hand” for public comment • The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or presiding Council Member may: • Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you. • A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you. • It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a future Council agenda. Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council: • Comments should be limited to 3 minutes or less. • Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council members. • Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or member of the audience shall not be permitted. 9.CONSENT AGENDA The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Any member of the public who wishes to comment on any Consent Agenda item may do so at this time. Any Council Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion. 9.a Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification (VALENTINE) Recommended Action: 1) Ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period of February 1 through February 15, 2023; 2) Determine that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) Page 2 of 354 9.b Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits (VALENTINE) Recommended Action: 1) Receive and file the attached report listing investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande as of January 31, 2023, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b); 2) Determine that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) 9.c *Consideration of 1) Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events (McDONALD) Recommended Action: 1) Adopt a Resolution declaring a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 storm events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events; and 3) Make findings that adopting the Resolution continuing a local emergency is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) 9.d Approval of Minutes (MATSON) Recommended Action: Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council Meetings of February 14, 2023 and February 28, 2023, as submitted, and approve the minutes of the Special City Council Meeting of March 2, 2023, as submitted. 9.e Consider Adoption of a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 (ROBESON) Recommended Action: 1) Receive and file an update of the emergency generator replacement project at the FCFA Station 1; 2) Adopt a Resolution determining that there is a need to continue the emergency action for the replacement of the emergency generator in accordance with Public Contract Code Section 22050; and 3) Make findings that the continuation of the emergency action and the update of the Emergency generator replacement project at FCFA Station 1 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 2 exemption, which applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, and where none of the exceptions to the exemption apply. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15302.) 9.f 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report Page 3 of 354 (PEDROTTI) Recommended Action: 1) Review and accept the 2022 General Plan Annual Report (the “Annual Report” or “Report”) and direct staff to forward the Report to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the Department of Housing and Community Development. 2) Find that the request is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5). 10.PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 11.OLD BUSINESS None. 12.NEW BUSINESS 12.a Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast (VALENTINE) Recommended Action: Consider and receive the updated Five-Year Financial Forecast Report. 12.b Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance (PEDROTTI) Recommended Action: Review staff’s proposed ordinance, receive public comment, and provide direction to staff. 12.c Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update (PEDROTTI) Recommended Action: Review the draft Halcyon Complete Streets Plan, receive public comment, and direct staff to solicit comment from stakeholders and community groups and schedule the item for Planning Commission and City Council hearings. 13.COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Any Council Member may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council policies and procedures, Council Members may request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter or request that staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. Any request to place a matter of business for original consideration on a future agenda requires the concurrence of at least one other Council Member. 14.CLOSED SESSION CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: Property: 400 West Branch Street Agency negotiators: Whitney McDonald, City Manager; Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Page 4 of 354 Negotiating parties: Dev Patel, on behalf of Kamla Hotels Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment 15.ADJOURNMENT All staff reports or other written documentation, including any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the City Council within 72 hours of a regular meeting, relating to each item of business on the agenda are available for public inspection during regular business hours in the City Clerk’s office, 300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability-related modification or accommodation, contact the Legislative and Information Services Department at 805-473-5400 as soon as possible and at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date. This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2 Agenda reports can be accessed and downloaded from the City’s website at www.arroyogrande.org If you would like to subscribe to receive email or text message notifications when agendas are posted, you can sign up online through the “Notify Me” feature. City Council Meetings are cablecast live and videotaped for replay on Arroyo Grande’s Government Access Channel 20. The rebroadcast schedule is published at www.slo-span.org. Page 5 of 354 Item 9.a. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Nicole Valentine, Administrative Services Director BY: Lynda Horejsi, Accounting Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Review and ratify cash disbursements. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: There is a $1,069,528.21 fiscal impact that includes the following items:  Accounts Payable Checks $644,612.18  Payroll & Benefit Checks $424,916.03 RECOMMENDATION: 1) Ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period of February 1 through February 15, 2023; 2) Determine that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) BACKGROUND: Cash disbursements are made weekly based on the submission of all required documents supporting the invoices submitted for payment. Prior to payment, Administrative Services staff reviews all disbursement documents to ensure that they meet the approval requirements adopted in the Municipal Code and the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual operations during the period. The disbursements are accou nted for in the FY 2022-23 budget. Page 6 of 354 Item 9.a. City Council Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification March 14, 2023 Page 2 ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Approve staff’s recommendation; 2. Do not approve staff’s recommendation; or 3. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES:  The Administrative Services Department monitors payments of invoices for accountability, accuracy, and completeness using standards approved by the City Council.  Invoices are paid in a timely manner to establish goodwill with merchants.  Discounts are taken where applicable. DISADVANTAGES: There are no disadvantages identified in this recommendation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s websit e in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. February 1 – February 15, 2023 – Accounts Payable Check Register 2. February 10, 2023 – Payroll and Benefit Check Registers Page 7 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name1 02/03/2023 296500 $ 750.00 11/22 WEBSITE STREAMING & ARCHIVING 010.4002.5303 AGP VIDEO, INC2 02/03/2023 296500 1,990.00 11/22 CABLECASTING 010.4002.5330 AGP VIDEO, INC3 02/03/2023 296501 175.00 FIRE HVAC -THERMOSTAT NOT WORKING 010.4213.5303 ALPINE REFRIGERATION4 02/03/2023 296502 1,053.66 HOLIDAY TREE LIGHTING SERVICE 010.0000.2054 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES5 02/03/2023 296502 (568.80) CREDIT FOR RETURNED ITEMS 010.0000.2054 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES6 02/03/2023 296503 22.96 BAN#9391033180 CITY HALL FAX 010.4145.5403 AT&T7 02/03/2023 296503 22.96 BAN#9391033186 CC MACHINE 010.4145.5403 AT&T8 02/03/2023 296503 22.15 BAN#9391033180 CITY HALL FAX 010.4145.5403 AT&T9 02/03/2023 296504 50.00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND-ELM ST 010.0000.2206 JENNY BARLOW10 02/03/2023 296504 106.00 PARK RENTAL REFUND-ELM ST 010.0000.4354 JENNY BARLOW11 02/03/2023 296505 10.00 PD CAR WASHES - ADMIN 010.4201.5601 BOB'S EXPRESS WASH12 02/03/2023 296505 150.00 PD CAR WASHES - PATROL 010.4203.5601 BOB'S EXPRESS WASH13 02/03/2023 296505 10.00 PD CAR WASHES - SUPPORT SERVICES 010.4204.5601 BOB'S EXPRESS WASH14 02/03/2023 296506 340.23 PATROL SUPPLIES - ROUTING SLIPS 010.4203.5255 BOONE PRINTING & GRAPHICS INC15 02/03/2023 296507 77.58 B'FAST W/SANTA POSTERS 010.4424.5252 BURDINE PRINTING (DBA)16 02/03/2023 296507 45.31 VOLUNTEER MOVIE NIGHT INVITATIONS 010.4424.5252 BURDINE PRINTING (DBA)17 02/03/2023 296508 621.11 01/22-12/22 UST MAINT FEE RETURN 010.4305.5303 CA DEPT OF TAX & FEE ADMIN18 02/03/2023 296509 150.00 CPOA - 2023 CHIEF OF POLICE LDP 010.4201.5503 CA PEACE OFFICERS ASSN19 02/03/2023 296510 182.52 BATTERY FOR RESERVOIR #2 640.4712.5603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS20 02/03/2023 296510 175.07 4608 - PARTS 010.4203.5601 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS21 02/03/2023 296511 199.98 ACCT#8245100960104152 PD INTERNET 010.4201.5403 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS22 02/03/2023 296512 400.00 REFUND WOMENS CLUB SECURITY DEPOSIT 010.0000.2206 CHRISTINA CORTES23 02/03/2023 296513 180.00 COSTCO BUSINESS MEMBERSHIP010.4201.5503 COSTCO MEMBERSHIP24 02/03/2023 296514 1,210.00 CASH FOR GRASS REBATE: 1210 SQ 226.4306.5554 SUSAN DENIKE25 02/03/2023 296515 38.33 POISON OAK SCRUB, CAUTION TAPE 220.4303.5255 FARM SUPPLY CO26 02/03/2023 296515 119.25 STRAW WATTLE, WOOD STAKES 220.4303.5613 FARM SUPPLY CO27 02/03/2023 296516 290.27 PW - 44 TIRE REPLACEMENT 612.4610.5601 FIGUEROA'S TIRES28 02/03/2023 296517 1,733.75 191 TALLY HO DESIGN WORK 010.4301.5303 GARING TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES INC29 02/03/2023 296517 968.75 ONGOING SURVEY WORK 010.4301.5303 GARING TAYLOR & ASSOCIATES INC30 02/03/2023 296518 94.77 FLOWERS- MARTINS 010.4101.5504 GRAND BOUQUET31 02/03/2023 296519 29.10 STREETS TRAILER-HOOK AND LATCH 220.4303.5603 HEACOCK TRAILERS & TRUCK32 02/03/2023 296520 41.31 02/23 AETNA RESOURCES EAP-FCFA 010.0000.1111 HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCE CTR33 02/03/2023 296520 165.24 02/23 AETNA RESOURCES EAP 010.4145.5147 HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCE CTR34 02/03/2023 296521 1,280.00 CASH FOR GRASS-1280 SQFT 226.4306.5554 ROBERT E HOWELLS35 02/03/2023 296522 81.36 FUEL 010.4203.5608 JB DEWAR, INC36 02/03/2023 296523 7,538.00 2023 MEMBERSHIP DUES 010.4145.5503 LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES37 02/03/2023 296524 480.00 11/22 FACILITY USE-OCC ZUMBA & 010.4424.5251 LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST38 02/03/2023 296524 93.75 11/22-FACILITY USAGE-PAULDING 010.4424.5251 LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTPage 8 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name39 02/03/2023 296524 $ 22.50 CHILDREN IN MOTION THANKSGIVING CAMP 010.4425.5303 LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST40 02/03/2023 296525 103.38 KILZ, FLEX SEAL 010.4213.5604 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC41 02/03/2023 296525 19.74 C BATTERIES - SHOP 010.4213.5604 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC42 02/03/2023 296525 1.02 FASTENERS 010.4420.5603 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC43 02/03/2023 296525 (0.43) PUSH THRU ADAPTER RETURN, TOUCHFLOW ADAPTER 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC44 02/03/2023 296525 27.99 CM WIDE MOUTH TL BAG 010.4420.5605 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC45 02/03/2023 296525 51.70 (2) GARDEN SPRAYERS 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC46 02/03/2023 296525 26.68 UTILITY KNIFE, BLADES 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC47 02/03/2023 296525 144.34 GLOVES, LANDSCAPE PN, FILM POLY 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC48 02/03/2023 296525 39.86 SPRAYPAINT, RECIP BLADES 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC49 02/03/2023 296525 10.76 CAULK GUN 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC50 02/03/2023 296525 55.90 DRILL BIT, TAPPER, FASTENERS, WASH 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC51 02/03/2023 296525 6.45 PUSH THRU ADAPTER 220.4303.5613 MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC52 02/03/2023 296526 738.00 CASH FOR GRASS REBATE: 738 SQ. 226.4306.5554 J'MARIE MORA53 02/03/2023 296527 145.07 FRONT SEAT HOUSING FOR RI-14 640.4712.5601 MULLAHEY FORD54 02/03/2023 296528 1,114.00 TRAINING - REGISTRATION/TUITION 010.4203.5501 NATIONAL TRAINING CONCEPTS55 02/03/2023 296529 27.50 UNIFORM CLEANING - ADMINISTRATIVE 010.4201.5303 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS56 02/03/2023 296529 441.75 UNIFORM CLEANING - PATROL SERVICES 010.4203.5303 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS57 02/03/2023 296529 98.50 UNIFORM CLEANING - SUPPORT SERVICES 010.4204.5303 PARAMOUNT CLEANERS58 02/03/2023 296530 70.00 REFUND-QUILTING W/BOBBI 010.0000.4605 JONI PATTILLO59 02/03/2023 296531 200.00 12/22 PARKING CITATION PROCESS 010.4204.5303 PHOENIX GROUP60 02/03/2023 296532 567.57 11/28/22-02/27/23 POSTAGE MACHINE 010.4102.5602 PITNEY BOWES, INC61 02/03/2023 296533 39.00 REFUND-DUPLICATE PYMT 010.0000.4050 MIKE RATKAY62 02/03/2023 296534 2,501.27 DUMOR CAST BENCH FOR WILLIAMS 010.0000.2204 RECWEST OUTDOOR PRODUCTS INC63 02/03/2023 296535 2,386.92 AMMUNITION 010.4204.5255 SAN DIEGO POLICE EQUIPMENT CO64 02/03/2023 296536 50.00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND-STROTHER 010.0000.2206 DONNA SHAFFER65 02/03/2023 296536 106.00 REFUND PARK RENTAL-STROTHER 010.0000.4354 DONNA SHAFFER66 02/03/2023 296537 50.00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND-ELM ST 010.0000.2206 MEGAN SHERRILL67 02/03/2023 296538 12.46 ZENPORT SERRATED SICKLE 220.4303.5613 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC68 02/03/2023 296539 57.00 PARKING CITATION REVENUE DISTR 010.0000.4203SLO COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER69 02/03/2023 296540 100.00 FILING FEE-NOTICE OF EXEMPTION 010.4002.5201 SLO COUNTY CLERK-RECORDER70 02/03/2023 296541 46.56 GAS SERVICES-1500 W BRANCH 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS71 02/03/2023 296541 89.34 GAS SERVICES-215 E BRANCH 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS72 02/03/2023 296541 330.09 GAS SERVICES-211 VERNON ST 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS73 02/03/2023 296541 144.96 GAS SERVICES-111 S MASON 010.4145.5401 SOCALGAS74 02/03/2023 296542 1,500.00 SCCC LEADERSHIP IV CLASS TUITION 010.4120.5501 SOUTH COUNTY CHAMBERS75 02/03/2023 296543 50.00 PARK DEPOSIT REFUND-STROTHER 010.0000.2206 JULIE SPENCE76 02/03/2023 296544 2,521.35 OTS GRANT LIDAR RADAR UNIT 010.4209.6201 STALKER RADARPage 9 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name77 02/03/2023 296545 $ 100.65 SLOW CLOSING PUSH BUTTON CARTRIDGE 010.4213.5604 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY78 02/03/2023 296545 396.94 VAC BREAKER REPAIR KIT, FAUCET 010.4213.5604 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY79 02/03/2023 296546 60.00 T-2 RECERTIFICATION RENEWAL 010.4420.5255 SWRCB-DWOCP80 02/03/2023 296547 280.15 OBD - NEW CODE READER FOR CITY VEHICLE 010.4305.5273 TCA TOOLS INC81 02/03/2023 296547 280.15 OBD - NEW CODE READER FOR CITY VEHICLE 010.4305.5603 TCA TOOLS INC82 02/03/2023 296548 80.12 UNIFORMS - EQUIPMENT 010.4203.5272 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS83 02/03/2023 296548 347.84 UNIFORMS - NEW HIRE 010.4203.5272 TEMPLETON UNIFORMS84 02/03/2023 296549 1,066.61 LOF - SAFETY CHECK. REPLACE REAR BRAKES 010.4301.5601 TOM'S AUTO SERVICE85 02/03/2023 296549 113.04 P17 OIL CHANGE 010.4420.5601 TOM'S AUTO SERVICE86 02/03/2023 296549 1,411.21 PD-4613 MAINT & BRAKE REPAIR 010.4204.5601 TOM'S AUTO SERVICE87 02/03/2023 296550 122.84 TONER-CLERKS OFFICE 010.4002.5201 ULTREX BUSINESS PRODUCTS (DBA)88 02/03/2023 296550 81.95 12/22 COPY MACHINE MAINT AGREEMENT 010.4102.5602 ULTREX BUSINESS PRODUCTS (DBA)89 02/03/2023 296551 888.25 ACCT#208620661-00002 PD CELL PHONES 010.4201.5403 VERIZON WIRELESS90 02/03/2023 296552 564.59 COPY MACHINE LEASE PAYMENT 010.4201.5803 WELLS FARGO VENDOR FINANCIAL91 02/03/2023 296553 7,817.28 02/23 DENTAL INSURANCE 011.0000.2110 DELTA DENTAL92 02/03/2023 296553 2,375.84 02/23 DENTAL INSURANCE: RETIREES 010.4099.5132 DELTA DENTAL93 02/03/2023 296554 6,190.32 HMO-UNITED HEALTH FIRE-MGMT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED94 02/03/2023 296554 7,777.58 HMO UNITED HEALTHCARE-FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED95 02/03/2023 296554 11,830.84 PPO PERS GOLD - FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED96 02/03/2023 296554 4,668.08 PPO PERS PLATINUM - FIRE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED97 02/03/2023 296554 1,809.42 PERS GOLD - FIRE MANAGEMENT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED98 02/03/2023 296554 1,977.86 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED99 02/03/2023 296554 18,729.70 HMO UNITED HEALTHCARE-SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED100 02/03/2023 296554 7,301.42 HMO UNITED HEALTHCARE-POLICE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED101 02/03/2023 296554 16,348.79 HMO-UNITED HEALTHCARE-MGMT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED102 02/03/2023 296554 2,738.58 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - POLICE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED103 02/03/2023 296554 1,977.86 BLUE SHIELD TRIO HMO - MGMT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED104 02/03/2023 296554 16,424.00 PPO PERS GOLD - SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED105 02/03/2023 296554 16,841.54 PPO PERS GOLD - POLICE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED106 02/03/2023 296554 11,134.92 PPO PERS GOLD - MANAGEMENT 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED107 02/03/2023 296554 3,431.35 PORAC MED INSURANCE 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED108 02/03/2023 296554 2,431.32 HMO ANTHEM TRADITIONAL - SEIU 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MED109 02/03/2023 296554 7,212.43 RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE 010.4099.5136 PERS - ACTIVE MED110 02/03/2023 296554 765.96 RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE 220.4303.5136 PERS - ACTIVE MED111 02/03/2023 296554 769.74 RETIREE HEALTH INSURANCE 010.0000.1111 PERS - ACTIVE MED112 02/03/2023 296554 106.52 ACTIVE HEALTH ADMIN FEE-FCFA 010.0000.1111 PERS - ACTIVE MED113 02/03/2023 296554 327.77 ACTIVE HEALTH ADMIN FEE 010.4145.5131 PERS - ACTIVE MED114 02/03/2023 296555 3,455.30 ACTIVE HEALTH INS-PT NONPERS 011.0000.2109 PERS - ACTIVE MEDPage 10 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name115 02/03/2023 296555 $ 11.40 ACTIVE HEALTH ADMIN FEE-PT NONPERS 010.4145.5131 PERS - ACTIVE MED116 02/03/2023 296556 1,438.70 STANDARD LTD/STD INSURANCE 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO117 02/03/2023 296556 23.50 STANDARD LIFE TAXABLE DEDUCT 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO118 02/03/2023 296556 469.12 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO119 02/03/2023 296556 974.32 STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO120 02/03/2023 296556 166.26 MISC ADJUSTMENTS 011.0000.2113 STANDARD INSURANCE CO121 02/03/2023 296557 58.13 EIN95-6000668 SOCIAL SECURITY 011.0000.2105 UNITED STATES TREASURY122 02/03/2023 296558 2,116.82 VISION CARE INSURANCE 011.0000.2119 VISION SERVICE PLAN123 02/03/2023 296558 635.35 VISION CARE PREMIUM-RETIREES 010.4099.5133 VISION SERVICE PLAN124 02/08/2023 296559 83.26 UB Refund Cst #00027366 640.0000.2301 GLORIA BARR125 02/08/2023 296560 41.08 UB Refund Cst #00028205 640.0000.2301 JACQUELINE GOTTWALD126 02/08/2023 296561 215.21 UB Refund Cst #00026205 640.0000.2301 ERROL & BRENDA LURIE127 02/08/2023 296562 12.86 UB Refund Cst #00027314 640.0000.2301 GAIL PERRY128 02/08/2023 296563 75.37 UB Refund Cst #00028462 640.0000.2301 MARISSA VANGUILDER129 02/08/2023 296564 426.19 UB Refund Cst #00006627 640.0000.2301 JENNIFER ZAMBO130 02/10/2023 296565 400.00 START CHANGE FOR SR SWEETHEART DANCE 010.0000.1033 PETTY CASH131 02/10/2023 296566 400.00 BALANCE DUE FOR PERFORMANCE-SR SWEETHEART 010.4424.5252 MICHAEL DIAS132 02/10/2023 296567 750.00 12/22 WEBSITE STREAMING & ARCHIVING 010.4002.5303 AGP VIDEO, INC133 02/10/2023 296567 4,215.00 12/22 CABLECASTING 010.4002.5330 AGP VIDEO, INC134 02/10/2023 296568 98.65 OFFICE SUPPLIES-ORGANIZERS 010.4001.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES135 02/10/2023 296568 30.12 OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES136 02/10/2023 296568 211.76 TP 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES137 02/10/2023 296568 155.54 FLAG POLE LIGHT, SOLAR FLAG LIGHT 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES138 02/10/2023 296568 268.84 (4) ELKAY WATER FILTERS 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES139 02/10/2023 296568 1,751.59 PAPER TOWELS, SOAP, PENCILS 010.4213.5604 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES140 02/10/2023 296568 9.68 PRIMER BULB 010.4420.5603 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES141 02/10/2023 296568 29.64 BAYCO CORD REEL 010.4430.5605 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES142 02/10/2023 296568 140.40 COPY PAPER 220.4303.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES143 02/10/2023 296568 6.35 PENS 220.4303.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES144 02/10/2023 296568 376.60 NITRILE GLOVES 220.4303.5255 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES145 02/10/2023 296568 75.69 PYRAMEX RAIN GEAR 220.4303.5255 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES146 02/10/2023 296568 450.40 MULTIQUIP TRASH PUMP 220.4303.5273 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES147 02/10/2023 296568 16.30 HOMELITE PRIMER BULB 220.4303.5603 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES148 02/10/2023 296568 36.50 SYLVANIA BULBS 220.4303.5613 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES149 02/10/2023 296568 140.40 COPY PAPER 612.4610.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES150 02/10/2023 296568 140.40 COPY PAPER 010.4307.5201 AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES151 02/10/2023 296569 9.80 PARKS DEPT MATS/MOPHEADS 010.4213.5303 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES152 02/10/2023 296570 115.00 01/23 VILLAGE WATERING, ELM ST 010.4420.5605 ARROYO GRANDE IN BLOOM INCPage 11 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name153 02/10/2023 296571 $ 30.82 BAN#9391033183 010.4201.5403 AT&T154 02/10/2023 296571 247.02 BAN#9391033184 010.4201.5403 AT&T155 02/10/2023 296571 68.86 BAN#9391033187 010.4201.5403 AT&T156 02/10/2023 296572 130.48 02/23 TOWER LEASE 010.4201.5303 ATC SEQUOIA LLC157 02/10/2023 296573 145.00 D.O. INSPECTION PW FUEL ISLAND 010.4305.5303 B & T SVC STN CONTRACTORS, INC158 02/10/2023 296574 100.73 PW-16 OIL CHANGE 220.4303.5601 BACK ON THE ROAD AUTOMOBILE159 02/10/2023 296575 787.50 PURCHASING POLICY UPDATE 010.4120.5303 BAKER TILLY US LLP160 02/10/2023 296576 763.20 01/23 DOGGIE CLASSES 010.4424.5351 IRINA BEATTY161 02/10/2023 296577 500.00 JANITORIAL SERVICE FOR THE POLICE DEPART 010.4201.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE162 02/10/2023 296577 1,585.00 JANITORIAL SERVICE FOR VARIOUS CITY BLDGS 010.4213.5615 BRENDLER JANITORIAL SERVICE163 02/10/2023 296578 103.00 PEST CONTROL: WOMENS CLUB 010.4213.5303BREZDEN PEST CONTROL, INC164 02/10/2023 296578 144.00 PEST CONTROL: FCFA 010.4213.5303 BREZDEN PEST CONTROL, INC165 02/10/2023 296579 82.46 VOLUNTEER MOVIE NIGHT SIGNS 010.4424.5252 BURDINE PRINTING (DBA)166 02/10/2023 296580 86.42 BRAKE CLEANER, CALIPER LUBE, ANTI SEIZE 010.4305.5601 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS167 02/10/2023 296580 23.77 GREASE COUPLER, SHOP TOWELS 010.4420.5603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS168 02/10/2023 296580 39.61 10W30 OIL, GREASE COUPLER 010.4420.5603 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS169 02/10/2023 296580 26.17 AIR ACCESSORY KIT 7 PIECE 010.4420.5605 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS170 02/10/2023 296580 14.93 PW-21 BULB, GORILLA TAPE 010.4430.5605 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS171 02/10/2023 296580 0.38 EXCHANGE BULB 010.4430.5605 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS172 02/10/2023 296580 7.87 GOPHER MACHINE COMPRESSION SLEEVE 010.4430.5605 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS173 02/10/2023 296580 24.56 TOP TERMINAL, STARTER CABLE 220.4303.5601 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS174 02/10/2023 296580 22.37 PW38- WIPER BLADE 220.4303.5613 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS175 02/10/2023 296580 80.23 CLAMPS, COOLANT 220.4303.5613 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS176 02/10/2023 296580 32.55 PW-64 OIL FILTER 010.4307.5601 CARQUEST AUTO PARTS177 02/10/2023 296581 342.54 BOOTS-2 EMPLOYEES 220.4303.5148 CARR'S BOOTS & WESTERN178 02/10/2023 296582 65.00 01/23 JIUJITSU REIMBURSEMENT 010.4203.5501 JASON CASTILLO179 02/10/2023 296583 761.30 ACCT#8245100960211791 REC TV & VOICE 010.4145.5401 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS180 02/10/2023 296583 122.10 ACCT#8245100960129431 COUNCIL 010.4145.5401 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS181 02/10/2023 296583 736.80 ACCT#8245100960211288 PW VOICE 010.4145.5401 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS182 02/10/2023 296583 327.16 ACCT#8245100960216667 WOMENS CLUB 010.4145.5401 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS183 02/10/2023 296583 1,349.00 ACCT#8245100960301246 COUNCIL CHAMBER 211.4101.5330 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS184 02/10/2023 296583 53.34 ACCT#8245100960221923 PW TV 010.4307.5303 CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS185 02/10/2023 296584 131.20 01/23 CLOGGING 010.4424.5351 KATHLEEN J CINOWALT186 02/10/2023 296585 6,077.00 JUNIPER J-CARE NEXT DAY SUPPORT RENEWAL 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP187 02/10/2023 296585 5,643.00 01/23-01/24 MITEL SUPPORT (NO PHONES) 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP188 02/10/2023 296585 4,768.00 02/23 IT SUPPORT 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP189 02/10/2023 296585 1,500.00 02/23 CROWDSTRIKE ADV DEFEND 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LP190 02/10/2023 296585 246.75 02/23 MICROSOFT 365 G3 GCC 010.4140.5303 CIO SOLUTIONS LPPage 12 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name191 02/10/2023 296586 $ 57,060.00 PATROL FLEET REPLACEMENT & UPFITTING 010.4201.6301 COBAN TECHNOLOGIES INC192 02/10/2023 296586 4,042.02 SALES TAX 010.4201.6301 COBAN TECHNOLOGIES INC193 02/10/2023 296587 106.25 HOMELESS CAMP DEBRIS 220.4303.5307 COLD CANYON LANDFILL, INC194 02/10/2023 296588 660.22 REPAIR GOPHER MACHINE 010.4430.5603 CONTRACTORS MAINT.SERVICE195 02/10/2023 296589 414.40 01/23 SR FITNESS 010.4424.5351 GAYLE CUDDY196 02/10/2023 296590 1,100.00 POST PSYCH EVAL FOR NEW HIRES 010.4201.5315 CUESTA POLYGRAPH197 02/10/2023 296591 150.00 MEDIA RELATIONS TRAINING-POST 010.4204.5501 DAVID CULVER198 02/10/2023 296592 368.63 KYOCERA COPIER LEASE 010.4421.5602 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SVCS199 02/10/2023 296593 4,010.56 2022 CONCRETE REPAIR PROJECT ( PW 2022-07) 350.5658.7501 EIKHOF DESIGN GROUP200 02/10/2023 296593 370.00 OAK PARK BLVD/ECR STORM DRAIN REPAIR 350.5795.7501 EIKHOF DESIGN GROUP201 02/10/2023 296594 1,000.00 REFUND WOMENS CLUB DEPOSIT 010.0000.2206 NATALY ESPINOZA202 02/10/2023 296595 1,476.83 IRRIGATION REPAIR- 2" FITTINGS 640.4712.5610 FAMCON PIPE AND SUPPLY INC203 02/10/2023 296596 58.69 SOTO-SLIP FIX, COUPLER 010.4430.5605 FARM SUPPLY CO204 02/10/2023 296597 1,131.23 RES#2 8" GATE VALVE 640.4712.5609 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC205 02/10/2023 296597 20.27 METER COUPLING-ORMONDE SVC REP 640.4712.5610 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES, INC206 02/10/2023 296598 1,169.00 01/23 BRIDGE GAMES & CLASSES 010.4424.5351 FIVE CITIES DUPLICATE BRIDGE207 02/10/2023 296599 133.78 02/23 SEWER REIMBURSEMENT DUE 612.0000.4751 CITY OF GROVER BEACH208 02/10/2023 296600 121.80 PW SEWER BILL 612.0000.4751 CITY OF GROVER BEACH209 02/10/2023 296601 1,462.12 10/22-12/22 CJIS SYSTEM ACCESS 010.4204.5606 GSA-INFORMATION TECH210 02/10/2023 296602 251.28 (2) DEF DIESEL EXHAUST FLUID 220.4303.5601 JB DEWAR, INC211 02/10/2023 296603 2,228.20 12/22 PROF FEES HOTEL RFQ 010.0000.2563KOSMONT & ASSOCIATES INC212 02/10/2023 296603 3,424.20 11/22 PROF FEES HOTEL RFQ 010.0000.2563KOSMONT & ASSOCIATES INC213 02/10/2023 296604 798.08 SHORETEL PHONE CHRS-CITY HALL 010.4145.5403 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS LLC214 02/10/2023 296604 794.29 SHORETEL PHONE CHRGS-PD 010.4201.5403 LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS LLC215 02/10/2023 296605 1,366.40 01/23 ZUMBA & BARRE 010.4424.5351 HEIDY MANGIARDI216 02/10/2023 296606 113.60 01/23 YOGA IN THE PARK 010.4424.5351 NICCOLA NELSON217 02/10/2023 296607 60.00 REFUND-WRITING FOR LIFE 010.0000.4605 LINDA NOUSIANEN218 02/10/2023 296608 30.32 OFFICE SUPPLIES 010.4120.5201 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC219 02/10/2023 296608 233.00 COPY PAPER 010.4102.5201 ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC220 02/10/2023 296609 71.11 MAINT AGREEMENT-COPIER 010.4204.5602 OFFICE1221 02/10/2023 296610 16,742.90 ELECTRIC-STREET LIGHTING 010.4307.5402 PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO222 02/10/2023 296611 119.95 02/23 WIFI SVC HUBNER SITE 010.4201.5403 PEAKWIFI LLC223 02/10/2023 296612 251.63 POSTAGE MACHINE LEASE 010.4204.5602 PITNEY BOWES, INC224 02/10/2023 296613 200.00 WASHING MACHINE REBATE 226.4306.5554 SHANNON PRATT225 02/10/2023 296614 484.37 01/23 GRACE LANE LANDSCAPE MAI 216.4460.5304 RAINSCAPE226 02/10/2023 296614 1,201.41 01/23 PARKSIDE LANDSCAPE MAINT 219.4460.5304 RAINSCAPE227 02/10/2023 296615 74.00 K9 OPERATIONAL MED TRAINING-GS 010.4203.5501 TIMOTHY RAMIREZ228 02/10/2023 296616 261.89 LESCO PRO HERBICIDE 010.4420.5274 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLCPage 13 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name229 02/10/2023 296616 $ 151.64 SOTO-COUPLING, ELBOW, NIPPLE 010.4430.5605 SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC230 02/10/2023 296617 3,500.00 01/23 TBID ADMIN FEE 240.4150.5303 SOUTH COUNTY CHAMBERS231 02/10/2023 296618 204.32 DUMPSTERS -STROTHER 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC232 02/10/2023 296618 313.84 DUMPSTERS -FCFA 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC233 02/10/2023 296618 204.32 DUMPSTERS -RANCHO GRANDE PARK 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC234 02/10/2023 296618 102.16 DUMPSTERS -PW RECYCLE 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC235 02/10/2023 296618 88.46 CITY HALL TRASH & RECYCLE 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC236 02/10/2023 296618 160.61 DUMPSTERS -PD 010.4213.5303 SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC237 02/10/2023 296618 1,163.20 ROLL OFF DUMPSTERS -TALLY HO STORM RELATED 220.4303.5307SOUTH COUNTY SANITARY SVC, INC238 02/10/2023 296619 99.45 (6) ASPHALT COLD PATCH 220.4303.5613 STATEWIDE SAFETY & SIGNS INC239 02/10/2023 296619 698.93 (46) BAGS ASPHALT COLD PATCH 220.4303.5613 STATEWIDE SAFETY & SIGNS INC240 02/10/2023 296620 34.10 SOTO-FAUCET CARTRIDGE ASSEMBLY 010.4430.5605 STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY241 02/10/2023 296621 135.15 LEGAL AD-BLDG CODE ADOPTION 010.4002.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC242 02/10/2023 296621 84.15 LEGAL AD-BLDG CODE ADOPTION ORDINANCE 010.4002.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC243 02/10/2023 296621 94.35 LEGAL AD-PC PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE 010.4130.5301 THE MCCLATCHY COMPANY LLC244 02/10/2023 296622 920.82 PW-14 BRAKE REPLACEMENT SVC 640.4712.5601 TOM'S AUTO SERVICE245 02/10/2023 296623 809.74 (4) SQ POSTS & ANCHORS 220.4303.5613 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS246 02/10/2023 296623 1,485.03 (10) STREET SIGNS 220.4303.5613 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS247 02/10/2023 296625 128.18 01/23 KONICA COPIER OVERAGE 010.4102.5602ULTREX BUSINESS PRODUCTS (DBA)248 02/10/2023 296626 395.45 PAYROLL FOR:W/E: 01/29 OFFICE ASSISTANT 612.4610.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.249 02/10/2023 296626 395.45 PAYROLL FOR:W/E: 01/29 OFFICE ASSISTANT 640.4710.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.250 02/10/2023 296626 395.45 PAYROLL FOR:W/E 02/05 OFFICE ASSISTANT 612.4610.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.251 02/10/2023 296626 395.45 PAYROLL FOR:W/E 02/05 OFFICE ASSISTANT 640.4710.5303 UNITED STAFFING ASSOC.252 02/10/2023 296627 177.60 01/22 ADULT ART & PUNCHCARDS 010.4424.5351 PEGGY VALKO253 02/10/2023 296628 11,091.50 12/22 TBID ONLINE MKTG 240.4150.5301 VERDIN MARKETING INK254 02/10/2023 296629 14,618.04 12/22 TMD ASSESSMENT REMITTANCE 761.0000.2007 VISIT SLO CAL255 02/10/2023 296629 (292.36) 12/22 CITY ADMIN FEE 010.0000.4771 VISIT SLO CAL256 02/10/2023 296630 16,666.31 PURCHASE OF DISPENSERS AND FUEL 350.5474.7001 WESTERN PUMP INC257 02/10/2023 296631 741.00 12/22 PROF LEGAL FEES-SM WATER 640.4710.5575 WHITE BRENNER LLP258 02/10/2023 296632 12,724.00 FEE STUDY SERVICES - USER, DEV IMPACT 010.4120.5303 WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES259 02/10/2023 296633 1,440.00 12/22 SIGNAL MAINT- 12 INTERSECTIONS 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC260 02/10/2023 296633 60.00 OAK PARK & JAMES WAY 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC261 02/10/2023 296633 60.00 OAK PARK & EL CAMINO REAL 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC262 02/10/2023 296633 75.00 OAK PARK & W BRANCH 010.4307.5303 LEE WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC263 02/10/2023 296634 1,402.80 SOCCER & BASKETBALL WINTER BREAK 010.4424.5351 YOUTH EVOLUTION BASKETBALL264 02/10/2023 296634 1,420.30 SOCCER-FALL SESSION 3 010.4424.5351 YOUTH EVOLUTION BASKETBALL265 02/10/2023 296635 51,460.85 FEDERAL WITHHOLDING 011.0000.2104 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE266 02/10/2023 296635 54,808.86 SOCIAL SECURITY 011.0000.2105 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDEPage 14 of 354 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECHECK LISTINGFEBRUARY 1 - FEBRUARY 15, 2023ATTACHMENT 1Line Check Date Check # Amount Description Acct # Vendor Name267 02/10/2023 296635 $ 13,557.58 MEDICARE 011.0000.2105 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE268 02/10/2023 296636 19,935.00 STATE WITHHOLDING 011.0000.2108 CA ST EMPLOYMENT DEVEL DEPT269 02/10/2023 296636 2,201.10 CASDI 011.0000.2111 CA ST EMPLOYMENT DEVEL DEPT270 02/10/2023 296637 565.60 DEPT OF CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES 011.0000.2114 CA STATE DISBURSEMENT UNIT271 02/10/2023 296638 34,361.27 PERS RETIREMENT 011.0000.2106 PERS - RETIREMENT272 02/10/2023 296638 45,334.58 PERS RETIREMENT 011.0000.2106 PERS - RETIREMENT273 02/10/2023 296638 117.11 PERS BUYBACK - AFTER TAX 011.0000.2106 PERS - RETIREMENT274 02/10/2023 296638 1,082.51 PERS Employer Pick Up 011.0000.2106 PERS - RETIREMENT275 02/10/2023 296638 (0.04) ROUNDING DIFF 010.0000.4818 PERS - RETIREMENT276 02/10/2023 296639 1,625.26 PARS 011.0000.2107 US BANK OF CALIFORNIA277 02/15/2023 296640 4,682.69 03/23 RETIREE MEDICAL 010.4099.5136 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP278 02/15/2023 296640 358.87 03/23 RETIREE MEDICAL 220.4303.5136 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP279 02/15/2023 296640 602.12 03/23 RETIREE MEDICAL 010.0000.1111 ICMA RETIREMENT CORP $ 644,612.18 Page 15 of 354 ATTACHMENT 2 . General Fund 377,083.58 5101 Salaries Full time 257,281.35 Streets Fund 15,412.51 5101 Volunteer Employee Retirement - American Rescue Plan Act - 5102 Salaries Part-Time - PPT 5,842.21 Sewer Fund 9,758.55 5103 Salaries Part-Time - TPT 17,563.27 Water Fund 22,661.39 5105 Salaries OverTime 4,633.43 424,916.03 5106 Salaries Strike Team OT - 5107 Salaries Standby 1,690.40 5108 Holiday Pay 5,854.16 5109 Sick Pay 2,523.03 5110 Annual Leave Buyback - Administrative Services - 5111 Vacation Buyback - Information Services - 5112 Sick Leave Buyback - Community Development - 5113 Vacation Pay 1,739.04 Police 4,292.57 5114 Comp Pay 2,931.22 Public Works - Maintenance - 5115 Annual Leave Pay 11,073.09 Public Works - Enterprise 340.86 5116 Salaries - Police FTO 341.71 Recreation - Administration - 5121 PERS Retirement 32,556.62 Recreation - Special Events - 5122 Social Security 22,534.00 Children In Motion - 5123 PARS Retirement 313.27 4,633.43 5126 State Disability Ins. 1,053.01 5127 Deferred Compensation 741.66 5131 Health Insurance 49,756.15 5132 Dental Insurance 2,476.00 5133 Vision Insurance 802.54 5134 Life Insurance 392.58 5135 Long Term Disability 544.07 5137 Leave Payouts - 5142 Unemployment Insurance - 5143 Uniform Allowance - 5144 Car Allowance 837.50 5146 Council Expense - 5147 Employee Assistance - 5148 Boot Allowance - 5149 Motor Pay 168.22 5150 Bi-Lingual Pay 150.00 5151 Cell Phone Allowance 1,117.50 424,916.03 OVERTIME BY DEPARTMENT: CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION PAY PERIOD 01/20/2023 - 02/02/2023 2/10/2023 BY FUND BY ACCOUNT Page 16 of 354 Item 9.b. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Nicole Valentine, Administrative Services Director BY: Lynda Horejsi, Accounting Manager SUBJECT: Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Presentation of the City’s investment deposits as of January 31, 2023. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: There is no funding impact to the City related to these reports. However, the City does receive interest revenue based on the interest rate of the investments. No or minimal future staff time is projected. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Receive and file the attached report listing investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande as of January 31, 2023, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b); 2) Determine that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) BACKGROUND: The Administrative Services department has historically submitted to the City Council a monthly report, providing the following information: 1. Type of investment. 2. Financial institution (bank, savings and loan, broker, etc). 3. Date of maturity. 4. Principal amount. 5. Rate of interest. Page 17 of 354 Item 9.b. City Council Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits March 14, 2023 Page 2 6. Current market value for all securities having a maturity of more than 12 months. 7. Relationship of the monthly report to the annual statement of investment policy. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: This report represents the City’s investments as of January 31, 2023. It includes all investments managed by the City, the investment institution, investment type, book value, maturity date, and rate of interest. As of January 31, 2023, the investment portfolio was in compliance with all State laws and the City’s investment policy. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Approve staff’s recommendation to receive and file the attached report listing the investment deposits; 2. Do not approve staff’s recommendation; or 3. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the City. Investments are undertaken in a manner that seeks to ensure the preservation of capital in the overall portfolio. DISADVANTAGES: Some level of risk is present in any investment transaction. Losses could be incurred due to market price changes, technical cash flow complications such as the need to withdraw a non-negotiable Time Certificate of Deposit early, or even the default of an issuer. To minimize such risks, diversifications of the investmen t portfolio by institution and by investment instruments are being used as much as is practical and prudent. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The Statement of Investment Deposits is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. Portfolio Summary: January 31, 2023 Page 18 of 354 ATTACHMENT 1City of Arroyo Grande300 E. Branch St.Arroyo Grande, CA 93420Phone: (805) 473-5400CITY OF ARROYO GRANDEPortfolio ManagementPortfolio SummaryJanuary 31, 2023Investments Principal ValueCurrent Market Value Interest Rate Date of PurchaseTerm Maturity Date% of PortfolioLocal Agency Investment Fund15,266,500.24$ 15,266,500.24$ 2.425% 48.941%Certificates of DepositPacific Premier Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.200% February 21, 2022 12 mos February 21, 2023 0.798%1st Security Bank Washington 249,000.00 249,000.00 1.700% October 4, 2019 42 mos April 4, 2023 0.798%Morgan Stanley Private Bank 247,000.00 247,000.00 2.250% July 11, 2019 45 mos July 11, 2023 0.792%Merrick Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 1.800% October 16, 2019 48 mos October 16, 2023 0.798%BMW Bank North America 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.500% July 16, 2021 36 mos July 16, 2024 0.798%Mountain America Federal Credit Union 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.750% October 14, 2022 24 mos October 15, 2024 0.798%Enerbank USA 247,000.00 247,000.00 1.850% October 25, 2019 60 mos October 25, 2024 0.792%Wells Fargo Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.600% October 28, 2022 24 mos October 28, 2024 0.798%Beal Bk Plano TX 247,000.00 247,000.00 1.350% March 26, 2022 36 mos March 26, 2025 0.792%Beal Bk Las Vegas NV 247,000.00 247,000.00 1.250% March 26, 2022 36 mos March 26, 2025 0.792%Flagstar Bank 245,000.00 245,000.00 0.850% May 15, 2020 60 mos May 15, 2025 0.786%American Express National Bank 246,000.00 246,000.00 3.100% May 25, 2022 36 mos May 25, 2025 0.789%New York Community Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.550% July 1, 2021 48 mos July 1, 2025 0.798%Chief Financial Federal Credit Union 249,000.00 249,000.00 4.600% October 12, 2022 36 mos October 14, 2025 0.798%Live Oak Bank 249,000.00 249,000.00 3.150% May 25, 2022 48 mos May 26, 2026 0.798%UBS Bank USA 249,000.00 249,000.00 0.900% July 21, 2021 60 mos July 21, 2026 0.798%Toyota Financial Savings Bank 248,000.00 248,000.00 0.950% July 22, 2021 60 mos July 22, 2026 0.795%Bank United NA 249,000.00 249,000.00 1.350% December 8, 2021 60 mos December 8, 2026 0.798%Capital One Bank USA 248,000.00 248,000.00 1.250% December 8, 2021 60 mos December 8, 2026 0.795%Discover Bank 246,000.00 246,000.00 3.200% May 18, 2022 60 mos May 19, 2027 0.789%Total Certificates of Deposit4,960,000.00 4,960,000.00 15.900%Agency BondsFederal Farm Credit Bank 2,500,000.00 2,439,745.00 1.600% November 1, 2019 48 mos November 1, 2023 8.014%Federal Farm Credit Bank 1,999,314.00 1,886,994.00 0.350% December 4, 2020 42 mos May 16, 2024 6.409%Federal Home Loan Bank 499,252.43 493,154.03 1.000% July 19, 2022 29 mos December 20, 2024 1.600%Federal Farm Credit Bank 998,431.00 923,871.00 0.430% March 17, 2021 48 mos March 3, 2025 3.201%Federal Natl Mortgage Assn 1,000,000.00 902,208.00 0.500% October 20, 2020 60 mos October 20, 2025 3.206%Federal Home Loan Bank 999,500.00 897,902.00 0.800% March 17, 2021 60 mos March 10, 2026 3.204%Federal Home Loan Bank 994,396.00 929,354.00 2.400% March 17, 2021 72 mos March 29, 2027 3.188%Federal Home Loan Bank 500,000.00 479,505.00 3.375% May 17, 2022 60 mos May 17, 2027 1.603%Total Agency Bonds9,490,893.43 8,952,733.03 30.425%Page 19 of 354 ATTACHMENT 1City of Arroyo Grande300 E. Branch St.Arroyo Grande, CA 93420Phone: (805) 473-5400CITY OF ARROYO GRANDEPortfolio ManagementPortfolio SummaryJanuary 31, 2023Investments Principal ValueCurrent Market Value Interest Rate Date of PurchaseTerm Maturity Date% of PortfolioMunicipal BondsCalifornia State GO Various Purp Bond 491,810.00$ 478,360.00$ 3.100% May 12, 2022 47 mos April 1, 2026 1.577%Total Municipal Bonds491,810.00 478,360.00 1.577%Treasury ObligationsU.S. Treasury Z-2026 Series 984,728.00 902,148.00 1.100% December 6, 2021 53 mos May 31, 2026 3.157%Total Treasury Obligations984,728.00 902,148.00 3.157%TOTAL INVESTMENTS31,193,931.67$ 30,559,741.27$ 100.000%Page 20 of 354 Item 9.c. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Whitney McDonald, City Manager BY: Aleah Bergam, Management Analyst SUBJECT: Consideration of 1) Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Adoption of the Resolution will continue the declared local emergency related to the January 2023 storm events. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: There are no direct fiscal impacts related to the proposed action; however, adoption of the Resolution will facilitate the ability for the City to request resources including financial support and reimbursement from the State Office of Emergency Services and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for costs incurred in preparation and/or response to the January 2023 storm events. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Adopt a Resolution declaring a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 storm events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events; and 3 ) Make findings that adopting the Resolution continuing a local emergency is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) BACKGROUND: As the City Council is aware, in accordance with Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, the City Manager, in her capacity as the Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed a local emergency on January 18, 2023, regarding the severe January 2023 winter storms. The City Council ratified the proclamation at its regular meeting on January 24, 2023. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Page 21 of 354 Item 9.c. City Council Consideration of 1) Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events March 14, 2023 Page 2 Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 8.12.065(C) provides that the City Council is to “Review the need for a continuing emergency declaration at regularly scheduled meetings at least every twenty-one (21) days until the emergency is terminated.” Accordingly, the City Council has adopted the appropriate Resolutions declaring a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 storm events within the required 21 -day time period since the ratification of the proclamation at its January 24, 2023 regular meeting. This item is being presented to the City Council to satisfy the requirements of Section 8.12.065(C). Given the current state of emergency proclaimed by the Governor, and the Presidential Major Disaster Declaration declared on January 14, 2023 and Presidential Emergency Declaration declared on January 9, 2023, it is recommended that the City Council adopt the Resolution declaring the need to continue the emergency declaration. The County of San Luis Obispo issued a similar emergency declaration, which remains in effect. Federal, State and County emergency declarations associated with the January 2023 storm events, and resulting damage, continue to remain in effect. City staff continue to dedicate time towards responding to storm recovery efforts and continue to require support from County, State, and Federal emergency response resources to support these efforts. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Adopt the Resolution declaring a continued local emergency related to the storm events; or 2. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Adoption of the Resolution will satisfy the requirement of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code regarding the periodic review of the declared local emergency related to the January 2023 severe winter storms and support the City’s efforts to obtain assistance from County, State, and federal emergency response resources to recover from the disaster. DISADVANTAGES: No disadvantages have been identified to adopting the Resolution. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. Adopting the Resolution continuing a local emergency is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: Page 22 of 354 Item 9.c. City Council Consideration of 1) Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events March 14, 2023 Page 3 The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. Proposed Resolution 2. Revised Proposed Resolution 3.Proclamation of State of Emergency Relating to the March 2023 Storm Event Page 23 of 354 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE JANUARY 2023 WINTER STORMS WHEREAS, on January 18, 2023, in accordance with Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, the City Manager, in her capacity as the Director of Emergency Services Director, proclaimed a local emergency within the City commencing on or about 8:00 am on January 4, 2023, due to the storm events that began on December 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council ratified the emergency proclamation through adoption of Resolution No. 5259 at its regular meeting on January 24, 2023; and WHEREAS, Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 8.12.065(C) provides that the City Council is to review the need for a continuing emergency declaration at regularly scheduled meetings at least every twenty-one (21) days until the emergency is terminated; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Resolution declaring a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 Storm events on February 14, 2023 and February 28, 2023; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code section 8558(b), on January 4, 2023, the Governor of the S tate of California issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency (“Governor’s Proclamation”) related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2023, the President of the United States declared that an emergency exists in the State of California relating to severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides, and enabling public agencies in impacted counties that suffered damage or losses from the storms eligible to apply for federal disaster assistance; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the County Administrative Officer of San Lui s Obispo issued a Proclamation of Local Emergency relating to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck San Luis Obispo County, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding; and WHEREAS, adopting this Resolution continuing a local emergency is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) beca use it has no potential Page 24 of 354 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.); and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2023, the Department of Homeland Security amended the major disaster declaration issued in January 14, 2023 related to the January 2023 storm events to add San Luis Obispo County as an affected county, enabling Arroyo Grande residents who had damage or losses from the storms to apply for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster assistance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, that: 1. The recitals set forth herein are true, correct and incorporated by reference. 2. A local emergency is declared to continues to exist throughout the City of Arroyo Grande, and the City has been undertaking, and will co ntinue through termination of this emergency to undertake necessary measures and incur necessary costs, which are directly related to the damage caused by the severe winter storms and are taken in furtherance of; the Governor’s Proclamation of a State of Emergency on January 4, 2023; the President of the United States’ Declaration of a National Emergency on January 8, 2023; and related orders and directives. On motion of Council Member___________, seconded by Council Member ________, and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2023. Page 25 of 354 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR ATTEST: JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ISAAC ROSEN, INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY Page 26 of 354 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 1) DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE JANUARY 2023 WINTER STORMS; 2) DECLARING A LOCAL EMERGENCY FOR SUBSEQUENT STORM EVENTS WHEREAS, on January 18, 2023, in accordance with Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, the City Manager, in her capacity as the Director of Emergency Services Director, proclaimed a local emergency within the City commencing on or about 8:00 am on January 4, 2023, due to the storm events that began on December 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council ratified the emergency proclamation through adoption of Resolution No. 5259 at its regular meeting on January 24, 2023; and WHEREAS, Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 8.12.065(C) provides that the City Council is to review the need for a continuing emergency declaration at regularly scheduled meetings at least every twenty-one (21) days until the emergency is terminated; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Resolution declaring a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 Storm events on February 14, 2023 and February 28, 2023; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code section 8558(b), on January 4, 2023, the Governor of the State of California issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency (“Governor’s Proclamation”) related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2023, the President of the United States declared that an emergency exists in the State of California relating to severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides, and enabling public agencies in impacte d counties that suffered damage or losses from the storms eligible to apply for federal disaster assistance; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the County Administrative Officer of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of Local Emergency relating to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck San Luis Obispo County, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding; and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2023, the Department of Homeland Security amended the major disaster declaration issued in January 14, 2023 related to the January 2023 storm events to add San Luis Obispo County as an affected county, enabling Arroyo Grande Page 27 of 354 residents who had damage or losses from the storms to apply for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster assistance; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2023, in accordance with Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, the City Manager, in her capacity as the Director of Emergency Services Director, proclaimed a local emergency within the City commencing on or about March 9, 2023, in response to the latest series of atmospheric river systems and the damage to the City due to the storm events that began on December 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Manager’s March 11, 2023 proclamation followed a County of San Luis Obispo issued Proclamation of Local Emergency on March 10, 2023 for the entire County due to severe storms; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2023, President Biden approved a California Emergency Declaration beginning on March 9, 2023, ordering Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal and local response efforts; and WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable authorities, the City Council must both: 1) declare a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 storm events; and 2) ratify and declare a local emergency for subsequent storm events following the City’s Manag er’s March 11, 2023 proclamation related to the ongoing atmospheric rivers causing significant flooding of streets and homes in the City; and WHEREAS, adopting this Resolution is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, that: 1. The recitals set forth herein are true, correct and incorporated herein by reference. 2. A local emergency is declared to continues to exist throughout the City of Arroyo Grande, and the City has been undertaking, and will continue in effect through termination of this emergency to undertake necessary measures and incur necessary costs, which are directly related to the damage caused by the severe winter storms and are taken in furtherance of; the Governor’s Proclamation of a State of Emergency on January 4, 2023; the President of the United States’ Declaration of a National Emergency on January 8, 2023; and related orders and directives. 3. A local emergency is declared to exist throughout the City of Arroyo Grande resulting from subsequent storm events, and the City Council, by approval of this resolution, ratifies the City Manager’s March 11, 2023 proclamation, which is incorporated herein. The City Council ratification of a local emergency resulting from subsequent storm events will continue in effect through termination of this Page 28 of 354 emergency, to undertake necessary measures and incur necessary costs, which are directly related to the damage caused by the severe winter storms and are taken in furtherance of; the Governor’s Proclamation of a State of Emergency on January 4, 2023; the President of the United States’ approval of a California Emergency Declaration beginning March 9, 2023; the County of San Luis Obispo’s roclamation of a Local Emergency on March 10, 2023 ; and related orders and directives. On motion of Council Member ____________________ , seconded by Council Member _______ , and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2023. Page 29 of 354 CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR ATTEST: JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ISAAC ROSEN, INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY Page 30 of 354 A PROCLAMATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY WITHIN THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE (MARCH 2023 AND ONGOING STORM EVENTS BEGINNING DECEMBER 27, 2022) WHEREAS, Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services/City Manager ("Director'') of the City of Arroyo Grande to proclaim the existence of a local emergency when the City is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity and the Disaster Council/City Council ("City Council") is not in session; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 8558 (c) defines such conditions to include flood, storm, sudden and severe energy shortage, or other conditions that are or are likely to be, beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat; and WHEREAS, on January 4, 2023, the Governor of the State of California issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California beginning on December 27, 2022, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding, the recitals and findings of which are referenced and incorporated herein as though set forth in full and are hereby adopted as the recitals and findings of the Emergency Services Director; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2023, the President of the United States declared that an emergency exists in the State of California and ordered Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal, and local response efforts due to the emergency conditions resulting from successive and severe winter storms, flooding, and mudslides; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the Emergency Services Director for the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of a Local Emergency related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California beginning on December 27, 2022, bringing high winds, substantial rainfall, significant flooding, falling debris, downed trees, and widespread power outages; and WHEREAS, an additional atmospheric river system struck the Central Coast beginning on March 9, 2023, and, on March 10, 2023, the Emergency Services Director for the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of a Local Emergency related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California beginning on December 27, 2022, and have been ongoing since that date; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2023, President Biden approved a California Emergency Declaration beginning on March 9, 2023, ordering Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal and local response efforts related to the ongoing atmospheric river systems; and WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande has been adversely impacted by the above referenced winter storms in a manner that threatens local infrastructure and public health and safety, and which exceeds the capacity of the City to address with its own personnel and resources; and WHEREAS, the City Manager, as Emergency Services Director of the City of Arroyo Grande, does hereby find and determine as follows: ATTACHMENT 3 Page 31 of 354 DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY PAGE 2 1.That conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and/or property have arisen within the City of Arroyo Grande due to severe storms caused by a series of atmospheric river systems that have struck California since December 27, 2022, with the most recent atmospheric river system occurring March 9, 2023, bringing substantial rainfall, high winds, rising water levels along creeks within the City, and flooding of City streets and infrastructure, as well as damage to private property; and 2.That these conditions are expected to continue through the following week of March 13, 2023, bringing the potential for additional significant flooding, mudslides, strong wind gusts, debris, downed trees, and power outages throughout the City of Arroyo Grande; and 3.That such conditions, as a result of the ongoing atmospheric rivers, beginning December 27, 2022, are, or are likely to be, beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City of Arroyo Grande; and 4.That the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande is not in session and cannot be immediately called into session. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY PROCLAIMED by the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Arroyo Grande that a local emergency exists throughout the City; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that during the existence of said local emergency the powers, functions, and duties of the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by State law, ordinances, resolutions and approved emergency plans of the City; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that as soon as hereafter possible, this Proclamation be filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Proclamation; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED and that said emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist for the next seven (7) days, and hereafter by ratification of the City Council, or until its termination by the City Council. Dated: March 11, 2023 _____________________________ Whitney McDonald Emergency Services Director ATTEST: _______________________________ Jessica Matson, City Clerk Page 32 of 354 DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY PAGE 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand affixed the Official seal of the City of Arroyo Grande, California on this 11th day of March, 2023 _____________________________ Jessica Matson City Clerk Page 33 of 354 MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: Whitney McDonald, City Manager Isaac Rosen, Interim City Attorney SUBJECT: Supplemental Information Agenda Item 9.c - Consideration of 1) Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events and 2) a Declared Local Emergency for Subsequent Storm Events DATE: March 11, 2023 The day that the agenda was published for the March 14, 2023 City Council Meeting, a new atmospheric river storm event occurred within the City, causing significant flooding of streets and homes, including in the areas of Castillo Del Mar Avenue, Corbett Canyon Road, El Camino Real, Noyes Road, Tally Ho Road, and Valley Road. Storm related damage also occurred in and around Arroyo Grande Creek, Tally Ho Creek, and other creek systems within the City, with the accumulation of debris and damage to surrounding infrastructure and homes. The County of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of Local Emergency on March 10, 2023, for the entire County due to severe storms caused by a series of atmospheric river systems that have struck California, with the most recent atmospheric river system beginning March 9, 2023, and bringing with it high winds and substantial rainfall. Also on March 10, 2023, President Biden approved a California Emergency Declaration beginning on March 9, 2023, ordering Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal and local response efforts. In response to the latest series of atmospheric river systems and the damage to the City, on Saturday, March 11, 2023, the City Manager, acting in her capacity as Emergency Services Director for the city, proclaimed the existence of a local emergency within the City of Arroyo Grande pursuant to Section 8.12. 060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (Attachment 3). That proclamation is to be ratified by the City Council on March 14, 2023, consistent with Brown Act requirements and the City’s Municipal Code. An additional atmospheric river is also expected to hit the Central Coast next week, March 13-15, 2023, which has the likelihood of creating similar and additional damage and flooding within the City. In order to facilitate the ability of the City and its residents and businesses to access federal and state funding to assist in the ongoing recovery efforts through these storms, it is recommended that the Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Page 34 of 354 Emergency included in Agenda Item 9.c. be amended to include the current set of storms impacting Arroyo Grande. A proposed Revised Resolution is attached as Attachment 2. Attachment 2 – Revised Proposed Resolution Attachment 3 – Proclamation of State of Emergency Relating to the March 2023 Storm Event cc: Assistant City Manager Five Cities Fire Chief/Executive Officer Chief of Police City Attorney City Clerk City Website (or public review binder) Page 35 of 354 ATTACHMENT 2 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE 1) DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE JANUARY 2023 WINTER STORMS; 2) DECLARING A LOCAL EMERGENCY FOR SUBSEQUENT STORM EVENTS WHEREAS, on January 18, 2023, in accordance with Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, the City Manager, in her capacity as the Director of Emergency Services Director, proclaimed a local emergency within the City commencing on or about 8:00 am on January 4, 2023, due to the storm events that began on December 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council ratified the emergency proclamation through adoption of Resolution No. 5259 at its regular meeting on January 24, 2023; and WHEREAS, Arroyo Grande Municipal Code Section 8.12.065(C) provides that the City Council is to review the need for a continuing emergency declaration at regularly scheduled meetings at least every twenty-one (21) days until the emergency is terminated; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a Resolution declaring a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 Storm events on February 14, 2023 and February 28, 2023; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Government Code section 8558(b), on January 4, 2023, the Governor of the State of California issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency (“Governor’s Proclamation”) related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding; and Page 36 of 354 WHEREAS, on January 8, 2023, the President of the United States declared that an emergency exists in the State of California relating to severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, and mudslides, and enabling public agencies in impacted counties that suffered damage or losses from the storms eligible to apply for federal disaster assistance; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the County Administrative Officer of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of Local Emergency relating to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck San Luis Obispo County, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding; and WHEREAS, on January 17, 2023, the Department of Homeland Security amended the major disaster declaration issued in January 14, 2023 related to the January 2023 storm events to add San Luis Obispo County as an affected county, enabling Arroyo Grande residents who had damage or losses from the storms to apply for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) disaster assistance; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2023, in accordance with Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code, the City Manager, in her capacity as the Director of Emergency Services Director, proclaimed a local emergency within the City commencing on or about March 9, 2023, in response to the latest series of atmospheric river systems and the damage to the City due to the storm events that began on December 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Manager’s March 11, 2023 proclamation followed a County of San Luis Obispo issued Proclamation of Local Emergency on March 10, 2023 for the entire County due to severe storms; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2023, President Biden approved a California Emergency Declaration beginning on March 9, 2023, ordering Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal and local response efforts; and WHEREAS, pursuant to applicable authorities, the City Council must both: 1) declare a continued local emergency related to the January 2023 storm events; and 2) ratify and declare a local emergency for subsequent storm events following the City’s Manager’s Page 37 of 354 March 11, 2023 proclamation related to the ongoing atmospheric rivers causing significant flooding of streets and homes in the City; and WHEREAS, adopting this Resolution is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande, that: 1. The recitals set forth herein are true, correct and incorporated herein by reference. 2. A local emergency is declared to continues to exist throughout the City of Arroyo Grande, and the City has been undertaking, and will continue in effect through termination of this emergency to undertake necessary measures and incur necessary costs, which are directly related to the damage caused by the severe winter storms and are taken in furtherance of; the Governor’s Proclamation of a State of Emergency on January 4, 2023; the President of the United States’ Declaration of a National Emergency on January 8, 2023; and related orders and directives. 3. A local emergency is declared to exist throughout the City of Arroyo Grande resulting from subsequent storm events, and the City Council, by approval of this resolution, ratifies the City Manager’s March 11, 2023 proclamation, which is incorporated herein. The City Council ratification of a local emergency resulting from subsequent storm events will continue in effect through termination of this emergency, to undertake necessary measures and incur necessary costs, which are directly related to the damage caused by the severe winter storms and are taken in furtherance of; the Governor’s Proclamation of a State of Emergency on January 4, 2023; the President of the United States’ approval of a California Emergency Declaration beginning March 9, 2023; the County of San Luis Obispo’s Page 38 of 354 Proclamation of a Local Emergency on March 10, 2023 ; and related orders and directives. On motion of Council Member ____________________ , seconded by Council Member ________ , and by the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2023. Page 39 of 354 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR ATTEST: JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ISAAC ROSEN, INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY Page 40 of 354 A PROCLAMATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY SERVICES OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY WITHIN THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE (MARCH 2023 AND ONGOING STORM EVENTS BEGINNING DECEMBER 27, 2022) WHEREAS, Section 8.12.060 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code empowers the Director of Emergency Services/City Manager ("Director'') of the City of Arroyo Grande to proclaim the existence of a local emergency when the City is affected or likely to be affected by a public calamity and the Disaster Council/City Council ("City Council") is not in session; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 8558 (c) defines such conditions to include flood, storm, sudden and severe energy shortage, or other conditions that are or are likely to be, beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment and facilities of this City, requiring the combined forces of other political subdivisions to combat; and WHEREAS, on January 4, 2023, the Governor of the State of California issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California beginning on December 27, 2022, bringing high winds, substantial precipitation, and river, stream and urban flooding, the recitals and findings of which are referenced and incorporated herein as though set forth in full and are hereby adopted as the recitals and findings of the Emergency Services Director; and WHEREAS, on January 8, 2023, the President of the United States declared that an emergency exists in the State of California and ordered Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal, and local response efforts due to the emergency conditions resulting from successive and severe winter storms, flooding, and mudslides; and WHEREAS, on January 9, 2023, the Emergency Services Director for the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of a Local Emergency related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California beginning on December 27, 2022, bringing high winds, substantial rainfall, significant flooding, falling debris, downed trees, and widespread power outages; and WHEREAS, an additional atmospheric river system struck the Central Coast beginning on March 9, 2023, and, on March 10, 2023, the Emergency Services Director for the County of San Luis Obispo issued a Proclamation of a Local Emergency related to severe winter storms and a series of atmospheric river systems that struck California beginning on December 27, 2022, and have been ongoing since that date; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2023, President Biden approved a California Emergency Declaration beginning on March 9, 2023, ordering Federal assistance to supplement State, tribal and local response efforts related to the ongoing atmospheric river systems; and WHEREAS, the City of Arroyo Grande has been adversely impacted by the above referenced winter storms in a manner that threatens local infrastructure and public health and safety, and which exceeds the capacity of the City to address with its own personnel and resources; and WHEREAS, the City Manager, as Emergency Services Director of the City of Arroyo Grande, does hereby find and determine as follows: Page 41 of 354 DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY PAGE 2 1.That conditions of disaster or extreme peril to the safety of persons and/or property have arisen within the City of Arroyo Grande due to severe storms caused by a series of atmospheric river systems that have struck California since December 27, 2022, with the most recent atmospheric river system occurring March 9, 2023, bringing substantial rainfall, high winds, rising water levels along creeks within the City, and flooding of City streets and infrastructure, as well as damage to private property; and 2.That these conditions are expected to continue through the following week of March 13, 2023, bringing the potential for additional significant flooding, mudslides, strong wind gusts, debris, downed trees, and power outages throughout the City of Arroyo Grande; and 3.That such conditions, as a result of the ongoing atmospheric rivers, beginning December 27, 2022, are, or are likely to be, beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of the City of Arroyo Grande; and 4.That the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande is not in session and cannot be immediately called into session. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY PROCLAIMED by the Director of Emergency Services of the City of Arroyo Grande that a local emergency exists throughout the City; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that during the existence of said local emergency the powers, functions, and duties of the emergency organization of this City shall be those prescribed by State law, ordinances, resolutions and approved emergency plans of the City; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that as soon as hereafter possible, this Proclamation be filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Arroyo Grande and that widespread publicity and notice be given of this Proclamation; and IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED and that said emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist for the next seven (7) days, and hereafter by ratification of the City Council, or until its termination by the City Council. Dated: March 11, 2023 _____________________________ Whitney McDonald Emergency Services Director ATTEST: _______________________________ Jessica Matson, City Clerk Page 42 of 354 DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY PAGE 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand affixed the Official seal of the City of Arroyo Grande, California on this 11th day of March, 2023 _____________________________ Jessica Matson City Clerk Page 43 of 354 1 Item 9.d. ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL February 14, 2023, 6:00 p.m. Hybrid City Council Chamber/Virtual Zoom Meeting 215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande Council Members Present: Mayor Ray Russom, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member George, Council Member Guthrie, Council Member Secrest Staff Present: City Clerk Jessica Matson, Interim City Attorney Isaac Rosen, City Manager Whitney McDonald, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Bill Robeson, Community Development Director Brian Pedrotti, Administrative Services Director Nicole Valentine, Utilities Manager Shane Taylor, Police Chief Michael T. Martinez Due to ongoing COVID-19 concerns in San Luis Obispo County, and in compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 361, which allows for a deviation of teleconference rules required by the Ralph M. Brown Act, this meeting was conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. MOMENT OF REFLECTION 4. FLAG SALUTE Mayor Ray Russom let the flag salute. 5. AGENDA REVIEW 5.a Closed Session Announcements None. 5.b Ordinances read in title only None. Page 44 of 354 2 Item 9.d. 6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 6.a Honorary Proclamation Recognizing February 2023 as Teen Dating Violence Action and Prevention Month Mayor Ray Russom read the Honorary Proclamation Recognizing February 2023 as "Teen Dating Violence Action and Prevention Month". Callie Tennock, Lumina Alliance, and Molly, Close to Home volunteer, accepted the proclamation. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 6.b Introductions and Oath of Office - Police Officers Christopher Bennett and Jesse Pierce Police Chief Martinez introduced Police Officers Christopher Bennett and Jesse Pierce, highlighted their educational and professional background, and facilitated the badge pinning ceremony. City Clerk Matson administered the Oath of Office. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. 6.c San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan Presentation Stephen Hanamaikai, SLOCOG, provided a presentation regarding the Regional Transportation Plan. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 6.d Update Regarding Countywide COVID-19 Efforts City Manager McDonald provided a brief update on COVID-19. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 6.e City Manager Communications City Manager McDonald provided information regarding events happening in the City; and discussed upcoming items for Council consideration. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 7. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS None. 8. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. Page 45 of 354 3 Item 9.d. 9. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Ray Russom asked the Council if there were any questions or any items to be pulled from the consent agenda for further discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Barneich declared a conflict of interest due to work performed for Mary Verdin and pulled Item 9.e. for separate consideration. Item 9.g. was pulled for questions. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. Speaking from the public was Mary Verdin, and Kathy McCorry. No further public comments were received. Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Barneich Seconded by Council Member George Approve Consent Agenda Items 9.a. through 9.i. with exception of 9.e., with the recommended courses of action. AYES (5): Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member George, Council Member Secrest, Council Member Guthrie, and Mayor Ray Russom Passed (5 to 0) 9.a Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2023. 9.b Consideration of Statement of Investment Deposits Received and filed the report listing investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande as of December 31, 2022, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b). 9.c Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Authorizing the Continuance of Remote Teleconference Meetings of the Legislative and Advisory Bodies Pursuant to Government Code Section 5 Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) PANDEMIC AND AUTHORIZING THE CONTINUANCE OF REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS OF THE LEGISLATIVE BODIES OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953(e)". 9.d Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE JANUARY 2023 WINTER STORMS". 9.f Approval of Minutes Approved the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 24, 2023, as submitted. Page 46 of 354 4 Item 9.d. 9.g Consideration of Appointments to the Architectural Review Committee; Community Service Grant Program Committee; and Arroyo Grande Tourism Business Improvement District Advisory Board 1) Appointed Glenn Martin to the ARC; 2) Appointed Aileen Loe to the CSGPC; and 3) Appointed David Glass to the AGTBID Advisory Board. 9.h Consideration to Adopt a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 1) Received and filed an update of the emergency generator replacement project at the FCFA Station 1; and 2) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DETERMINING A NEED TO CONTINUE WORK UNDER EMERGENCY CONTRACTS FOR THE FCFA STATION 1 EMERGENCY GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT". 9.i Consideration of Rejection of All Bids for the Retrofit of Swinging Bridge over Arroyo Grande Creek Project, PW 2021-06 Rejected all Bids on the Retrofit of Swinging Bridge over Arroyo Grande Creek Project (Project) and directed staff to begin the processes of compliance with Federal procedures and requirements set forth in the Local Assistance Procedures Manual on the Project. 9.e Consideration of an Extension of the Consultant Services Agreement with Verdin Marketing for Tourism Marketing Services for One Year Mayor Pro Tem Barneich recused herself due to having performed interior design work for the owners of Verdin Marketing on their residence. Moved by Council Member George Seconded by Council Member Secrest Approve and authorize the City Manager to extend the Consultant Services Agreement with Verdin Marketing for a period of one year, expiring on June 30, 2024. AYES (4): Council Member George, Council Member Secrest, Council Member Guthrie, and Mayor Ray Russom ABSENT (1): Mayor Pro Tem Barneich Passed (4 to 0) 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS 10.a Public Hearing to Discuss and Consider a Resolution Approving Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Projects for Year 2023 Planning Manager Perez presented the item and recommended that the Council adopt a Resolution approving projects to be funded with the City’s allocation of CDBG funds for the Year 2023. Page 47 of 354 5 Item 9.d. Mayor Ray Russom opened the public hearing. Upon hearing no public comments, Mayor Ray Russom closed the public hearing. Moved by Council Member George Seconded by Council Member Guthrie Adopt a Resolution approving projects to be funded with the City’s allocation of CDBG funds for the Year 2023 as shown in Table 1. AYES (5): Council Member George, Council Member Guthrie, Council Member Secrest, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, and Mayor Ray Russom Passed (5 to 0) 11. OLD BUSINESS 11.a Update and Discussion of a Proposal for the Comprehensive General Plan Update Community Development Director Pedrotti presented the report and recommended that the Council 1) Direct staff to return to the City Council with a consultant services agreement with Mintier Harnish to initiate the comprehensive General Plan Update, and 2) Direct staff to solicit proposals for a Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice (DEIJ) expert to implement the City’s DEIJ Policy and return to the City Council with a consultant contract for these services. Director Pedrotti and City Manager McDonald responded to Council questions. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. Council discussion ensued regarding timing options for the General Plan Update and the consultant's proposal. Michael Gibbons, Minitier Harnish, responded to questions from Council. Moved by Council Member George Seconded by Council Member Secrest 1) Direct staff to return to the City Council with a consultant services agreement with Mintier Harnish to initiate the comprehensive General Plan Update to include the three-year scope of work and alternatives, the Climate Action Plan update, Comprehensive Development Code update, and Economic Development Tasks; and addition of potential funding sources; and 2) Direct staff to solicit proposals for a separate DEIJ expert. AYES (4): Council Member George, Council Member Secrest, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich and Mayor Ray Russom NOES (1): Council Member Guthrie Passed (4 to 1) 12. NEW BUSINESS 12.a Consideration of a Resolution Suspending Penalties for Failure to Meet Required Water Use Reductions During the Current Stage 1 Water Shortage Emergency Page 48 of 354 6 Item 9.d. Mayor Ray Russom called for a brief break at 7:46 p.m. The Council reconvened at 7:51 p.m. Administrative Services Director Valentine presented the report and recommended that the Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City’s Administrative Services Director to suspend penalties imposed pursuant to the Stage 1 Water Shortage Emergency Declaration adopted on October 12, 2021, Resolution 5119, for failure to meet required water use reductions for February 2023 billing dates and all future billing dates until otherwise directed by the City Council. Director Valentine and Utilities Manager Taylor responded to questions from Council. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. Mayor Ray Russom made a motion to adopt a Resolution authorizing the City’s Administrative Services Director to suspend penalties imposed for February billing dates and all future billing dates pursuant to the Stage 1 Water Shortage Emergency Declaration adopted on October 12, 2021, Resolution 5119, and to direct staff to include a discussion regarding potential future water shortage emergency declaration language. The motion failed due to a lack of a second. Council Member Guthrie made a motion to eliminate the penalties when the Stage 1 Water Shortage Emergency Declaration is rescinded, and to direct staff to bring back options in language that encourages continued water savings. Mayor Pro Tem Barneich seconded the motion with a request to direct staff to also bring back a discussion regarding water shortage triggers. Council Member Guthrie concurred. Council Member George commented regarding the option of suspending penalties until April 2023 when staff brings back an item to consider rescinding the State 1 Water Shortage Emergency declaration. Council Member Guthrie did not concur due to concerns with starting and stopping penalties. Moved by Council Member Guthrie Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Barneich Direct staff to eliminate the penalties when the Stage 1 Water Shortage Emergency Declaration is rescinded; bring back options in language that encourages continued water savings; and bring back a discussion regarding water shortage triggers. AYES (3): Council Member Guthrie, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, and Council Member Secrest NOES (2): Council Member George and Mayor Ray Russom Passed (3 to 2) 13. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Pro Tem Barneich commented on the Community Service Grant Application and welcomed Interim City Attorney Rosen. Council Member George thanked Central Coast Follies for their assistance; and commented on the Clark Center performances of STEAMPunk Adventures in March. Page 49 of 354 7 Item 9.d. Council Member Secrest noted that there will be a youth section included in the Art in the Park event; and that Christopher Pruvell, lead prosecutor in the Kristin Smart case, appreciated the support from the Arroyo Grande community during the trial. 14. CLOSED SESSION City Attorney Rosen announced that the Council will recess into closed session to discuss the following item: CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL- EXISTING LITIGATION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Name of Case: Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District v. City of Santa Maria, et al. and related actions, Santa Clara Superior Court, Case No. CV 770214. Council adjourned to Closed Session at 8:39 p.m. A Closed Session report will be provided at the next Regular City Council meeting. 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Ray Russom adjourned the meeting at 9:45 p.m. _________________________ Caren Ray Russom, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Jessica Matson, City Clerk Page 50 of 354 1 ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL February 28, 2023, 6:00 p.m. Hybrid City Council Chamber/Virtual Zoom Meeting 215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande Council Members Present: Mayor Ray Russom, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member George, Council Member Guthrie, Council Member Secrest Staff Present: City Clerk Jessica Matson, Interim City Attorney Isaac Rosen, City Manager Whitney McDonald, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Bill Robeson, Administrative Services Director Nicole Valentine, Community Development Director Brian Pedrotti, Planning Manager Andrew Perez, FCFA Chief Steve Lieberman, Police Chief Michael Martinez, Commander Zak Ayala, Commander Dave Culver Due to ongoing COVID-19 concerns in San Luis Obispo County, and in compliance with Assembly Bill (AB) 361, which allows for a deviation of teleconference rules required by the Ralph M. Brown Act, this meeting was conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Ray Russom called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Matson took roll call. 3. MOMENT OF REFLECTION 4. FLAG SALUTE Mayor Ray Russom led the flag salute. 5. AGENDA REVIEW 5.a Closed Session Announcements Regular Meeting of February 14, 2023 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL- EXISTING LITIGATION pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1): Page 51 of 354 2 Name of Case: Santa Maria Valley Water Conservation District v. City of Santa Maria, et al. and related actions, Santa Clara Superior Court, Case No. CV 770214. Interim City Attorney Rosen announced that there was no reportable action. 5.b Ordinances read in title only None. 6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 6.a Honorary Proclamation Recognizing March as Women’s History Month Mayor Ray Russom read the Honorary Proclamation Recognizing March as Women’s History Month. Nan Fowler, South County Historical Society, accepted the proclamation. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 6.b Recognition of Outgoing Advisory Body Members Mayor Ray Russom thanked outgoing Downtown Parking Advisory Board Members Mike Zimmerman, Chiasa Klapper, Jim Kelsey, and Architectural Review Committee Members Jon Couch and Warren Hoag for their service to the community. Mayor Ray Russom presented a Mayor's Commendation to Warren Hoag for his 30 years of service on the Architectural Review Committee. Council Member George and Mayor Pro Tem Barneich commented on Mr. Hoag's service and thanked him. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. 6.c Central Coast Community Energy Special Presentation Judi Young, Central Coast Community Energy, provided a presentation regarding recent accomplishments and plans for 2023. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 6.d Update Regarding Countywide COVID-19 Efforts City Manager McDonald noted that this item will no longer be on future agendas due to the termination of the local emergency. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. No action was taken on this item. 6.e City Manager Communications City Manager McDonald provided information regarding the upcoming City Council goal-setting meeting; and discussed upcoming items for Council consideration. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. Page 52 of 354 3 No action was taken on this item. 7. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS The City Council provided brief reports from the following committee, commission, board, or other subcommittee meetings that they attended as the City’s appointed representative. 7.a MAYOR RAY RUSSOM: 1. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) 2. Central Cost Blue Regional Recycled Water Authority Board 3. San Luis Obispo County Mayor's Meeting 4. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD) 5. Other 7.b MAYOR PRO TEM BARNEICH: 1. Audit Committee 2. Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC) 3. Zone 3 Water Advisory Board 4. Other 7.c COUNCIL MEMBER GEORGE: 1. Five Cities Fire Authority 2. Tourism Business Improvement District Advisory Board 3. Visit SLO CAL Advisory Board 4. Other 7.d COUNCIL MEMBER GUTHRIE: 1. Brisco/Halcyon Interchange Subcommittee 2. County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) 3. Council of Governments/Regional Transit Authority/ South County Transit (SLOCOG/SLORTA/SCT) 4. Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA) 5. REACH Economic Development Roundtable 6. Other 7.e COUNCIL MEMBER SECREST: 1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD) 2. Brisco/Halcyon Interchange Subcommittee Page 53 of 354 4 3. South County Chambers of Commerce Arroyo Grande Business Meeting 4. South County Chambers of Commerce Governmental Affairs Committee 5. Other 8. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. Speaking from the public were Nan Fowler and Jeff Metcalf. No further comments were received. 9. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Ray Russom asked the Council if there were any questions or any items to be pulled from the consent agenda for further discussion. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received. Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Barneich Seconded by Council Member Guthrie Approve Consent Agenda Items 9.a. through 9.i., with the recommended courses of action. AYES (5): Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member Guthrie, Council Member George, Council Member Secrest, and Mayor Ray Russom Passed (5 to 0) 9.a Consideration of Cash Disbursement Ratification 1) Ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 16 through January 31, 2023. 2) Determined that ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) 9.b Consideration of Fiscal Year 2022-23 Second Quarter Status Report and Request to Approve Two Budget Adjustment Requests Received, considered, and filed the FY 2022-23 Second Quarter Financial Status Report; and approve two Budget Adjustment Requests. 9.c Consideration of a Resolution Designating Authorized Agents for the City’s Application(s) for State and Federal Disaster Relief Funds 1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED AGENTS FOR THE CITY’S APPLICATION(S) FOR STATE AND FEDERAL DISASTER COST RECOVERY ASSISTANCE". 2) Made findings that adopting the Resolution Designating Authorized Agents for the City’s Application(s) for State and Federal Disaster Relief Funds is not a project subject to the Page 54 of 354 5 California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) 9.d Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Declaring a Continued Local Emergency Related to the January 2023 Storm Events 1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DECLARING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE JANUARY 2023 WINTER STORMS". 2) Made findings that adopting the Resolution continuing a local emergency is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) 9.e Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution Terminating the Local Emergency Related to the COVID-19 Pandemic 1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE TERMINATING A CONTINUED LOCAL EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19) PANDEMIC". 2) Made findings that the Resolution terminating a local emergency is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) 9.f Consider Adoption of a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 1) Received and filed an update of the emergency generator replacement project at the FCFA Station 1; 2) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DETERMINING A NEED TO CONTINUE WORK UNDER EMERGENCY CONTRACTS FOR THE FCFA STATION 1 EMERGENCY GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT"; and 3) Made findings that the continuation of the emergency action and the update of the Emergency generator replacement project at FCFA Station 1 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 2 exemption, which applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, and where none of the exceptions to the exemption apply. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15302.) 9.g Consideration of Acceptance of the 2022 Pedestrian Crossing Improvements Project, PW 2021-08 1) Accepted the project improvements as constructed by G. Sosa Const ruction, Inc. in accordance with the plans and specifications for the 2022 Pedestrian Crossing improvement Project, PW 2021-08; 2) Directed staff to file a Notice of Completion; and 3) Authorized release Page 55 of 354 6 of retention, thirty-five (35) days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded, if no liens have been filed. 2) Found the Project improvements and completion of the Project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, under the CEQA Class 3 exemption, for the new construction of small structures. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15303.) 9.h Consideration of a Resolution Accepting Public Improvements for Parcel Map PM AG17- 0073; Location – 189 Brisco Road 1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL MAP 17-0073, LOCATED AT 189 BRISCO ROAD BY EDWARD SHAPIRO". 2) Made a finding that the acceptance of public improvements for PM AG17-0073 is not a project under CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378, because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment; or in the alternate, is exempt from CEQA on the basis that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15061, subd. (b)(3).) 9.i Monthly Water Supply and Demand Update Received and filed the monthly Water Supply and Demand Update. 10. PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 11. OLD BUSINESS None. 12. NEW BUSINESS 12.a Receive an Update Regarding the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Wind-Down Process and Organizational Assessment City Manager McDonald presented an update regarding the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) wind-down process and organizational assessment. City Manager McDonald also shared questions for discussion from the Grover Beach City Council including "Should we continue to pursue a restructured fire services Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the City of Grover Beach as recommended in the study?"; "If so, should our restructured JPA provide service to Oceano in a contractual fee-for-service arrangement for a defined period of time?"; and "Do you have any other input or direction or inclusions or recommendations to be included in what the consultant is putting together?". City Manager McDonald commented that staff recommend taking the recommendations from the consultant and working with the City of Grover Beach to form a new JPA and noting the Oceano divestiture process will not be completed by June 30, 2023. City Manager McDonald and Interim City Attorney Rosen responded to questions from Council. Page 56 of 354 7 Rick Hayden, Larry Waterhouse, Bob Leland, and Andy Belknap, consultants with Baker Tilly, presented the analysis of the FCFA Fire Services. The consultants responded to questions from Council. Mayor Ray Russom called for a brief break at 8:47 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:56 p.m. FCFA Chief Steve Lieberman read his statement into the record and responded to questions from Council. Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. Speaking from the public was Bruce Hensley, Barbara Harmon, No name provided, Craig Vanderzwaag, Steven Hensley, Jeff Lane, Matthew Chircop, and Tom Hugh. No further public comments were received. Extensive Council discussion ensued. Mayor Ray Russom invited additional public comment. No additional public comments were received. Mayor Ray Russom disclosed ex-parte conversations with Local 4403. Mayor Ray Russom led a straw poll regarding Grover Beach City Council's questions as follows: - "Should we continue to pursue a restructured fire services Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the City of Grover Beach as recommended in the study?" Council Members George, Secrest, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, and Mayor Ray Russom stated "yes;" Council Member Guthrie stated "no." - "If so, should our restructured JPA provide service to Oceano in a contractual fee-for-service arrangement for a defined period of time?" Council Members Guthrie, George, Secrest, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, and Mayor Ray Russon stated "yes." - "Do you have any other input or direction or inclusions or recommendations to be included in what the consultant is putting together?" All Council Members provided comments in response to Baker Tilly's report including contract options for fire services, tax measures, the JPA Board makeup, and possibility of providing fire services to Oceano. Council Member George disclosed ex-parte conversations with Local 4403. At 10:52 p.m., Mayor Ray Russom stated that pursuant to Council policy, the Council must vote unanimously to continue the meeting past 11:00 p.m. Council Member Guthrie moved to continue the meeting to 11:30 p.m. Mayor Ray Russom seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously by voice vote. No action was taken on this item. 12.b Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance Due to meeting time constraints, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich moved to continue Item 12.b. to a date uncertain. Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Barneich Seconded by Council Member Secrest Move to continue the item to a date uncertain. Page 57 of 354 8 AYES (5): Mayor Ray Russom, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member George, Council Member Guthrie, and Council Member Secrest Passed (5 to 0) 13. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS Council Member Guthrie commented on the success of the Meet the Machines event. Mayor Pro Tem Barneich requested an update on the Short-term Rental consultant's work; and requested that the Council consider directing staff to agendize a discussion of the TBID Board. Council Member Guthrie concurred. The Council briefly discussed timing of the proposed item and directed the City Manager to discuss the item separately with Mayor Pro Tem Barneich and Council Member Guthrie. Mayor Ray Russom announced that she will be absent from the April 11th City Council meeting. 14. CLOSED SESSION Due to meeting time constraints, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich moved to continue Closed Session to a date uncertain. Moved by Mayor Pro Tem Barneich Seconded by Council Member Secrest Move to continue the item to a date uncertain. AYES (5): Mayor Ray Russom, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member George, Council Member Guthrie, and Council Member Secrest Passed (5 to 0) 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Ray Russom adjourned the meeting at 11:25 p.m. _________________________ Caren Ray Russom, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Jessica Matson, City Clerk Page 58 of 354 1 ACTION MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL March 2, 2023, 5:00 p.m. Hybrid City Council Chamber/Virtual Zoom Meeting 215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande Council Members Present: Mayor Ray Russom, Mayor Pro Tem Barneich, Council Member George, Council Member Guthrie, Council Member Secrest Staff Present: City Clerk Jessica Matson, Interim City Attorney Isaac Rosen, City Manager Whitney McDonald, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Bill Robeson, Administrative Services Director Nicole Valentine, Community Development Director Brian Pedrotti, Recreation Services Director Sheridan Bohlken, Police Chief Michael Martinez, FCFA Chief Steve Lieberman, Human Resources Officer Tashina Ureno, Management Analyst Aleah Bergam, Utilities Manager Shane Taylor This meeting was held in an in-person/hybrid format. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pro Tem Barneich called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Matson took roll call. 3. FLAG SALUTE Mayor Pro Tem Barneich led the flag salute. Mayor Ray Russom joined the meeting at 5:09 p.m. 4. CITY COUNCIL GOAL SETTING WORKSHOP 4.a Fiscal Year 2023-25 Goal Setting Study Session Page 59 of 354 2 City Manager McDonald presented the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-25 Budget process and introduced facilitator, Sommer Kehrli, from the Centre for Organizational Excellence. Sommer Kehrli introduced herself and facilitated a goal-setting workshop with City Council. Management Analyst Bergam presented results from the online Community Priorities Survey and answered questions from Council. City Manager McDonald invited public comment. Speaking from the public was Greg, and Jeff Lane. No further public comments were received. Police Chief Martinez responded to comments regarding crime statistics in the city. Ms. Kehrli presented the Council Prioritized Goals. City Manager McDonald invited public comment. Speaking from the public were Greg, and Krista Jeffries. No further public comments were received. Council took a brief break from 6:48 p.m. to 7:04 p.m. Ms. Kehrli reviewed the Prioritized Goals Summary. Council discussed the 7 goals listed in the summary: 1. Funding: sales tax measure, new revenue sources, economic development; 2. Five Cities Fire Authority; 3. Address our current infrastructure needs; 4. General Plan; 5. Water Resilience; 6. Homeless/Housing; and 7. Staff resources/employee attraction and retention. Council discussion ensued regarding the top funding focus. Police Chief Martinez and FCFA Chief Lieberman responded to questions from Council regarding cannabis businesses. City Manager McDonald explained the process and next steps which includes staff working to identify what work needs to start, continue, or stop based on the Council goals discussion; and staff will bring back a Council goals item as part of the FY 2023-25 Budget process for Council consideration and adoption. No action was taken on this item. 5. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Council, Mayor Ray Russom adjourned the meeting at 7:41 p.m. _________________________ Caren Ray Russom, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Jessica Matson, City Clerk Page 60 of 354 Item 9.e. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director BY: Steve Kahn, Interim City Engineer SUBJECT: Consider Adoption of a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Adoption of the Resolution by the required four-fifths vote will allow for the continued accelerated replacement of the emergency generator at the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Station 1. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: There are no additional fiscal impacts from adoption of this Resolution. The FY 2021-22 and FY 2022-23 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budgets included $680,018 ($46,780 General Fund, $318,738 Sales Tax Funds, and $314,500 of California Nuclear Power Preparedness (NPP) Program funding) for the subject project. The engineer’s construction cost estimate for the project is currently $646,453. FCFA staff will seek to secure the NPP funding upon completion of the construction documents and associated engineer’s construction cost estimate. It is anticipated that NPP funding will cover approximately 50% or $323,277. Staff time will be necessary to coordinate construction activities with the contractor and special inspectors. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Receive and file an update of the emergency generator replacement project at the FCFA Station 1; 2) Adopt a Resolution determining that there is a need to continue the emergency action for the replacement of the emergency generator in accordance with Public Contract Code Section 22050; and 3) Make findings that the continuation of the emergency action and the update of the Emergency generator replacement project at FCFA Station 1 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 2 exemption, which applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located Page 61 of 354 Item 9.e. City Council Consider Adoption of a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 March 14, 2023 Page 2 on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, and where none of the exceptions to the exemption apply. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15302.) BACKGROUND: Public Contract Code (PCC) Section 22050 allows a public agency, in the case of an emergency, to repair or replace a public facility, take any directly related and immediate action required by that emergency, and procure the necessary equipment, services, and supplies for those purposes without going through a formal bid process. At its regular meeting on September 13, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5219 declaring an emergency and authorizing the accelerated replacement of the emergency generator at the FCFA Station 1 by eliminating the formal bid process. PCC Section 22050 requires that after proceeding with an emergency project, the Cit y Council shall review the emergency action at its next regularly scheduled meeting and at every regularly scheduled meeting thereafter until the emergency action is terminated, and if it is determined that there is a need to continue the action, authorize continuation of the emergency action by a four-fifths vote. On September 27, October 11 and 25, November 22, December 13, 2022, January 10 and 24, and February 14 and 28, 2023 the Council adopted Resolution Nos 5225, 5231, 5239, 5243, 5250, 5253, 5262,5266, and 5271 respectively, determining a need to continue work under emergency contracts to replace the emergency generator at the FCFA Station 1. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: Since the February 28, 2023 City Council meeting, the status of the project is as follows:  On January 25, 2023, two bids were received on the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project. The bids were from Electricraft, Inc. for $462,357 and Thoma Electric for $561,889. These bids are below the engineers estimate of the Project costs and there are sufficient funds in the Project budget to move forward on the Project.  Staff will be awarding the bid on the Project to Electricraft, Inc. The first order of work on the Project is to order the generator and other long lead t ime equipment. When these are ordered the contractor will let us know the estimated delivery date, but the initial estimate is up to a year away. The next step after that is to complete the site work at Fire Station #1 and the wait for the generator to arr ive for installation. While a portable generator has been brought on site that allows for the opening of the apparatus bay doors and some lighting at the fire station, it does not provide power to the server room or the station alerting system, which are critical needs. Therefore, there Page 62 of 354 Item 9.e. City Council Consider Adoption of a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 March 14, 2023 Page 3 remains an imminent danger to public health and safety as this situation may cause delay of emergency 9-1-1 services during the event of a power outage . Because of this, staff recommends that the emergency action be continued. As required by statute, staff will continue to bring a similar item to the Council on subsequent agendas with the necessary findings until the necessary emergency work has been completed or until the emergency action is terminated. Until this future item, staff will continue to work with the design consultant and selected contractor to complete the improvements on an accelerated basis. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Receive and file an update of the emergency generator replacement project at the FCFA Station 1; and adopt the proposed Resolution finding that there is a need to continue the emergency action for the replacement of the emergency generator in accordance with Public Contract Code Section 22050; 2. Receive and file an update of the emergency generator replacement project at the FCFA Station 1; do not adopt the proposed Resolution; and direct staff to prepare a Resolution to terminate the need to continue work under emergency action; or 3. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Adoption of the Resolution will allow for the accelerated replacement of the emergency generator at the FCFA Station 1 which will ensure power during the event of a power outage thereby providing rapid response time in the event of an emergency situation. DISADVANTAGES: No disadvantages are identified at this time. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: The continuation of the emergency action and the update of the emergency generator replacement project at FCFA Station 1 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 2 exemption, which applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, and where none of the exceptions to the exemption apply. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15302.). PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Page 63 of 354 Item 9.e. City Council Consider Adoption of a Resolution Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22050 Determining to Continue Work Under Emergency Contracts for the FCFA Station 1 Emergency Generator Replacement Project, PW 2021-09 March 14, 2023 Page 4 Attachment: 1. Proposed Resolution Page 64 of 354 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE DETERMINING A NEED TO CONTINUE WORK UNDER EMERGENCY CONTRACTS FOR THE FCFA STATION 1 EMERGENCY GENERATOR REPLACEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, on September 13, 2022, pursuant to Public Contract Code (PCC) Section 22050, the City Council deemed it was is in the public interest to immediately authorize the expenditure of City funds needed to safeguard the health, safety and welfare and to proceed immediately with the replacement of the emergency generator at the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) Station 1; and WHEREAS, On September 13, 2022, the City Council deemed the immediate replacement of the emergency generator was necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare and would not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation for bids and that prompt action, including authorization to expend all funds required for such replacement without competitive bidd ing, was necessary to respond to the emergency; and WHEREAS, on September 13, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5219 declaring an emergency and authorizing the City Manager to enter into any contract or agreement in order to immediately replace the emergency generator; and WHEREAS, PCC Section 22050 requires that after proceeding with an emergency project, the City Council shall review the emergency action at its next regularly scheduled meeting and at every regularly schedu led meeting thereafter until the emergency action is terminated; and WHEREAS, on September 27, 2022, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5225 determining a need to continue work under emergency contracts to replace the emergency generator and has adopted a similar resolution at all subsequent regular City Council meetings; and WHEREAS, the continuation of the emergency action and the update of the emergency generator replacement project at FCFA Station 1 is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the Class 2 exemption, which applies to the replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the structure replaced and will h ave substantially the same purpose and capacity as the structure replaced, and where none of the exceptions to the exemption apply. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15302.); and Page 65 of 354 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 WHEREAS, if it is determined that there is a need to continue the emergency action, PCC Section 22050 requires a four-fifths vote to authorize the continuation of the emergency action. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande that the emergency declared by the City Council on September 13, 2022 regarding replacement of the generator at FCFA Station 1 shall be deemed to continue , that the action is necessary to respond to the emergency, and there is substantial evidence in the record the continued emergency will not permit a delay resulting from a competitive solicitation of bids. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the recitals are incorporated herein and the local emergency shall be deemed to continue to exist until its termination is proclaimed by the City Council. On motion by Council Member _________, seconded by Council Member _______, and on the following roll call vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: The foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 14th day of March, 2023. Page 66 of 354 RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 ___________________________________ CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR ATTEST: ___ JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: _________________________________ WHITNEY MCDONALD, CITY MANAGER APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ ISAAC ROSEN, INTERIM CITY ATTORNEY Page 67 of 354 Item 9.f. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director BY: Andrew Perez, Planning Manager SUBJECT: 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: The General Plan Annual Report is an informational document identifying work completed in the previous year to implement the City’s General Plan. Once received and filed by the City Council, the Report is filed with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the California Department of Housing and Community Development. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: No financial impact is projected. RECOMMENDATION: 1) Review and accept the 2022 General Plan Annual Report (the “Annual Report” or “Report”) and direct staff to forward the Report to the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research and the Department of Housing and Community Development. 2) Find that the request is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5). BACKGROUND: California Government Code Section 65400(a)(2) requires all cities to file a General Plan Annual Report with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) and the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). By statute, the annual report must include the following: (1) the status of the plan and progress in its implementation; (2) the progress in meeting regional housing needs and removing governmental constraints to housing for all income levels; and (3) the degree to which the General Plan complies with State Office of Planning and Research guidelines. The purpose of the Report is to monitor the City's implementation of the General Plan over time (calendar year 2022), to help identify statewide trends, document progress in meeting the City’s share of regional housing needs and inform local decision makers. Page 68 of 354 Item 9.f. City Council 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report March 14, 2023 Page 2 Prior to submittal to the state, the Annual Report must be presented to the City Council for review and acceptance. As a procedural matter, the Annual Report was brought to the Planning Commission for receipt and acceptance prior to the Council given the role of the Commission as one of the "keepers" of the General Plan. The City's General Plan was adopted in October 2001. A number of activities have been undertaken that implement the goals and policies of the General Plan since that time, including the optional elements adopted by the City. Planning Commission The Annual Report was presented to the Planning Commission at its meeting on February 21, 2023. The Planning Commission recommended that the report be submitted to the City Council for final acceptance. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The Annual Report provides an overview of the activities completed or currently being undertaken during 2022 to implement or update the General Plan. No updates to any elements of the General Plan were completed during the 2022 calendar year; however, a comprehensive update of the General Plan was initiated. Staff held a study session with City Council on July 26, 2022, to discuss and clarify the scope of the Update. Council directed staff to prepare a Request for Proposals, which was published in November. The City received one proposal for services prior to the December 22, 2022 deadline. Council discussed the consultant’s qualifications and recommended scope of work on February 14, 2023, supporting the proposal and directing staff to execute a consultant contract t o initiate the Update. Meeting the housing goals established by the City’s Housing Element relies on the creation of accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Housing Element Program A.2-1 encourages ADU development through updates to the ADU ordinance and execut ion of the pre-approved ADU plan program. The City Council adopted updates to the City’s ADU Ordinance on September 27, 2022. The update brought the City’s ordinance into compliance with State law in an effort to streamline the creation of ADUs. Plans for the pre-designed ADU plan program, a regional effort with the cities of Atascadero, Grover Beach, and Morro Bay, are complete and are now available for public use. The City’s Annual Report is formatted into two (2) sections:  Section 1: Introduction, including the legal requirements of the Annual Report and status of the adopted Elements of the General Plan; and  Section 2: Summary of Activity for 2022. Please note that the tables reporting housing data in Appendix A are derived from spreadsheets provided by the State, with limited formatting functionality. These digital spreadsheets will be submitted in their native file format, resolving blurry image issues. Page 69 of 354 Item 9.f. City Council 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report March 14, 2023 Page 3 ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Accept the 2022 General Plan Annual Report and direct staff to forward the Report to OPR and HCD; or 2. Do not accept the 2022 General Plan Annual Report at this time and provide direction to staff regarding modifications to the Report; or 3. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The City will be reporting data to the State in compliance with the California Government Code and the required April 1st deadline. DISADVANTAGES: None identified. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Staff recommends the City Council find the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5). The action is an administrative activity of the City that invo lves a report only to a State agency on progress regarding the General Plan implementation. The report does not authorize any development or changes to land use. Thus, the project would not result in any direct or indirect changes to the environment, and consequently, this action is not a project within the meaning of CEQA. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. 2022 General Plan Annual Progress Report Page 70 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 1 ATTACHMENT 1 General Plan Annual Report 2022 Page 71 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 2 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE City Council Caren Ray Russom, Mayor Kristen Barneich, Mayor Pro Tem Lan George Kate Secrest Jim Guthrie Planning Commission Jamie Maraviglia, Vice Chair Kevin Buchanan Cathy Sackrison Virginia Roof Bruce Berlin City Staff Whitney McDonald, City Manager Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director Steve Kahn, Interim City Engineer Mark Meyers, Contract Building Official Andrew Perez, Planning Manager Contact Information City of Arroyo Grande Community Development Department 300 E. Branch Street Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Phone: (805) 473-5420 Website www.arroyogrande.org Page 72 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 3 Contents Section 1 - Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4 A. Purpose of the Annual Report ................................................................................................ 4 B. Purpose of the General Plan ................................................................................................... 4 C. Status of the Adopted Elements of the City’s General Plan ................................................... 4 Land Use Element (Adopted October 2001) ............................................................................... 7 Circulation Element (Adopted June 2021) .................................................................................. 7 Housing Element (Adopted January 2021) ................................................................................. 7 Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element (Adopted October 2001, Amended June 2007)............................................................................................................................................ 8 Safety Element (Adopted October 2001) .................................................................................... 8 Noise Element (Adopted October 2001) ..................................................................................... 8 Economic Development Element (Adopted October 2012) ....................................................... 8 Parks and Recreation Element (Adopted October 2001) ............................................................ 8 Section 2 – Summary of Activity – 2022 ......................................................................................... 9 Planning Commission .................................................................................................................. 9 Building and Life Safety Division ................................................................................................. 9 Planning Division ......................................................................................................................... 9 General Plan Policies and Programs .......................................................................................... 10 Appendix A – Housing Element Reporting Forms ......................................................................... 11 Page 73 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 4 Section 1 - Introduction A. Purpose of the Annual Report This report reviews the activities that took place to implement the Arroyo Grande General Plan between January 1, 2022 and December 31, 2022. This report fulfills the requirements of Section 65400 of the California Government Code, which requires the City to file an annual report addressing the status of the General Plan and progress made toward goals and objectives. This annual report provides a means to monitor the success of implementing the General Plan and determine if changes need to be made in the plan or its implementation programs. The City is required to file the annual report with the Office of Planning and Research (OPR), as well as to their legislative bodies. The legislative body for Arroyo Grande is the City Council. B. Purpose of the General Plan The General Plan is the foundational development policy document of the City of Arroyo Grande. It defines the framework by which the physical, economic and human resources of the City are to be managed and utilized over time. The General Plan is available for public review at City Hall and on the City’s website. The General Plan acts to clarify and articulate the intentions of the City with respect to the rights and expectations of the public, property owners, and prospective investors and business interests. C. Status of the Adopted Elements of the City’s General Plan State law requires that the General Plan include seven elements. These mandatory elements must cover the following topics: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Safety, Noise, Conservation, and Open Space. State law allows the City to adopt any additional general plan elements that the City deems necessary. The City has adopted the Parks and Recreation, Agriculture, and Economic Development Elements as optional elements, which have the same decision making weight as the mandatory elements. Additionally, the elements of the general plan may combine elements as it deems necessary. The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan combines Agriculture, Open Space, and Conservation elements into a single element. The following is a breakdown of the City’s General Plan: Arroyo Grande GP Elements Required GP Elements Examples of Topics Covered Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space Element Agriculture (Optional) Define policy for the protection of significant natural resources, providing the setting or context for urban land use development and incorporated City areas. Conservation Open Space Fringe and Urban Area Land Use Element Land Use Provides for the types, density or intensity, design and distribution of existing and potential City areas. Circulation/Transportation Element Circulation Identifies the street pattern and other circulation infrastructure and transportation Page 74 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 5 Arroyo Grande GP Elements Required GP Elements Examples of Topics Covered systems needed to support the uses identified Land Use Element. Housing Element Housing Identifies and provides an analysis of existing and projected housing needs, an evaluation of housing constraints, a statement of goals, policies, quantifiable objectives and financial resources, and scheduled programs for the preservation, improvement, and development of housing. Safety Element Safety Provides for the protection of lives and property from the adverse effects of natural and man- caused hazards. Noise Element Noise Identifies the sources and outlines policy to protect land uses against adverse noise levels associated with necessary circulation and related activity. Economic Development Element Economic Development (Optional) Defines the objectives, policies and proposals for improved employment, business retention and expansion, and fiscal growth of the community. Park and Recreation Element Parks and Recreation (Optional) Outlines these public facilities and services desired to support the City and area residents, businesses, and visitors’ leisure-time activities. The City’s General Plan was comprehensively updated in October 2001. The City’s last major revision to the General Plan was completed in January 2017, with the City’s approval of the East Cherry Avenue Specific Plan project. Updates to the Housing Element and Circulation Element occurred in 2021. The following is a list of updates to the General Plan since the document’s adoption: Amendment No. Date Type Project GPA 02-001 November 2003 Land Use Map Parkside Residences GPA 02-002 June 2003 Land Use Map Berry Gardens Subarea 2 GPA 03-001 April 2003 Land Use Map Village Core Extension GPA 03-002 September 2003 Land Use Map Agriculture Designations GPA 03-003 March 2004 AG/C/OS Conversion of Prime Ag Land, Farmworker Housing, and Ag Conservation Easements GPA 04-002 August 2004 Land Use Map Noyes Road Properties GPA 04-003 March 2005 Housing Element Housing Element Update Page 75 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 6 Amendment No. Date Type Project GPA 06-001 August 2006 Land Use Map Castillo Del Mar GPA 06-002 November 2006 Circ & Parks and Rec Elements Bike and Pedestrian Plan GPA 06-003 November 2007 Land Use Map S. Elm Multi-Family Designation GPA 06-004 February 2007 Land Use Map Sunset Drive GPA 07-001 June 2007 AG/C/OS Creek Protection Policies GPA 07-002 November 2007 Housing Element Affordable Housing Requirements GPA 09-001 September 2009 Land Use Map 2009 Land Use Map Cleanup GPA 09-001B October 2009 Land Use Map Pearwood Annexation GPA 11-002 October 2013 Housing Element 2007-15 Housing Element GPA 12-002 July 2012 Circulation Element Bicycle and Trails Master Plan GPA 12-003 October 2012 Economic Development 2012 Economic Development Element GPA 14-001 March 2014 Land Use Map Heights at Vista Del Mar Annexation GPA 14-002 October 2015 Land Use Element Courtland/Grand GPA 14-003 March 2016 Housing Element 2014-19 Housing Element GPA 15-001 January 2017 AG/C/OS Creek Map Land Use Map E. Cherry Avenue Specific Plan None of the City’s individual Elements were updated in 2022; however, the City began the process to comprehensively update the City’s General Plan. A Request for Proposals (RFP) was released in November 2022 to solicit a consultant to assist the City with the Update. Since the General Plan has not been updated since 2001, all elements are in need of an update, with the exception of the Housing Element, which was recently updated in accordance with State law. The RFP included the following components in the project scope: 1) Development and implementation of a well-defined, inclusive, and robust public outreach strategy, including policies that promote inclusive outreach to diverse communities contained in the City’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice Policy; 2) Comprehensive update of existing General Plan Elements (except Housing Element); 3) Creation of an Environmental Justice Element; 4) An update to the Climate Action Plan; 5) Development of objective design standards and an overlay district for the East Grand Avenue corridor; and 6) Development Code update Page 76 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 7 One Proposal for Services was submitted prior to the December 22, 2022 deadline. Council discussed the consultant’s qualifications and recommended scope of work on February 14, 2023, supporting the proposal and directing staff to execute a consultant contract to initiate the Update. Land Use Element (Adopted October 2001) No text amendments to the Land Use Element occurred in 2022. Circulation Element (Adopted June 2021) No text amendments to the Circulation Element occurred in 2022. Housing Element (Adopted January 2021) No text amendments to the Housing Element occurred in 2022. Table 1 reflects the number of units that were entitled, permitted, and/or finaled in 2022. This is compared to the number of units permitted in 2021. With changes in reporting requirements for the State, future Annual Reports will have comparable data between the current and previous years: Table 1: Entitled, Permitted, & Finaled Units – 2021 vs. 2022 Income Level Entitled Permitted Finaled 2021 2022 2021 2022 2021 2022 Very Low 0 0 0 0 0 0 Low 63 0 0 6 0 7 Moderate 0 5 0 7 0 7 Above Moderate 5 13 14 4 25 4 Total 68 18 14 17 25 18 The year 2022 was the third year of the 6th cycle for purposes of reporting progress towards the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Table 2 reflects the number of units permitted during the first three years of the 6th cycle. Table 2: 6th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Allocation Income Level RHNA by Income Units Permitted 2020 – 2028 Very Low 170 0 Low 107 26 Moderate 124 7 Above Moderate 291 72 Total 692 105 Page 77 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 8 Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element (Adopted October 2001, Amended June 2007) No text amendments to the Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element occurred in 2022. Safety Element (Adopted October 2001) No text amendments to the Safety Element occurred in 2022. Noise Element (Adopted October 2001) No text amendments to the Noise Element occurred in 2022. Economic Development Element (Adopted October 2012) No text amendments to the Economic Development Element occurred in 2022. Parks and Recreation Element (Adopted October 2001) No text or map amendments to the Parks and Recreation Element occurred in 2022. Page 78 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 9 Section 2 – Summary of Activity – 2022 The City of Arroyo Grande policies and programs identified in the General Plan include tools already in place and used on a day-to-day basis in the City. Some of the various tools available to further the City’s goals and objectives include the City Council’s annual goals and priorities, Budget/Capital Improvement Program, Specific Plans and Master Plans of Development, Zoning and Subdivision Regulations, CDBG Funds, etc. Planning Commission The City of Arroyo Grande Planning Commission is designated as the "Planning Agency", as authorized by Section 65100 of the Government Code. The Commission has the discretionary and advisory responsibilities that are authorized by Chapters 2.18, 16.04, and 16.08 of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code. During 2022, the Planning Commission took action on the following: • Three (3) Conditional Use Permits; • Three (3) Time Extensions; • Two (2) Lot Line Adjustments; • Two (2) Appeals; • One (1) Tentative Tract Map; • One (1) Tentative Parcel Map; and • Five (5) Development Code Amendments. Building and Life Safety Division The City’s Building and Life Safety Division reviews project plans, issues permits, and provides inspection services for compliance with California's building, fire, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, energy, and disabled access codes, as well as City ordinances. In 2022, the Building Division received 708 building permit applications and issued 581 building permits. During the past year, City building inspectors made 2,923 construction and safety- related inspections associated with building permit activity. The Building Division finaled and completed 282 building permits in the same period. Engineering Division The City’s Engineering Division ensures all construction in the public right-of-way related to land development entitlements comply with adopted codes and engineering standards. Additionally, the Engineering Division, in partnership with the Public Works Department, is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the City’s Stormwater Management Program. In 2022, the Engineering Division received 162 applications for encroachment permits, 9 grading permit applications, and 51 stormwater permit applications for a total of 222 permit applications received. Major work efforts include the Traffic Way Bridge rehabilitation and replacement project and the Halcyon Complete Streets Plan. Page 79 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 10 Planning Division The Planning Division assists the community, the City Council, and the Planning Commission in preparing for the City's future growth and development, as well as reviews current development plans for consistency with local ordinances. The Planning Division administers the Development Code and deals with transportation, housing, community facilities, public safety, open space, design, and the use of land. The Planning Division provides support staff to the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Committee, and Downtown Parking Advisory Board. Administrative functions include the scheduling of meetings, preparation of agendas, posting of hearing notices, and preparation of minutes. The Planning Division provides land use analysis, environmental review as required under the California Environmental Quality Act, and prepares staff reports for the aforementioned Commissions and Committees, including the City Council. In 2022, the Planning Division received 151 applications for various land use entitlements (permits), including, land divisions, Conditional Use Permits, Minor Use Permits, and Sign permits. In 2022, the Planning Division spent time working on a number of work items. These work items included: • Adoption of ordinances updating the City’s Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance and Short Term Rental Ordinance; • Adoption of an Ordinance to implement Senate Bill 9; • Adoption of ordinances creating a Permanent Parklet Program, and allowing Tiny Homes on Wheels; • Community Service Grant Program; • Community Development Block Grant Program; • Participation in a regional effort to develop a pre-designed accessory dwelling unit program; and • Participation in the Regional Housing Action Team working group. General Plan Policies and Programs Community Development Department staff is currently working on a number of items specifically related to the General Plan, as referenced above. Prioritized work efforts for the General Plan include the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan, and the continuation of the comprehensive General Plan Update. Page 80 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 11 Appendix A – Housing Element Reporting Forms Page 81 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 12 Table A Page 82 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 13 Table A2 (Part 1) Page 83 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 14 Table A2 (Part 2) Page 84 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 15 Table A2 (Part 3) Page 85 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 16 Table A2 (Part 4) Page 86 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 17 Table A2 (Part 5) Page 87 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 18 Table B Page 88 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 19 Table D (Part 1) Page 89 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 20 Table D (Part 2) Page 90 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 21 Table D (Part 3) Page 91 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 22 Table D (Part 4) Page 92 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 23 Table D (Part 5) Page 93 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 24 Table D (Part 6) Page 94 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 25 Table D (Part 7) Page 95 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 26 Table D (Part 8) Page 96 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 27 Table D (Part 9) Page 97 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 28 Table H Page 98 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 29 Table I Page 99 of 354 Arroyo Grande General Plan Annual Report - 2022 Page 30 Summary Page 100 of 354 Item 12.a. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Nicole Valentine, Administrative Services Director Don Rhoads, Financial Consultant SUBJECT: Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Review and discuss the General Fund Five-Year financial forecast. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: The forecast provides an analysis of the financial impact of revenue and expenditure changes in the current fiscal year and the following five years. Preparation of the forecast required several hours of staff time, with additional review and input provided by the City’s financial consultant, Don Rhoads. RECOMMENDATION: Consider and receive the updated Five-Year Financial Forecast Report. BACKGROUND: The General Fund is the City’s largest fund and is used to account for the revenues and expenditures that support most services commonly associated with local government, including police, fire, public works, community development, parks and recreation , and administration. The preparation of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 through FY 2027-28 Five- Year Financial Forecast Report (Forecast) is one of the first steps in the City’s budget process. The City of Arroyo Grande’s Forecast is a long-range fiscal planning tool that will serve as the framework for the development of the upcoming FY 2023 -24 and FY 2024-25 General Fund Biennial Budget. The Forecast will provide City Council, key stakeholders, and the public information about the City’s financial resources to facilitate discussion and decision-making regarding the upcoming General Fund budget. The Forecast is a fiscally conservative, yet realistic, point-in-time estimate of the capacity of the General Fund to pay for both ongoing services and capital needs for the next five years. Because the General Fund is the City’s primary fund and is where most Page 101 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 2 discretionary funds reside, this Forecast does not include other City funds such as the water, sewer, transportation, and park development funds. The Forecast takes into account cost inflation over its five-year timeline while also implementing a “Status Quo” approach to staffing and program levels by projecting costs into the future with no material changes. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: 5-Year Financial Forecast Overview As depicted in Table 1 below, expenditures are expected to exceed revenues by $1.8 million in the current fiscal year (2022-23) due to a planned drawdown of reserves to support spending on streets, sidewalks, employee retention incentive program, and capital equipment. This expected deficit in FY 2022-23, however, is less than the originally planned reserve drawdown of $2.4 million. This is mainly due to better -than-expected projections for property, sales, and transient occupancy taxes in the current fiscal year while budgeted expenditures are largely on target. Table 1 also shows that the City is expected to experience a budget deficit that reaches $716,000 by FY 2027-28 if no adjustments are made to expenditures and no new revenue sources are developed. This trajectory would reduce the General Fund reserve from the current 36% of expenditures to just over 25% by FY 2027-28, approaching the policy level minimum reserve of 20%. As shown in Table 2 below, revenues in FY 2023-24 are projected to dip slightly from FY 2022-23 due in part to non-recurring grant revenues in the current year, in part to a mild economic slowdown in sales tax receipts anticipated by the City’s sales tax consultant (HdL), and in another part to the discontinuation of some recreation programs (before and after school childcare). According to HdL, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is expected to increase only 0.8% in FY 2022-23, rising to a modest 2.5% in the following year. Though HdL does not project that a recession is an inevitable outcome in the near future, they do expect some economic pullback in the near term and do not w rite off the possibility of a deeper recession depending on choices made by state and national policymakers in the FY 2022-23 Adopted FY 2022-23 Projection FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 Beginning Fund Balance $7,999 $10,500 $8,662 $8,506 $8,356 $7,804 $7,173 Total Revenue 20,901 22,104 21,731 22,358 23,014 23,689 24,386 Total Expenditures 23,279 23,941 21,887 22,508 23,565 24,321 25,102 Surplus or (Deficit)(2,378) (1,838) (157) (150) (552) (631) (716) Ending Fund Balance $5,621 $8,662 $8,506 $8,356 $7,804 $7,173 $6,457 Fund Balance %24.1%36.2%38.9%37.1%33.1%29.5%25.7% Table 1 (In thousands) General Fund Financial Forecast Page 102 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 3 months ahead. Most revenues after the current fiscal year are, therefore, expected to increase modestly each year as will be described in more detail later in this report. FY 2021-22 Actual FY 2022-23 Adopted FY 2022-23 Projection FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 REVENUE & OTHER SOURCES Taxes Property Tax 7,957$ 8,013$ 8,066$ 8,329$ 8,618$ 8,917$ 9,227$ 9,547$ Sales Tax 5,389 4,730 5,377 5,318 5,469 5,633 5,802 5,976 Transient Occupancy Tax 1,477 1,300 1,500 1,545 1,591 1,639 1,688 1,739 Franchise Fees 782 704 780 796 812 828 844 861 Licenses & Permits 531 529 529 540 551 562 573 584 Charges for Services Community Development 411 354 354 361 368 375 383 391 Other Charges for Services 1,202 1,378 1,388 990 1,010 1,030 1,051 1,072 Other Revenue Fines & Forfeitures 61 47 47 48 49 50 51 52 Use of Money 402 537 537 548 558 570 581 593 Intergovernmental 193 296 513 120 120 120 120 120 Transfers 2,993 3,013 3,013 3,137 3,213 3,291 3,370 3,452 Total Revenues 21,398$ 20,901$ 22,104$ 21,731$ 22,358$ 23,014$ 23,689$ 24,386$ 5.8%-1.7%2.9%2.9%2.9%2.9% EXPENDITURES & OTHER USES Salary & Benefits Salary & Taxes 6,783$ 7,679$ 7,736$ 8,006$ 8,286$ 8,576$ 8,876$ 9,187$ Flexible benefits 1,157 1,430 1,430 1,496 1,564 1,636 1,711 1,789 Workers' Compensation 558 626 626 676 731 789 852 920 Employee retention - 1,030 1,030 - - - - - Pension Normal Cost 690 899 899 1,000 1,003 1,020 1,025 1,034 CalPERS Unfunded Liab 1,520 1,905 2,302 1,272 1,421 1,546 1,677 1,581 OPEB 143 235 235 235 235 235 235 235 Total Salary & Benefits 10,851 13,804 14,258 12,685 13,239 13,802 14,375 14,746 Services & Supplies Contractual Services 1,776 2,465 2,490 2,275 2,320 2,366 2,414 2,462 Five Cities Fire Services 2,052 2,052 2,052 3,114 3,012 3,328 3,323 3,536 Liability Insurance 653 622 622 684 752 827 910 1,001 Utility Charges 445 526 526 536 547 558 569 581 Other Operating Expense 1,529 1,534 1,662 1,567 1,598 1,630 1,663 1,696 Total Service & Supplies 6,455 7,199 7,351 8,175 8,229 8,710 8,879 9,276 Debt Service 128 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 Transfers 1399 1,536 1,591 641 654 667 680 694 Capital Purchases 13 454 454 100 100 100 100 100 Total Expenditures 18,846$ 23,279$ 23,941$ 21,887$ 22,508$ 23,565$ 24,321$ 25,102$ General Fund (Shortfall)/Surplus 2,552$ (2,378)$ (1,838)$ (157)$ (150)$ (552)$ (631)$ (716)$ Table 2 (In thousands) Fiscal Year 2024-2028 Financial Forecast Page 103 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 4 Table 2 above also shows that e xpenditures are expected to decline from the current fiscal year to the next, mostly due to the one-time nature of the employee retention incentive program and larger than normal expenditures related to streets, sidewalks, and capital equipment budgeted in FY 2022-23. Offsetting these expenditure decreases somewhat is an expected increase in the cost to provide fire services to our residents through the Five Cities Fire Authority. Unless otherwise noted, most expenditures are projected to increase modestly over time. More details on these projections are included later in this report. General Fund Revenues Property Tax Property tax is the City’s largest revenue source, representing 36% of all General Fund revenues based on the FY 2022-23 Projected Budget. The primary component of property tax is derived from levying an ad valorem tax imposed on real property (land and permanently attached improvements) and tangible personal property (movable property). Proposition 13 (1978) limits the real property tax rate to one dollar ($1) per hundred dollars ($100) of taxable value of all real property within the city limits. The amount of this tax is based on an annually determined assessed valuation calculated by the County Assessor’s Office. Also included in property tax revenue is Property Tax in Lieu of Vehicle License Fees, which is the result of the state reducing Vehicle License Fees for cities from 2.0 % to 0.65% and offsetting this loss with property tax. A third type of revenue also included in the property tax projection is the property transfer tax that is levied on the sale of real property. Property tax assessments on all properties are limited to an increase of no more than 2.0% per year unless there is new construction or a property has a change in ownership. When ownership changes or new construction is completed, the property is reassessed at market value and is added to the existing assessment. The City has generally, over time, experienced growth in home prices. However, due in part to rising mortgage rates, this growth has moderated recently to a median sale price of about $750,000 according to Realtor.com and Redfin.com. Given continued demand for homes and the relatively restricted supply in Arroyo Grande and surrounding communities, home prices are expected to continue to show growth. Forecast The following Table 2.1 shows FY 2021-22 actual revenues, the FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget and revised property tax revenue projection and a five-year Forecast for FY 2023- 24 through FY 2027-28. The FY 2022-23 and 2023-24 projections are based on recent estimates provided by the County Auditor-Controller’s Office. In the outyears of the Forecast, property tax revenue are projected to increase 3.5% annually, reflecting the combination of the 2% inflator added each year to assessed values along with increases Page 104 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 5 resulting from the sale of existing properties at higher values than their current assessed valuations. Chart 2.1 shows the projected growth in property tax over the next five years using the 3.5% inflator noted above. It is advantageous to the City to have property tax as its largest General Fund revenue source given its relative stability over time. While property taxes can decrease during certain periods, as occurred during the 2008-09 recession, in general, property taxes weather economic changes better than the more volatile revenues such as sales tax and TOT. Chart 2.1 Property Tax Revenue Projection Sales Tax The City’s second largest revenue source is sales tax which represents 24% of General Fund revenues based on the FY 2022 -23 Projected Budget. Sales tax revenue includes both taxes collected at the point of sale as well as taxes collected from online sales. The City receives the basic local Bradley-Burns rate of 1.0% of the total City’s sales tax rate of 7.75% based on point-of-sale transactions within the City. Additionally, a half percent (0.50%) of the total sales tax is also paid to the City and is attributed to the Local Sales Tax measure approved in 2006. The majority of the Local Sales Tax is utilized for Capital Improvement Projects. However, a portion of the Local Sales Tax collected is used to support public safety programs, including payments to the Five Cities Fire Authority and the costs of a Senior Police Officer. Page 105 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 6 Forecast Economic drivers of the City’s sales tax revenue are unemployment rates, consumer confidence, consumer spending, and business retention and development. The unemployment rate in the region including and surrounding Arroyo Grande was 2.4% in December 2022, as published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. This is a positive sign as it is less than half the unemployment rate of 5.5% two years earlier in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic and lower than the national unemployment rate of 3.5%. Countering this good news, however, is a decline in the national index of consumer confidence, which measures consumers’ willingness to spend . This important measure declined for a second month in a row to 69.7% in February, which is more than 10 points below the confidence level that often signals a pending recession. Changes in consumer confidence, in part, account for the small decrease in sales tax revenues projected in FY 2023-24. Table 2.2 shows HdL’s projected reduction in sales tax revenues of 0.2% in the current fiscal year and another 1.1% in FY 2023-24 due to the anticipated minor slowdown noted earlier. These projections reflect expected declines in categories like automobiles and transportation, fuel and service stations, and general consumer goods. The lower projections in these categories are the result of lower expected consumer demand in the short-term and, in the case of fuel, lower prices at the pump. In addition, the state and county pools sales tax category, which captures online sales, is projected to grow 14% this year, or $92,000, over the original Adopted Budget. Categories that are expected to increase modestly over the next year include building and construction, restaurants and hotels, and receipts from the county sales tax pool. This pool is made up primarily of transactions that occur online rather than point of sale in Arroyo Grande and used automobile sales purchased outside the City. The economic Forecast for sales tax revenue in the outyears assumes a 3% growth rate, which is in line with recommendations of the City’s sales tax consultant. Chart 2.2 below shows this trend in graphical form. Page 106 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 7 Chart 2.2 Sales Tax Revenue Projection Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) TOT represents 7.0% of the General Fund revenues based on the FY 2022 -23 Projected Budget. All lodging businesses (including vacation rentals, hotels, motels, bed and breakfasts, inns, etc.) must register for a City Business License and collect Transient Occupancy Tax (also called "bed tax" or "hotel tax") from their guests . A TOT tax is levied at 10 cents per dollar of taxable rent. Forecast The primary economic drivers of TOT revenues are lodging capacity, room rates, and occupancy. The following Table 2.3 shows that the original TOT projection of $1.3 million for FY 2022-23 underestimated the rebound from previous pandemic related lows. Based on final numbers from FY 2021-22 of $1.48 million, and after reviewing TOT receipts so far in FY 2022-23, this estimate has been revised to $1.5 million, or a modest 1.6% increase over the previous fiscal year. The 5-year Forecast projects a modest but healthy increase of 3.0% year-over-year. The Forecast does not factor in any increase in the City’s current room capacity or the addition of new hotels within the City limits over the next five years. Nor does it factor in any efforts the City is making to increase TOT compliance with short-term rentals. Chart 2.3 provides a graphical representation of expected growth in TOT. Page 107 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 8 Chart 2.3 Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue Projection License and Permit The License and permit category includes revenue associated with regulating certain activities within the City, such as permits for building, encroachment, electrical, police, and fire. License and permit revenue represents 2.4% of General Fund revenues based on the FY 2022-23 Projected Budget. The following Table 2.4 reflects license and permit revenue as flat for FY 2022 -23 Adopted Budget with an expected 2.0% increase each year in the Forecast thereafter. Charges for Services The City provides a variety of fee-based services that provide a benefit to an individual or group such as recreation programs, plan checking, and engineering inspections. Together, these charges for services represent 8% of General Fund revenues , so are an important part of the budget. Forecast As shown in Table 2.5 below, revenue from charges for services are on track for FY 2022 - 23 and did not change significantly from the original estimate. The 22.5% decrease in revenues projected for FY 2023-24 is due to the discontinuation of the before and after school childcare program in the Recreation Services Department, which is anticipated to be phased out by the City and provided, instead, by the YMCA in coordination with the Lucia Mar Unified School District. The corresponding Recreation Services Department Page 108 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 9 expenditures will be reduced as well. The Forecast includes a 2.0% increase per year in the outyears compared to FY 2023-24. General Fund Expenditures Salaries and Taxes Because municipalities are service entities, personnel costs are the largest category of expenditure, accounting for almost 60% of General Fund expenditures. The salaries and payroll taxes shown in Table 2.6 below represent all employee salaries (e.g. full-time, part-time, overtime, holiday, sick leave, etc.) and their associated payroll taxes. In addition to this, total personnel costs include employee benefits, workers’ compensation, and pension related expenses. These costs will be described later in this report. The following Table 2.6 shows that Forecast includes a 3.5% inflator for the next five fiscal years based on current employee contracts and anticipated cost increases over the next few years. Employee Benefits The City offers benefits to all eligible employees under a qualified benefits program that includes medical, dental, vision and basic life insurance plans. These benefits vary by recognized employee organization, working hours, years of service, and other factors. As shown in Table 2.7 below, the FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget included $1.4 million in flexible benefits, 85% of which is health insurance costs. The FY 2022 -23 Projection for flexible benefits does not change from the Adopted Budget. The 23.6% jump from 2021 - 22 to the current fiscal year is due to a 10% increase in the cost of health insurance in FY 2022-23 and the addition of three new positions. The Forecast projects an approximate 4.6% increase year-over-year based on an average increase of actual health insurance over the previous five years. FY 2021-22 Actual FY 2022-23 Adopted FY 2022-23 Projection FY 2023-24 FY 2024-25 FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 FY 2027-28 Growth Rate 7.4%8.0%(22.5%)2.0%2.0%2.0%2.0% Projection 1,612,715$ 1,732,110$ 1,742,110$ 1,350,800$ 1,377,800$ 1,405,400$ 1,433,500$ 1,462,200$ Community Development 410,821$ 353,700$ 353,700$ 360,800$ 368,000$ 375,400$ 382,900$ 390,600$ Recreation 827,286 822,610 822,610 412,900 421,200 429,600 438,200 447,000 Public Works/Other 374,608 555,800 565,800 577,100 588,600 600,400 612,400 624,600 Table 2.5 Other Charges for Services Five-Year Forecast Page 109 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 10 Workers’ Compensation The City is a member of the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) which manages the City’s workers’ compensation program. The CJPIA is composed of more than 100 California public entities and is organized under a Joint Powers Agreement. As is reflected in Table 2.8, the FY 2022-23 Projected Budget includes workers’ compensation costs of $626,300, which is 12.2% above the previous fiscal year. For FY 2022-23 and beyond the Forecast includes projected increases of 8.0% in workers’ compensation costs year-over-year based on the average actual increase of workers’ compensation costs over the previous five years moderated by the fact that the growth rate has slowed somewhat in the last two years. CalPERS Unfunded Liability All qualified employees are eligible to participate in the City’s Safety (Police) or Miscellaneous Employee Pension Plans. These two defined benefit plans are administered by the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). The unfunded portion of the pension liability is the gap between the amount of future benefits a pension fund is expected to pay out and the assets presently in the pension fund. The City is required by CalPERS to make annual payments towards the unfunded liability portion of the City’s various retirement plans. The minimum amount the City is required to pay is calculated annually by CalPERS actuarial staff and invoiced to the City. The amount of the City’s unfunded liability is based on a numb er of factors including investment returns, payroll growth, benefit eligibility, and the longevity of retirees. In 2021 CalPERS lowered their investment earnings assumption from 7.0% to 6.8% to better reflect expected long-term earnings. This change has resulted in increases to the City’s unfunded liabilities in recent years. The following Table 2.9 reflects a projection of the CalPERS unfunded liability payment the City will be required to pay through the period of this Forecast. The table reflects a significant decrease (44.7%) in the FY 2023-24 due to the fact that the current FY 2022- Page 110 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 11 23 budget includes $982,000 as an estimated catch -up amount for unfunded liabilities of the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) owed by the City. The FY 2022-23 Mid-Cycle Update included funding for a true-up payment to the FCFA totaling an estimated $550,000 ($50,000 per year for 10 years + $50,000 for FY 2022-23) for the City’s share of accrued actuarial liability for employees who worked for the City before the FCFA was formed. No new CalPERS plan was created for the FCFA and instead all FCFA employees have been covered under the City of Arroyo Grande’s CalPERS pension plans. As a result, the City’s CalPERS plans include liabilities for employees and retirees of the City an d of FCFA. Since the JPA was formed, FCFA has paid the full costs of the City’s Fire Safety CalPERS plans. The City will be required to pay back these amounts as part of the unwinding process contemplated in the Third Amendment to the JPA following the outcome of the OCSD’s 2022 ballot measure. The FCFA retained the actuarial firm Foster & Foster (formally Bartel & Associates) to calculate the actuarial accrued liability (AAL) for each person in the Fire Safety Classic tier, mirroring CalPERS actuarial valuation methods and assumptions. Foster & Foster has completed a detailed review of the past ten years to tally the City’s total amount owed, which is approximately $982,000. A budget adjustment for this increased amount will be included in the FY 2022-23 Third Quarter Financial Status Report in May 2023. It is anticipated that funding for this adjustment will come from fund balance. An additional estimate of $100,000 is included in each year of the Forecast thereafter to fund the FCFA unfunded liability through the next five years. The estimates in this Forecast are provided by CalPERS and take into account the -6.1% investment return CaPERS experienced in FY 2021-22. Services and Supplies Non-personnel expenditures include contractual and professional services, insurance, utilities, and other operating expenditures. These non-personnel related costs make up 38% of all General Fund expenditures. In addition, the portion of fire services contracted through the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) and paid for with General Funds currently represents another 9% of total expenditures. The remaining portion of the City’s FCFA costs are paid from Fund 218, the City’s Local Sales Tax, Measure O-06 fund. Fire Services - Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) The City’s fire service and emergency response is provided through a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JPA) combining fire department resources with the City of Grover Beach and Oceano Community Services District. Under current contract with FCFA, the current budget includes just over $2 million for FCFA services as shown in Table 2.10. Page 111 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 12 Local sales tax dollars in the amount of $645,000 in FY 2022-23 also contribute to pay for fire services but are not included as part of this Genera l Fund analysis. An analysis funded by Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach is currently being completed to support the two cities’ future decisions regarding staffing levels and costs to each of the member agencies. Based on the preliminary report provided by the consultant to the City Council on February 28, 2023, indications are that the cost to Arroyo Grande to maintain fire services will increase substantially as shown in Table 2.10 below. It should be noted that the $3.1 million included in the Forecast for FY 2023-24 was based on the Baker Tilly Alternative Staffing plans Option A-4 from the PowerPoint presented at the February 28, 2023 City Council meeting (Attachment 1) and the amounts projected into the following years is a rough estimate at this point. Contractual Services The City budgeted $2.5 million for contractual and professional services in FY 2022 -23. This category includes services provided by independent contractors for services such as legal, auditing, labor negotiations, police dispatch, landscaping, and professional and technical consulting and studies. Forecast Table 2.11 above reflects a large 40% increase from FY 2021-22 actual expenditures to the budgeted amount in FY 2022-23. The increase in the FY 2022-23 budget over the $2.1 million in the FY 2021-22 budget was closer to 17% but some services expected to be encumbered that year were delayed and added to the FY 2022-23 budget. The increase in FY 2022-23, therefore, is largely due to several one-time contracts, such as services for a salary survey, a cost allocation, user fee, and development impact fee study, funding for the general plan update, consultant services in IT, and services related to new software products. Some of these projects were put on hold during the pandemic and are being completed now, which has temporarily inflated the budget for contractual services. These one-time items have been backed out of the forecast starting in FY 2023- 24. Expenditures for contractual services are expected to increase by 2% thereafter. Page 112 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 13 Next Steps The Five-Year Financial Forecast is part of a five step Budget Process as depicted in the timeline of the budget cycle below: Steps 1 and 2: Step 1 was completed through the Arroyo Grande Community Priorities Survey, which was published January 3rd and closed on February 20th. Results of the survey were presented to Council on March 2, 2023. Step 2 was completed on March 2, 2023, during the FY 2023-25 Goal Setting Study Session. The set of priorities developed during the study session will be used by staff to create work plans and a proposed biennial budget. Step 3 includes:  March 2023 – Financial Forecast o This report is the presentation to Council of the 5-year financial forecast with budget assumptions, challenges, goals, and strategies. Page 113 of 354 Item 12.a. City Council Consideration of General Fund Five-Year Financial Forecast March 14, 2023 Page 14  Spring 2023 – Staff Develop Work Plans o Staff will finalize operating and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) preliminary budgets that reflect the established major City goals and the financial forecast.  May 2023 – Review of CIP o Staff will present a proposed 5-year CIP for review and input from the City Council, and by the Planning Commission for determination of consistency with the General Plan. Step 4 includes: The proposed operating budgets, work plans, and CIP will be incorporated into a proposed FY 2023-25 Biennial Budget for discussion and consideration by Council in June 2023. Step 5: Adoption of the FY 2023-25 Biennial Budget will occur by the end of June 2023. Once Council approves the FY 2023-25 Biennial budget, FY 2023-24 funds will be appropriated on July 1, 2023. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Consider and receive the General Fund Five-Year Fiscal Forecast; or 2. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: Receiving the Five-Year Financial Forecast Report will assist in informed discussions between the community, City Council, and staff about budgetary priorities as the City develops the upcoming FY 2023-25 Biennial Budget. In future budget cycles, this Report will be provided prior to the City Council’s goal setting process. DISADVANTAGES: There are no disadvantages in relation to the recommended action. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this item. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. February 28, 2023 Staff Report and Final Presentation Page 114 of 354 ATTACHMENT 1 Attachment 1 is available as a link: February 28, 2023 Staff Report and Final Presentation Page 115 of 354 Item 12.b. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director BY: Andrew Perez, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: The purpose of this study session is to provide the City Council an opportunity to review and provide further direction regarding a potential ordinance that would allow Safe Parking sites for the unhoused under certain circumstances on Public Facility zoned property, and any paved lot within the Industrial Mixed Use zone. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: Development of the ordinance requires staff time to review the ordinance internally and with stakeholders, prepare staff reports, and present the ordinance to Council. The ordinance does not commit any City funding to support safe parking sites. RECOMMENDATION: Review staff’s proposed ordinance, receive public comment, and provide direction t o staff. BACKGROUND: Rising costs of living and lack of affordable housing units have contributed to housing instability throughout the State. In response, cities, counties, non-profit organizations, and faith-based organizations have sought to establish safe parking sites to provide a level of security and stability for those living in their vehicles. The needs of individuals living in their vehicles are different from the chronically unhoused in that they face unique legal, social, and economic challenges. Safe parking programs aim to meet the basic needs of security and hygiene for those living in their vehicles while also mitigating potential impacts to surrounding neighborhoods. On two occasions, City staff met with a group of faith leaders from the community and homeless advocates that had expressed interest in hosting safe parking sites. The safe parking model described by the participating members of the faith community consisted of providing a limited number of spaces in parking lots at existing church properties for Page 116 of 354 Item 12.b. City Council Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance March 14, 2023 Page 2 use by individuals living out of their vehicles to park overnight. Those lots would be monitored by volunteers and church resources would be used to cover expenses and provide essentials for those staying at the site. Safe parking sites are not well defined as a land use by the Municipal Code, so initially staff considered a safe parking program to be an expansion of the existing church use, and therefore, warranted an amendment of the church’s conditional use permit to establish a permanent safe parking site. The faith leaders expressed that an amendment to the CUP was too onerous for the churches and would deter organizations from establishing these programs. At the same time, there are health and safety standards that need to be regulated for the well-being of safe parking operators, guests, and neighbors that apply uniformly to qualifying properties, however the City Council sets that eligibility. As a result of those discussions with community stakeholders, staff developed the attached draft ordinance for Council consideration and comment. It provides for a safe parking permit approval process, that addresses City’s health and safety concerns while ensuring those standards do not make these kinds of programs too difficult to operate. It is meant to provide a starting point in advance of staff initiating the formal ordinance approval process. On September 18, 2020, Temporary Use Permit 20-024 was approved for the establishment of a temporary safe parking program at St. John’s Lu theran Church located at 959 Valley Road. The permit authorized four (4) parking spaces in the church’s parking lot for this program. St. John’s provided portable restrooms, a handwashing station, trash receptacles, and fire extinguisher for use of its gue sts. Involvement in active case management with the 5Cities Homeless Coalition was a condition of entry into the site. In its application, St. John’s committed to monitor the site for at least the first 30 days to verify the program was operating as intended. The initial approval authorized the program to operate for six (6) months. At the end of that time period , staff had not received any complaints about the use, therefore, staff approved a six (6) month extension to the program. Again, no complaints were received during the final six (6) months. Various local cities and the County of San Luis Obispo (County) have identified areas for safe parking with mixed success. The City of San Luis Obispo operates a 20 -space safe parking site in the Railroad District that provides toilets and handwashing stations. On February 27, 2023, the County announced the intended phasing out of a large safe parking site on Kansas/Oklahoma Avenue that had opened in August 2021 with approximately 70-80 users, acknowledging the program failed to meet its objective of serving as a temporary solution where participants could transition into other temporary or permanent housing. On February 28, 2023, staff agendized a study session for discussion of the safe parking ordinance at the City Council meeting. Due to timing constraints from other items on the same agenda, the City Council continued the item to a date uncertain. Page 117 of 354 Item 12.b. City Council Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance March 14, 2023 Page 3 ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: While Section 16.16.090 of the Municipal Code authorizes the Community Development Director to approve minor use permits for temporary uses, including temporary safe parking, the intent in drafting this ordinance was to craft a permanent, codified entitlement authority for a safe parking use. The draft ordinance presented for discussion defines the use, identifies eligible locations, outlines permit requirements, establishes performance standards for the operation of a site, and provide allowances for the City to inspect the site for compliance with those performance standards. The attached draft ordinance is presented to the City Council as one potential option. If the City Council is not in favor of the way this draft ordinance is structured, City staff could consider a different framework for the safe parking permit, or choose not to move forward at this time. For instance, City staff could instead prepare an ordinance with a ministerially-approved safe parking permit, based on objective, defined criteria specified in the ordinance. Such an alternative would allow the permit to be approved without a subjective determination by the City, provided it had sufficient procedural safeguards in place. Under that alternate, the City could mimic some of the existing standards applicable to a Public Safety Welfare Permit. Definition The draft ordinance defines a Safe Parking Site as: “A paved parking lot outside of the public right-of-way that provides unhoused individuals and/or families who are living in a vehicle a dedicated, safe place to park overnight. No rent shall be exchanged be tween a host and occupants. The occupancy of a vehicle at a safe parking site operated in compliance with this Section shall not constitute a violation of AGMC 9.22.” Properties will be eligible to host a Safe Parking Site on a paved lot in the Public Fac ility zone or a paved lot on properties within the Industrial Mixed Use Zone. The zoning eligibility ensures a number of established religious facilities located in the City, the most interested City stakeholders for this potential program, would be able to apply to establish a safe parking site. Permit Requirements Staff is presenting an ordinance to the City Council for its consideration that requires an applicant to obtain a Safe Parking Permit (SPP), a new permit type that would be processed similar to a Minor Use Permit – Plot Plan Review (PPR). The processing fee for the PPR is $756 which reflects the City’s projected, actual costs of issuance of such a permit. The Community Development Director would be authorized to approve SPPs through a discretionary approval process. Approved SPPs would be reported to the Planning Commission on its agenda, which is posted at City Hall and on the City’s website for public viewing. Due to the sensitivity surrounding this land use, the attached ordinance for discussion purposes establishes unique findings for approval, provisions for appeal Page 118 of 354 Item 12.b. City Council Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance March 14, 2023 Page 4 and permit revocation, and limits the duration of the entitlement. Existing procedures for appeals and revocation may be sufficient for other Minor Use Permits, but SPPs involve unhoused individuals who will rely on these programs in determining where to sleep at night. Thus, the draft ordinance includes a more rigorous procedure before such a permit is revoked. This draft version of the ordinance limits the duration of the entitlement to 18 months. The approval would automatically extend for another 18 -month period if the Director finds no violations of any of the permit conditions occurred during the previous 18-month operating period. AGMC Section 16.12.130 specifies that all permits and licenses, with the exception of Home Occupation Permits and Business Licenses, run with the land even in the event of change of ownership on the site or structure. Although it is uncommon for a religious facility to sell its property for a non-religious use, the provision within the draft ordinance that limits the length of the entitlement would prevent the SPP permit from transferring to the new property owner that may want to continue the safe parking use, but lacks the resources to successfully operate the site. If the City Council would like to see a different approach for its Safe Parking ordinance, an alternative option would involve a ministerial approval process, meaning the application would be approved if it meets certain defined, objective standards. If Council provides direction that this alternative is desired, then staff will draft an ordinance with objective criteria for administrative approval with procedural safeguards for revocation or modification of the permit. Performance Standards An application to establish a Safe Parking Site, regardless of the permit requirement, must include a site plan showing locations and number of parking spaces allocated to the use, restrooms, trash and recycling facilities, and exterior lighting. It is through the application that an applicant demonstrates compliance with certain performance standards required by the ordinance. In addition to the site plan, an application must include an operations and management plan that communicates the operational details about the site to give the City a high level of certainty that the site will be operated in a safe manner that is harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood. The operations plan will need to identify the number of spaces allocated to the program and the days and hours of operation. It will also need to identify the operators of the site, their qualifications for managing the site, and any training or experience in providing social services. Perhaps the most important aspect of the management plan is the details of the security plan. For a safe parking site to serve its purpose for those living in their vehicles, the site must operate in a safe and orderly manner. An applicant must commit to monitoring the site during the hours of operation, identify the manner in which it will do the monitoring, and include procedures for addressing issues at the site as well as any complaints. Additionally, the applicant must furnish evidence of liability insurance for the overnight parking use. These standards will assure those that reside in the areas near a safe Page 119 of 354 Item 12.b. City Council Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance March 14, 2023 Page 5 parking site that it will operate safely and without adversely impacting the adjacent neighborhood. Many of the performance standards are addressed in the initial application. One o f those standards requires that the applicant coordinate with a social services provider that will offer support services and case management for those occupying the site. Due to liability issues, a social service provider will need assurance that the safe parking site will have the necessary level of security before referring people to the site. Th e applicant must therefore develop and implement a security plan that provides protection for the occupants as an initial step to operation of a program onsite Additional performance standards are included in the draft ordinance for the purposes of maintaining a safe environment for guests to the site and to mitigate potential impacts on surrounding neighborhoods. For example, a safe parking site may only opera te between the hours of 6:00pm and 7:00am, and may not conflict with the hours of operation of the site’s primary use. Additionally, a site may not host more than six (6) vehicles at any time to minimize potential impacts. The draft ordinance also establishes definite standards for noise, a prohibition of campfires, adequate lighting, and maintenance of emergency access to ensure guests are provided with a safe environment. Next Steps Feedback obtained from the City Council at the study session will dictate whether an ordinance will proceed through the regular consideration and adoption process . In the event that Council is supportive of the presented ordinance, staff will refine and present the draft ordinance to Planning Commission at a future meeting for a recommendation to Council for adoption. If Council instead prefers an ordinance based on an administrative, non-discretionary approval, staff will prepare a new safe parking ordinance based on that direction. Alternatively, City Council may seek to not move forward with a safe parking ordinance at this time. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Identify a preferred version of the draft ordinance and direct staff to proceed in refining and presenting to the Planning Commission for a recommendation hearing; or 2. Request that staff revise the draft ordinance as directed or draft an ordinance which uses a ministerial approval process, then proceed to Planning Commission for a recommendation hearing; or 3. Do not direct staff to proceed with a Safe Parking ordinance at this time; or 4. Provide other direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The ordinance will establish a process for permitting safe parking sites, which provide basic hygienic needs and safety for those living out of their vehicles. The ordinance Page 120 of 354 Item 12.b. City Council Discussion of a Draft Safe Parking Ordinance March 14, 2023 Page 6 includes performance standards that are anticipated to prevent the safe parking use from having adverse impacts on surrounding properties. DISADVANTAGES: The safe parking site ordinance requires participation from a social services provider that may face challenges in serving multiple sites in the City. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for the study session discussion. Adoption of a safe parking ordinance will require environmental review at the time it is considered formally, and will be noticed accordingly. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: Leaders of local faith-based organizations, the 5 Cities Homeless Coalition, and San Luis Obispo County Homeless Services staff were notified of this agenda item via e-mail on March 3, 2023 due to expressed stakeholder interest. The notification included a link to the February 28th City Council staff report and the draft ordinance. The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. Draft Ordinance Page 121 of 354 65501.00001\41035851.1 ATTACHMENT 1 16.52.270 Safe Parking (draft) A. Purpose. This Section establishes criteria and procedures for the consideration and review of Safe Parking Site applications, and standards for the operation of Safe Parking Sites. Vehicles parked overnight have been a source of potential environmental hazards when waste is discharged. Such waste may include gas, oil, or human waste. These discharges create unsanitary conditions, public health risks, and potential environmental impacts. Additionally, vehicles parked overnight can accumulate and discharge trash and debris in and around areas where vehicles are parked. The city wishes to provide for designated areas for unhoused individuals to park their vehicles overnight and ensure that unhoused individuals receive social services as part of these programs. The programs will help provide assistance to households using vehicles as their residence by providing a safe place to park, restroom facilities, access to social services programs, and other support needed to help transition households toward permanent, stable housing. B. Definitions. 1. “Safe Parking Site” means a paved parking lot outside of the public right-of-way that provides unhoused individuals and/or families who are living in a vehicle a dedicated, safe place to park overnight. No rent shall be exchanged between host and occupants. The occupancy of a vehicle at a safe parking site operated in compliance with Section shall not constitute a violation of AGMC 9.22.020. 2. “Safe Parking Operator” means an agency or organization that facilitates, administers, oversees, and provides staffing for safe parking uses in the permitted area of the Safe Parking Site. 3. “Guest” means a person who stays overnight in the permitted area of the Safe Parking Site. 4. “Director” means the Community Development Director. C. Locations. The following locations are eligible to host a Safe Parking Site: 1. Paved parking lots on properties located in the Public Facility zone; 2. Paved parking lots on properties within the Industrial Mixed Use zone. D. Permit Requirements. 1. No person shall operate, allow, permit a Safe Parking Site without approval of a Safe Parking Permit through the authority granted in the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code (AGMC). 2. All applications shall be filed with the director in the form prescribed by the director. The application form shall contain a list of information that must be submitted in order for the application to be deemed complete. 3. Establishment of a Safe Parking Site at an eligible location shall obtain a Safe Parking Permit. The site shall comply with all existing conditions of approval for the entitled use, the Performance Standards of this Section, and any conditions of approval for the Safe Parking Permit. E. Application Requirements. An application to establish a Safe Parking Site shall include: 1. Completed application form and payment of the required fee. Page 122 of 354 65501.00001\41035851.1 2. A site plan indicating the location of the designated overnight parking spaces trash and recycling facilities, water, restroom facilities, exterior lighting fixtures, location of and distances to surrounding residential properties. 3. A written statement from a social service provider assuring its participation in the operation of the Safe Parking Site. 4. Management Plan. A management plan shall be submitted with the application to establish a Safe Parking Site. The plan shall address the following items, at a minimum: i. Number of spaces allocated ii. Proposed days and hours of operation iii. Staff qualifications and training iv. Security, including the number of people per shift, length of shifts, and description how the site is monitored and how the performance standards will be enforced v. Pet policy, including provisions for cleanliness, noise, and use of leashes vi. Facility and parking lot maintenance vii. Prohibition of campfires viii. Procedures for addressing complaints in a timely manner ix. An anti-discrimination policy x. Copy of liability insurance for the use of the property as a safe parking site. 5. Any other information the Director may determine is necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Section. F. Decision and Appeal. Notwithstanding Section 16.16.080, safe parking permits shall be subject to the decision and review process provided herein. 1. Authority and findings. The director may approve a safe parking permit only after finding that: i. The Safe Parking Operator has met the application requirements in subsection E of this section. ii. The proposed location is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed Safe Parking Site. iii. The Safe Parking Site meets the standards in subsection G of this section. 2. Director Decision i. The director shall prepare a written decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. ii. Notice of the director’s decision approving or denying a Safe Parking Site permit shall be given by mail to owners and residents of property within 300’ of the proposed Safe Parking Site. The notice shall include the address of the property, a brief description of the proposed use, the director’s decision, and a description of the appeal process. iii. The director’s decision shall become final fourteen (14) days after the date the notice is mailed unless an appeal is filed. 3. Appeal i. The applicant or property owners within 300’ of the proposed Safe Parking Site may file an appeal of the director’s decision by making a written request of appeal to the city clerk before the date the director’s decision becomes final. Page 123 of 354 65501.00001\41035851.1 ii. At any time prior to the hearing, the person requesting the hearing may withdraw the appeal request. If the hearing request is withdrawn and 14 days have lapsed from the mailing date of the notice under (F)(2) above, the decision of the director shall become final. 4. City Council Review on Appeal. i. If there is proper appeal of the director’s decision, the city council shall decide the appeal on consent within 60 days. The decision of the City Council shall be final. ii. The city council may: 1. Adopt the findings and recommendation of the director; or 2. Remove the recommendation from the consent calendar by three votes in favor. Such removal will result in the city council adopting its own findings and action on the application. G. Performance Standards 1. Hours of Operation. The Safe Parking Program’s hours of operations shall not conflict with the hours of operation of the primary use of the location, nor shall it operate outside of the hours of 6:00pm and 7:00am. 2. Facilities. The Safe Parking Operator shall ensure that occupants of vehicles parked overnight shall have access to restrooms, drinking water, and trash receptacles. The restrooms may by located in an existing building on-site, or in mobile bathrooms. 3. Social Services. The Safe Parking Operator of the site shall coordinate with a social service provider that will screen occupants as they enter the safe parking site, offer support services, and case management. Social service provider, for purposes of this Section is defined as an organization that provides assistance applying for benefits, mental health and substance use services, outpatient health services, information and referral services, child care, education, life skills training, employment assistance and job training, housing search and counseling services, legal services, outreach services, transportation, food assistance, risk assessment and safety planning (particularly for individuals and families experiencing domestic violence), and case management services such as counseling, finding and coordinating services, and monitoring and evaluating progress in a program 4. Lighting. All source of lighting shall be shielded and focused away from adjoining properties in accordance with AGMC Section 16.48.090. 5. Capacity. A maximum number of six (6) parking spaces may be allocated for overnight use in a Safe Parking Program. 6. Distance/Screening. The Safe Parking Operator shall provide screening from residential structures through the use of fencing or other physical barrier and locate the parking spaces no closer than 300’ from neighboring residential structures. The designated parking spaces shall be located as far as possible from neighboring residential structures. 7. Noise. No noise, music, or other audio may be played in the vehicle at a volume which exceeds 50 decibels, the standards established by AGMC 9.16.040. Any guest who creates noise exceeding the standards in AGMC 9.16.040 will first be warned, and if the noise does not cease, be asked to leave. In addition, the guest and/or the Safe Parking Operator may be penalized based on AGMC 9.16.080. Page 124 of 354 65501.00001\41035851.1 8. Recreational Vehicles. Recreational vehicles are prohibited from safe parking sites. 9. Emergency Access. All driveways must remain clear to provide access to the site by emergency vehicles. H. Guests. Guests of the safe parking site must provide proof of vehicle registration, insurance and the vehicle must be driven by someone with a valid driver’s license. I. Duration. The permit issued through this section shall be valid for 18 months, unless suspended or revoked as described in this section. At the end of the 18-month period, if the director finds that there have been no violations of any of the permit conditions, the permit shall be automatically extended for an additional 18-month period. J. Assignment. A Safe Parking Operator may only transfer or assign a permit issued through this section with the written permission of the director. Transfer of the permit granted in this section without such permission shall be grounds for the suspension or termination of the permit. K. City’s Right to Inspect. 1. The Safe Parking Operator shall allow City representatives to enter and inspect the program site during business hours to ensure compliance with this Section, all applicable County, State, and Federal regulations, and compliance with all applicable Building and Fire Codes. L. Penalty. Violation of any of the standards and regulations of this section shall result in revocation or suspension of the permit through procedures described below. 1. The director may suspend, revoke, or modify a permit if the director finds that: i. Operation of the Safe Parking Program violates any provision of this section, other applicable provision of this code, or state law; or ii. Operation of the Safe Parking Program is detrimental to public health, safety or the general welfare. 2. Procedure for suspension, revocation, or modification. i. Opportunity to Cure. Whenever the director believes that the permit holder is in violation of this section, conditions of approval, or other law, the director shall provide the Safe Parking Operator a written notice describing the violations and provide a reasonable opportunity for the Safe Parking Operator to cure the violations. ii. Failure to Cure. If the Safe Parking Operator fails to cure the violations specified by the director, the director shall set a date for hearing on whether the permit should be suspended revoked or modified. The director shall provide notice to the Safe Parking Operator 10 days in advance of the date set for hearing to the most recent home or business address on file with the city for the Safe Parking Operator. The notice shall state the reasons the director proposes to revoke, suspend, or modify the permit. iii. Public Notice. Notice of the hearing regarding the permit shall be given at least 10 days in advance of the hearing to all residents and owners of property within 300’ of the subject property. iv. Director Decision. Within 10 days of the hearing, the director shall prepare a written record of its decision, stating the grounds for such decision and the evidence supporting the decision. Page 125 of 354 65501.00001\41035851.1 v. Notice of Decision. Notice of the director’s decision shall be mailed to the permit holder at the most recent business or home address on file with the city. Additionally, the notice shall be posted to the city’s website and provided by email to any other person who requested notice of such decision with the city clerk. vi. The director’s decision shall become final 10 days after the notice is mailed to the permit holder unless a timely appeal is filed. Appeal of the director’s decision shall occur through the same process described in subsection (F), (3-4) of this section. The decision of the city council shall be mailed to the permit holder and shall become final and effective five days following the date postmarked on the mailing. Page 126 of 354 Item 12.c. MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update DATE: March 14, 2023 SUMMARY OF ACTION: The purpose of this update is to provide the City Council an opportunity to review and provide comments on the draft Halcyon Complete Streets Plan . IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: The Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan was originally funded with $150,000 of State Highway Account – Sustainable Communities Grant Funding, with a $19,434 local match funding. An additional $82,066 in funding was needed to complete updates to the plan due to changing traffic patterns associated with US 101 closures and evaluations of alternatives for the intersection of Fair Oaks and Halcyon Road, as well as environmental review. The total amount spent for this work is $229,597. Funding for the construction phase includes awards of $250,000 in Highway Safet y Improvement Program (HSIP) funds, $100,000 in Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) funds, $750,000 in Community Betterment grant funding through the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), and $8.1 million in Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding. RECOMMENDATION: Review the draft Halcyon Complete Streets Plan, receive public comment, and direct staff to solicit comment from stakeholders and community groups and schedule the item for Planning Commission and City Council hearings. BACKGROUND: Introduction The City of Arroyo Grande has initiated a project to produce a "Complete Streets Plan" for Halcyon Road, a major urban arterial that provides access within the City connecting US 101 and State Route 1. The purpose of the Plan is to develop an improved transportation corridor that provides for safe mobility and accessibility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists. Presently, the Halcyon Road corridor does not provide necessary bicycle acc ommodations and lacks Page 127 of 354 Item 12.c. City Council Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update March 14, 2023 Page 2 adequate pedestrian accommodations. Unsignalized crossings and intersections with poor visibility, lack of sidewalk connectivity, the absence of bike lanes, unclear or poorly marked lane markings, and high vehicle speeds present challenges to overall corridor safety. The Plan proposes multimodal transportation enhancements so that all travel modes are accommodated to promote safe and convenient walking and bicycling for residents and visitors alike. This Complete Streets Plan provides a framework within which to further develop specific designs. This document is intended to guide future improvements along the corridor as funds become available. History of the Plan The plan for a complete street for the Halcyon corridor started in 2013 when the City identified improvements that were needed and hired Omni-Means to prepare a technical memorandum for a Halcyon Road Corridor Study. This was followed in 2015 with the South Halcyon Corridor Study that identified needed improvements, including sidewalks and landscaping. In 2016, the City received a Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant Program that led to the creation of an initial draft Plan. The need for these improvements was reaffirmed in subsequent studies, such a s the Circulation Element Update, the Local Road Safety Plan, and the Systemic Safety Analysis Report. ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The Halcyon Road corridor is a direct regional connector with a both local and through traffic. The Halcyon Road corridor provides a ccess to some very significant resources within the City of Arroyo Grande and the adjacent unincorporated areas , including the South County's only hospital, the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, Harloe Elementary School, and by extension, Arroyo Grande High School located on Fair Oaks Avenue near US 101. In addition, there are numerous commercial, industrial, and residential uses along the corridor. Halcyon Road is also a key facility for transporting agricultural products and farm workers between US 101 and SR 1, serving regional traffic between the Nipomo Mesa and destinations north. Since the closure of the median crossings such as El Campo Road on US 101 south of the City in 2019, Halcyon Road has experienced a significant uptick in traffic from rural Arroyo Grande and Nipomo residents heading north to connect with US 101. Within the boundaries of the City, the Halcyon Road corridor runs generally north and south between El Camino Real and The Pike and is approximately 1.7 miles long. The character of Halcyon Road changes as it passes through three (3) distinct sections described in more detail below, from a primarily urban area at the north end, past a hospital and an elementary school, and finally through a residential neighborhood area, to the City limits. Page 128 of 354 Item 12.c. City Council Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update March 14, 2023 Page 3 Project Goals Recognizing the unique and diverse character and needs of the Halcyon Road corridor, the draft Plan includes the following specific project goals:  Enhance Safety for All Modes of Travel - Identify circulation improvements that enhance safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motor vehicles to travel along and across Halcyon Road.  Improve Multimodal Connectivity - For all age groups, improve multimodal connectivity by closing gaps to complete continuous walkways and bicycle facilities between residences, Harloe Elementary School, Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, parks, and retail destinations.  Provide Adequate Roadway Capacity for Diverse Travel Needs - Adequate capacity on Halcyon Road needs to be provided for both local and inter-regional travel with intersection controls that promote both safe and efficient travel.  Promote Economic Vitality and Visual Character - Plan Halcyon Road in a way that promotes multimodal travel options, local visual character, vibrant civic space, social interaction, and public health that fosters the local economy and creates a place one wants to be.  Recognize and Address the Urban and Rural Interface - Embrace the diverse urban and rural communities Halcyon Road serves by recognizing the interface with a notable gateway between the two areas this road serves.  Recognize Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Air Quality Benefits - Metrics of the Plan need to include environmental benefits including, but not limited to , reduced use of motor vehicles, reduced traffic congestion and reduced greenhouse gases.  Engage the Community – Community involvement is essential so that the findings and recommendations in the Plan are drawn from public consensus and reflect the desires of the community. Existing Conditions/Context Zones The draft plan includes three “Context Zones,” essentially dividing the corridor into three existing sections as follows:  Context Zone 1: El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue  Context Zone 2: East Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue  Context Zone 3: Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike Each Context Zone has its own adjacent land uses and roadway characteristics. Context Zone 1 includes the Arroyo Grande Police Station and the Arroyo Grande Cemetery, and is characterized by its proximity to US 101 . This zone lacks bikes lanes and continuous sidewalk infrastructure and has inconsistent lane configurations through intersections. Context Zone 2 includes the Arroyo Grande Hospital, commercial, office, and medical offices, and is characterized by speeding, lack of accessible curb ramps, and limited Page 129 of 354 Item 12.c. City Council Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update March 14, 2023 Page 4 visibility due to on-street parking. Context Zone 3 includes Harloe Elementary and primarily residential land uses, and is characterized by similar issues, including speeding during school hours. Overall Concepts and Draft Plan Recommendations Each Context Zone in the draft Plan inc ludes recommended improvements that are tailored specifically to that section based on the existing conditions, parking, land use, and intersecting streets. Some of the terms in the draft Plan, although common in the language of transportation engineers and planners, may be unfamiliar with the general public; therefore, the draft Plan includes a definitions section for many of these terms. Context Zone 1 generally includes:  One travel lane in each direction;  Class II buffered bike lanes; and  Parking only in front of the Arroyo Grande police station . Context Zone 2 includes a more complicated mix of land uses and sections and therefore includes three general roadway segments as follows:  A three-lane section with two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and buffered Class II Bike Lanes with on-street parking southbound between Grand Avenue and Dodson Way. In this section, the southbound bike lane has a buffer area on both sides between the parking for the door zone and between the travel lane.  A brief section south of Dodson Way has a three-lane segment with a bike lane northbound, and a Class IV parking-protected bike lane southbound. Four on- street parking spaces are provided southbound in front of the Arroyo Grande Optometry building at Dodson Way.  The third typical cross-section is between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Boulevard. Also proposed, a three-lane segment with two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and Class II Buffered Bike Lanes northbound and southbound where achievable. Context Zone 3 generally includes:  Three lanes, with two travel lanes and a center turn lane;  Class II Buffered Bike lanes where achievable;  On-street parking along Halcyon Road northbound between Cameron Court and 130’ north of Sandalwood Avenue; and  Restricted left turns out of Farroll Avenue due to the severe delays currently experienced by turning motorists, multiple turning conflicts, and safety concerns with vehicles and schoolchildren at this intersection. Fair Oaks Intersection Alternatives Although the draft Plan is for the entire Halcyon Street corridor from US 101 to The Pike, special attention has been directed toward the intersection at Fair Oaks Avenue. The draft Plan presents conceptual alternatives for the Fair Oaks intersection based on long -term Page 130 of 354 Item 12.c. City Council Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update March 14, 2023 Page 5 traffic projections. Each of the alternatives would need to be further refined for ultimate design of a preferred concept. Over the course of discussion with the consultant, alternatives for a modern roundabout with larger central island and diameter and traffic signal with additional lanes were considered but ultimately deemed infeasible due to impacts to adjacent properties. In particular, these alternatives required the need for significant right-of-way on at least three corners of the intersection. Therefore, the draft Plan includes two tailored alternatives for the intersection of Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue that recognize the unique land uses and generally stay within the footprint of the existing right-of-way; a traffic signal upgrade with road diet (Alternative 1) and a smaller, compact roundabout concept with mountable center island (Alternative 2). Alternative 1 – Traffic Signal Upgrade with Road Diet. This concept results in a signalized intersection with the road diet while providing enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilities and minimizing impacts to existing rights-of-way. The proposed improvements to the intersection include installing green-colored Class II Bike Lanes on all approaches and delineating the bike lane through the intersection with green paint markings. Where right turn lanes are proposed, the Bike Lane would be located to the left of the right turn lane. This type of improvement reduces the risk of collisions between right -turning vehicles and bicyclists. In summary of the traffic operations analysis (page 43 of the draft Plan), the signalized intersection concept is anticipated to have very good access and comfort for bicycles and pedestrians and minimal need for additional right -of-way, but would have longer vehicles queues and a Level of Service (LOS) of C/D. Alternative 2 – Compact Roundabout. This concept would replace the existing traffic signal at the intersection with a modern compact roundabout with single entry and exit lanes, except for the westbound approach, which proposes a right turn lane and a shared thru/left lane. There would be a single circulating lane around the roundabout. Motorists at the roundabout would be required to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians and bicyclists. Based on the traffic operations analysis, the compact roundabout concept would also have very good access and comfort for bicycles and pedestrians with a higher safety rating, and would result in shorter vehicles queues and a Level of Service (LOS) of B/C. This concept would have slightly more right-of-way needed, particularly at the northeast corner (Arroyo Grande Community Hospital). Community Outreach During the initial planning stages in 2016 and 2017, various types of outreach and opportunities for community input were provided. These included social media, printed media, pop-up workshops, community charrettes, and stakeholder meetings. A pop-up outreach survey was conducted between August 12-14 at three community events, including the Arroyo Grande Summer Carnival at Elm Street Park, the Saturday Farmers’ Market, and a Summer Concert at the Heritage Square Park. The four charrettes were held on September 14-15, 2016, and April 12-13, 2017. A Stakeholder Advisory Group of 33 members was formed to discuss the corridor and provide input on key areas of concern Page 131 of 354 Item 12.c. City Council Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update March 14, 2023 Page 6 and potential improvements. In addition, a project-specific website was created for posting information, and an online survey was posted to better understand key issues. Following a significant hiatus since these public out reach efforts, staff has met with and received additional input from some residents with concerns about vehicle speeds and turning movements on the Halcyon Road corridor, and more recently engaged with a residential group, the Halcyon Neighborhood Group , to discuss the status of the Plan. Staff plan to re-engage the stakeholders and neighborhood groups if directed by the City Council. One primary focus of the public outreach will be to provide information about roundabouts, and specifically the concepts for the intersection of Halcyon and Fair Oaks, as the compact roundabout alternative for this intersection would be the first of its kind in the City of Arroyo Grande if implemented. Funding This project (the Halcyon Complete Streets Plan) is funded with $150,000 of State Highway Account – Sustainable Communities Grant funding with a $19,434 local match. An additional $82,066 in funding was needed to complete updates to the plan due to changing traffic patterns associated with US 101 closures and evaluations of alternatives for the intersection of Fair Oaks and Halcyon Road, as well as environmental review. The total amount spent for this work is $229,597. Funding for the construction phase includes awards of $250,000 in Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds, $100,000 in Safe Routes to School Program (SRTS) funds, $750,000 in Community Betterment grant funding through SLOCOG, and $8.1 million in Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding. The total estimated budget for this work is $9.2 million. Next Steps Following this update, and if directed by City Council, staff will begin public outreach of the draft Plan, including stakeholder and neighborhood meetings. Staff will also complete and circulate the environmental document prepared for the Plan in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in April 2023, schedule the item for Planning Commission for review and recommendation, and schedule City Council hearings for approval of the Plan and certification of the environmental document after its required circulation period. The anticipated schedule is provided as Attachment 2. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration: 1. Review the draft Halcyon Complete Streets Plan, receive public comment, and direct staff to solicit comment from stakeholders and community groups and schedule the item for Planning Commission and City Council hearings; or 2. Provide other direction to staff. Page 132 of 354 Item 12.c. City Council Halcyon Complete Streets Plan Update March 14, 2023 Page 7 ADVANTAGES: The primary objective and benefit of the Halcyon Complete Streets Plan is to provide for safe mobility and accessibility throughout the Halcyon Road corridor, connecting pe ople, schools, the hospital, and businesses by enhancing the built environment for all modes of travel including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists . The multimodal transportation enhancements can also help to reach the State’s greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. This Plan provides the framework and tools needed to further develop specific designs and provide a complete street along Halcyon Road , ultimately filling sidewalk gaps, installing buffered bike lanes, and implemen ting a road diet. DISADVANTAGES: Staff time and resources will need to be dedicated to public outreach, environmental review, and additional processing of the draft Plan. If improvements associated with the draft Plan are ultimately constructed, there will be some right-of-way needed from two property owners (Arroyo Grande Hospital and Harloe Elementary) and the impacts of construction on the adjacent businesses and residents. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: No environmental review is required for this project update. The Halcyon Complete Streets Plan is subject to CEQA, and a Mitigated Negative Declaration is being prepared for the project and will be appropriately circulated. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS: The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2. Attachments: 1. Draft Halcyon Complete Streets Plan and Appendices 2. Proposed Public Outreach and Hearing schedule Page 133 of 354 COMPLETE STREET PLAN DRAFT - FEBRUARY 6, 2023 Made Possible Through Caltrans Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant Program ATTACHMENT 1 Page 134 of 354 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 135 of 354 page i TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS CITY COUNCIL Caren Ray Russom, Mayor Kristen Barneich, Mayor Pro Tem Lan George Jim Guthrie Kate Secrest PLANNING COMMISSION Jamie Maraviglia Bruce Berlin Cathy Sackrison Kevin Buchanan Virginia Roof CITY STAFF Whitney McDonald, City Manager Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director Steve Kahn, Interim City Engineer Andrew Perez, Planning Manager Jill McPeek, CIP Manager TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 1 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 2 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................ 3 Project Challenges ..................................................................................................................... 3 Project Goals .............................................................................................................................. 3 Current Policy and Planning Documents ................................................................................... 4 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................. 5 Speeds........................................................................................................................................ 5 Context Zones ............................................................................................................................ 5 Environmental Conditfons and Potentfal Constraints ................................................................ 9 Existfng Traffic Characteristfcs .................................................................................................... 9 Existfng Traffic Conditfons & Analysis ........................................................................................ 9 Existfng Conditfons Analysis Summary .................................................................................... 18 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION .................................................................................................19 Public Outreach Partfcipatfon Plan .......................................................................................... 19 Stakeholder Partfcipatfon ........................................................................................................ 19 Pop-Up Outreach Survey ......................................................................................................... 20 Community Charrettes............................................................................................................. 20 Social Media and Online Engagement ..................................................................................... 22 2022 Outreach: Neighborhood Group ..................................................................................... 24 4. COMPLETE STREETS ELEMENTS ...............................................................................................25 Type of Complete Streets Elements ........................................................................................ 25 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................29 CONTEXT ZONE 1: URBAN (EL CAMINO REAL TO E. GRAND AVENUE.) ................................... 30 CONTEXT ZONE 2: URBAN TRANSITION (E. GRAND AVENUE. TO FAIR OAKS AVENUE.) ......... 32 CONTEXT ZONE 3: NEIGHBORHOOD (FAIR OAKS AVENUE. TO THE PIKE) ............................... 34 PARKING................................................................................................................................... 36 FUTURE TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS & ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON ............................ 37 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 42 PROTECTED BIKEWAY OPTION ................................................................................................ 44 BICYCLE LTS ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 46 LIFE-CYCLE BENEFIT/COST ANALYSIS ....................................................................................... 47 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS SUMMARY ....................................................................................... 48 6. COSTS & FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES ........................................................................................50 Phasing Potentfal ..................................................................................................................... 50 Funding Opportunitfes ............................................................................................................. 50 Federal Funding Programs ....................................................................................................... 50 State Funding Programs ........................................................................................................... 51 Developer In-Kind Contributfons ............................................................................................. 52 Additfonal Grant Programs ...................................................................................................... 52 APPENDIX A – CURRENT POLICY, PLANNING DOCUMENTS, & REFERENCES APPENDIX B – POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS APPENDIX C— ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS (UPDATED) APPENDIX D—EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM APPENDIX E— BICYCLE LTS ANALYSIS APPENDIX F— OUTREACH MEMORANDUM APPENDIX G—COST ESTIMATES APPENDIX H—LOS AND QUEUE REPORTS Made Possible Through Sustainable Communities Transportation Planning Grant Program (Caltrans) Page 136 of 354 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 137 of 354 Page 1 Complete Streets Plan EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary Local and State transportatfon policy has progressed from planning and designing almost solely for the movement of motorized vehicles, to a collectfve focus on the movement of people and goods. Complete streets policy and design exemplifies this paradigm shift by recognizing that not all people travel by car, and that land use affects how the street is used and how the street should functfon as a whole. The objectfve of the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan is to provide for safe mobility and accessibility, throughout the Halcyon Road corridor, connectfng people, schools, the hospital, and businesses by enhancing the built environment for all modes of travel including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists. This objectfve is parallel to the mission of the California Department of Transportatfon (Caltrans): Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy and livability. The Plan proposes multfmodal transportatfon enhancements so that all travel modes are accommodated, and will promote safe and convenient walking and bicycling for residents and visitors alike. The multfmodal transportatfon enhancements can also help to reach the State’s greenhouse gas emission reductfon goals. This Plan provides the framework and tools needed to further develop specific designs and provide a complete street along Halcyon Road. Table ES-1 describes the issues that are currently present and the proposed multfmodal improvements detailed in this Plan, for each of the three Context Zones. In additfon to filling in the sidewalk gaps, installing buffered bike lanes or separated bikeways where feasible, and implementfng a road diet, the Plan evaluates two alternatfve improvements at Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue: an upgraded traffic signal with enhanced bicycle facilitfes, or a roundabout. These enhancements are projected to provide safer travel for all travel modes at both the intersectfons and the adjacent roadway segments. The roundabout will provide adequate capacity for the diverse travel needs of the corridor, and improve intersectfon efficiency, which will in turn discourage cut-through traffic on Todd and Olive Streets. The upgraded traffic signal will also greatly enhance pedestrian and bicycle access and safety through the intersectfon. Either the upgraded traffic signal or the roundabout will significantly enhance safety and improve multfmodal connectfvity for all roadway users while maintaining the urban/suburban interface. Context Zone (see page 9 Figure) Existing Conditions and Issues Proposed Multimodal Improvements 1: Urban (El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue)  Lack of contfnuous and adequate sidewalks,  Difficulty in effectfvely accessing transit and park and ride facilitfes,  Proximity to US 101,  Inconsistent lane configuratfons through intersectfons, and  Poor traffic signal tfming.  Class II Buffered Bike Lanes on both sides (except southbound approaching E. Grand Avenue will be a Bike Route),  Bike Box for left turning cyclists at El Camino Real,  Green Pavement treatment in conflict zones,  Complete sidewalk connectfvity on northbound side, and  Install curb ramps at Bennett Avenue. 2: Urban Transitfon (East Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue)  Poor traffic signal tfmings,  Speeding,  Lack of accessible curb ramps,  Poor crosswalk visibility,  Narrow and degraded sidewalks,  Limited visibility caused by on-street parking, and  Inconsistent or confusing lane configuratfons  No bicycle facilitfes are available  A brief four-lane sectfon with striped Class II Bike Lanes between E. Grand Avenue and 150’ south of Park Way,  Transitfons to a three-lane segment with two travel lanes and a center turn lane,  A Class II Buffered Bike Lane northbound, a striped Class II Bike Lane southbound, and on- street parking southbound,  Four on-street parking spaces are provided southbound in front of the Arroyo Grande Optometry building at Dodson Way,  Class IV Separated Bikeway is provided from Dodson Way to approximately 130’ feet south, in between the sidewalk and the parking zone, via a separated landscaped median,  Class IV Separated Bikeway is provided northbound, with a separated landscaped median, from the main hospital driveway to approximately 120’ north,  Green pavement treatment provided in the conflict zones,  Marked Crosswalk on north side of intersectfon at Dodson Way, and  Curb extensions are proposed at all corners of the Dodson Way intersectfon, and  Additfonal improvements to Farroll Avenue and Halcyon Road 3: Neighborhood (Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike)  Speeding, especially during school hours,  Lack of contfnuous sidewalk and accessible curb ramps,  Limited visibility caused by on-street parking, inconsistent or confusing lane configuratfons, and  Poor crosswalk visibility  No bicycle facilitfes are available  At Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue, either upgrade the traffic signal with enhanced bike facilitfes, a leading pedestrian interval, and signal tfming and lane configuratfon adjustments, or install a single-lane modern roundabout with a dedicated right turn lane westbound. The proposed roundabout will provide bike ramps for all approaches leading to a multf-use path, for both pedestrians and bicyclists to navigate the roundabout, as well as shared lane markings for cyclists within the roundabout, improving safety for all.  Three-lane cross-sectfon with two travel lanes, a center turn lane,  On-street parking is provided along Halcyon Road northbound between Cameron Court and 130’ north of Sandalwood Avenue,  Install all-way stop control at Halcyon Road and The Pike,  Class II Buffered Bike Lanes are proposed for both sides of Halcyon Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Olive Street, and between Sandalwood Avenue and The Pike,  Northbound, a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Farroll Avenue to 130 feet north,  Southbound, a dedicated Bike Lane between the through lane and the right turn lane at Farroll Avenue. Green pavement treatment provided in the conflict zones,  A new two-stage crossing on the north side of Sycamore Drive, with a refuge island,  A contfnuous 6-foot wide sidewalk on the east side of Halcyon Road from The Pike to Willow Lane, and a 7-foot wide sidewalk from Willow Lane to Cameron Court, and  Curb Extensions and new curb ramps at various locatfons. Table ES-1: Summary of Issues and Improvements by Context Zone Page 138 of 354 Page 2 1. INTRODUCTION Complete Streets Plan The concepts and recommendatfons within the Plan are based on community input obtained from multfple workshops, extensive in-person and online surveys, comprehensive meetfngs with stakeholders, as well as from the review of existfng plans, policies and programs that support walking, biking, driving, and overall community livability and sustainability. The Plan:  Evaluates existfng and forecasted vehicular and multfmodal operatfons,  Uses available Geographic Informatfon System (GIS) data, right of way data and aerial imagery mapping, and  May require comprehensive topographic, boundary surveys, and operatfonal analysis to implement specific improvements. 1. INTRODUCTION The City of Arroyo Grande has initfated a project to produce a "Complete Streets Plan" (Plan) for Halcyon Road. Halcyon Road serves as a major urban arterial for the City providing access between US Route 101 (US 101) and State Route (SR) 1. Halcyon Road connects the urbanized City of Arroyo Grande to the unincorporated rural Nipomo Mesa. The Halcyon Road corridor runs generally north-south and is approximately 1.7 miles long. The character of Halcyon Road changes as it passes through three (3) distfnct Context Zones, from a primarily urban area at the north end, past a hospital and an elementary school, and finally through a neighborhood area, to the City limits. This project is funded in large part by the Caltrans Sustainable Communitfes Transportatfon Planning Grant Program. Presently, the Halcyon Road corridor does not provide necessary bicycle accommodatfons and lacks adequate pedestrian accommodatfons. Unsignalized crossings and intersectfons with poor visibility, lack of sidewalk connectfvity, the absence of bike lanes, unclear or poorly marked lane markings, and high vehicle speeds present challenges to overall corridor safety. THE PIKE FAIR OAKS AVENUE The purpose of the Plan is to develop an improved transportation corridor that provides for safe mobility and accessibility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists. The Plan proposes transportation enhancements so that all travel modes are accommodated, and will promote safe and convenient walking and bicycling for residents and visitors alike. This Complete Streets Plan provides a framework within which to further develop specific designs. This document is intended to guide future improvements along the corridor as funds become available. HALCYON ROAD HALCYON ROAD Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Arroyo Grande Police Department Harloe Elementary School Arroyo Grande High School Page 139 of 354 Page 3 Complete Streets Plan 1. INTRODUCTION Project Goals Recognizing the unique and diverse character and needs of the Halcyon Road corridor, the following specific Project Goals have been identffied as follows:  Enhance Safety for All Modes of Travel - Identffy circulatfon improvements that enhance safety for pedestrians, cyclists, and motor vehicles to travel along and across Halcyon Road.  Improve Multfmodal Connectfvity - For all age groups, improve multfmodal connectfvity by closing gaps to complete contfnuous walkways and bicycle facilitfes between residences, Harloe Elementary School, Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, parks and retail destfnatfons.  Provide Adequate Roadway Capacity for Diverse Travel Needs - Adequate capacity on Halcyon Road needs to be provided for both local and inter-regional travel with intersectfon controls that promote both safe and efficient travel.  Promote Economic Vitality and Visual Character - Plan Halcyon Road in a way that promotes multfmodal travel optfons, local visual character, vibrant civic space, social interactfon and public health that fosters the local economy and creates a place one wants to be.  Recognize and Address the Urban and Rural Interface - Embrace the Project Challenges Given its importance to the City and region, Halcyon Road remains disjointed and dated in terms of the transportatfon utflity it provides. Halcyon Road currently has an assortment of travel lane and on-street parking configuratfons. There are no dedicated bike lanes within the corridor and cyclists compete with motorists for the traveled way. With only three signalized intersectfons in the corridor, pedestrians have a difficult tfme navigatfng safely across the facility, and the public has expressed concerns about the excessive speeds of the motorized vehicles using the corridor. In additfon to the crossing difficultfes, an incomplete sidewalk system makes walking along the corridor an uncomfortable and unattractfve alternatfve. It is critfcal to bring the Halcyon Road corridor up to a standard that will encourage Harloe Elementary school children, Arroyo Grande High School students, hospital employees, and residents to walk, ride their bikes, or take transit; ultfmately improving the local economy and the overall livability of the corridor while maintaining the special rural town site of old Halcyon. Distfnctfve transitfons will remain between the adjacent land uses along Halcyon Road, and "Gateway" treatments could be utflized to give all users a sense of entering a special place regardless of the directfon they are traveling on Halcyon Road. Project Setting Halcyon Road is located in the southern part of the City of Arroyo Grande, which is approximately 15 miles south of the City of San Luis Obispo. The Halcyon Road corridor is a direct regional connector with a varied user base of local and through traffic. The Halcyon Road corridor provides access to some very significant resources within the City of Arroyo Grande and the adjacent unincorporated areas. It serves as primary access to the South County's only hospital, the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital, that averages over 2,000 patfents monthly. In additfon to providing patfent care, the hospital is the major job center for the community. Halcyon Road provides primary access to Harloe Elementary School, and by extension, the high school located on Fair Oaks Avenue near US 101. In additfon to these major traffic generators, there are numerous commercial, industrial, and residentfal uses along the corridor. Halcyon Road is also a key facility for transportfng a vast array of agricultural products and farm workers between US 101 and SR 1, serving regional traffic between the Nipomo Mesa and destfnatfons north. The corridor has evolved over several decades in an attempt to perform many functfons. Based on US Census Bureau data, populatfon within Arroyo Grande has increased from 17,252 in 2010, to 18,441 in 2020 (0.69% per year). This growth is consistent with San Luis Obispo County’s populatfon growth of 0.53% per year between 2010 and 2019. Project Location Halcyon Road provides access to schools, the hospital, and commercial uses Halcyon Road Page 140 of 354 Page 4 1. INTRODUCTION Complete Streets Plan diverse urban and rural communitfes Halcyon Road serves by recognizing the interface with a notable gateway between the two areas this road serves.  Recognize Greenhouse Gas Reductfon and Air Quality Benefits- Metrics of the Plan need to include environmental benefits including, but not limited to, reduced use of motor vehicles, reduced traffic congestfon and reduced greenhouse gases.  Engage the Community – Community involvement is essentfal so that the findings and recommendatfons in the Plan are drawn from public consensus and reflect the desires of the community. In additfon to these project specific goals, this effort also recognizes and strives to achieve both the State Transportatfon Planning Goals and the Federal Transportatfon Planning Goals as required by the Caltrans Sustainable Transportatfon Planning Grant Program, which has been a large funding source for this effort. Current Policy and Planning Documents This sectfon lists current policies and planning documents that guide or regulate transportatfon planning decisions related to Complete Streets. The Plan aims to align its recommendatfons with these available documents. Descriptfons for each of the documents are provided in Appendix A. To the extent feasible, the following documents were referenced for this study:  South Halcyon Road Corridor Study  City of Arroyo Grande Circulatfon Element (updated 2021)  City of Arroyo Grande Multfmodal Traffic Impact Study Guidelines (updated 2021)  County of San Luis Obispo General Plan  2015/16 County Bikeways Plan  SLOCOG Regional Transportatfon Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communitfes Strategy (SCS): Connectfng Communitfes  City of Arroyo Grande Climate Actfon Plan  California AB 1358 - Complete Streets Act  City of Arroyo Grande Bicycle and Trails Master Plan  Urban Bikeways Design Guide, 2nd Editfon, NACTO  Urban Streets Design Guide, NACTO  California AB 32  Main Street, California: A Guide for Improving Community and Transportatfon Vitality, 2003  Complete Streets Implementatfon Actfon Plan 2.0 (CSIAP 2.0), June 2014 - June 2017  Safe Routes to School  City of Arroyo Grande 2018 Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey Page 141 of 354 Page 5 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS This sectfon summarizes the existfng multfmodal transportatfon conditfons for the Halcyon Road corridor and identffies deficiencies in relatfon to Complete Streets and multfmodal circulatfon prioritfes. Multfmodal refers to all modes of transportatfon including vehicular, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit. Speeds At the junctfon of US 101/El Camino Real, the speed limit on Halcyon Road is 35 mph. It increases to 40 mph south of Dodson Way with a school zone speed limit of 25 mph beginning just north of Fair Oaks Avenue and ending just north of Sandalwood Avenue. Context Zones For the purposes of this Plan, the study corridor is divided into three (3) distfnct Context Zones to illustrate the changes in adjacent land uses and roadway characteristfcs along the corridor. This Plan will evaluate the Halcyon Road corridor relatfve to each segment’s context. The three distfnct Context Zones of the study corridor are discussed in detail. Halcyon Road Context Zones  Context Zone 1: Urban  US 101/El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue  Context Zone 2: Urban Transition  East Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue  Context Zone 3: Neighborhood  Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike Page 142 of 354 Page 6 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan Context Zone 1: El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue Halcyon Road through Context Zone 1 is approximately 0.3 miles long and passes through a primarily urban area. This urban Context Zone is predominantly developed with urban uses oriented toward El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue, both of which provide critfcal access to important commercial and retail areas of the City of Arroyo Grande. City of Arroyo Grande (City) land use and zoning designatfons within this zone include:  General Plan Land Use Designatfons  Community Facilitfes  Mixed Use  Single-Family Residentfal - Medium Density  Zoning Designatfons  Public Facility  Highway Mixed Use  Fair Oaks Mixed Use  Single-Family Existfng uses include commercial, residentfal, retail, and notable public facilitfes, including churches, the Arroyo Grande Cemetery, and the Arroyo Grande Police Department. The urban Context Zone also includes mature trees and landscaping adjacent to the existfng roadway, as well as existfng overhead utflity lines, signage, street lightfng, fencing, and other infrastructure. The City and Caltrans are currently considering modificatfons to the Brisco -Halcyon Road/US 101 Interchange within this Context Zone to provide congestfon relief, alleviate queuing, and improve the traffic operatfons of the regional and local street system in the vicinity of US 101 in Arroyo Grande. Modificatfons proposed within the urban Context Zone boundary include re-striping and lane reconfiguratfon at the Brisco Road/US 101 undercrossing, the Brisco Road/El Camino Real intersectfon, and along the eastbound and westbound El Camino Real approaches to the Brisco Road/ El Camino Real intersectfon. There is also an existfng Park and Ride lot immediately adjacent to the urban Context Zone, approximately 200 feet east of the Halcyon Road/El Camino Real/US 101 southbound ramps intersectfon. Speeds and Right-of-Way The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour (mph). The right of way in this zone is approximately 60 feet with a street width varying from 38 to 48.5 feet. There is one travel lane in each directfon with on-street parking allowed on approximately 25% of the curb face, and 20 access points. No designated bike lanes are provided. Sidewalk varying from 5 to 10 feet in width exists on both sides of the street; sidewalk is contfnuous southbound, however, there are gaps in the connectfvity in the northbound directfon. Issues in Context Zone 1 include:  Lack of contfnuous and adequate sidewalks,  Difficulty in effectfvely accessing transit and park and ride facilitfes,  Proximity to US 101,  Inconsistent lane configuratfons through intersectfons, and  Poor traffic signal tfming. Due to the adjacent Arroyo Grande Cemetery along much of the northern part of the street in this Context Zone, expansion of the right of way to accommodate additfonal modal improvements is limited. Context Zone 1: No Bicycle Facility Designations Context Zone 1: Gaps in Continuous Sidewalks Page 143 of 354 Page 7 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Context Zone 2: East Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue Halcyon Road through Context Zone 2 is approximately 0.4 miles long and transitfons from an urban area to a residentfal area. This urban transitfon Context Zone is predominantly developed with urban uses with few residentfal driveways having direct access to Halcyon Road, with direct access to parking lots for local commercial, office, and medical businesses. City land use and zoning designatfons within this zone include:  General Plan Land Use Designatfons  Mixed Use  Office Professional  Single-Family Residentfal - Medium Density  Multf-Family Residentfal - High Density  Multf-Family Residentfal - Very High Density  Zoning Designatfons  Fair Oaks Mixed Use  Office Mixed Use  Single-Family  Multf-Family Existfng uses include commercial, residentfal, retail, and public facilitfes, and notable land uses within this zone include the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital and other medical offices. The urban transitfon Context Zone also includes mature trees and landscaping adjacent to the existfng roadway, as well as existfng overhead utflity lines, signage, street lightfng, fencing, and other infrastructure. A marked pedestrian crossing is located at the side-street stop-controlled intersectfon of Halcyon Road and Dodson Way. Speeds and Right-of-Way Consistent with the recommended speed noted in the 2018 Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey, the posted speed limit is 35 mph south of East Grand Avenue and transitfons to 40 mph south of Dodson Way, with a school zone speed limit of 25 mph in the vicinity of Harloe Elementary School, which extends north of Fair Oaks Avenue. The right of way in this zone is approximately 80 feet with a street width varying from 63 to 64.5 feet. Two lanes in each directfon are provided, with a center Two-Way Left-Turn Lane (TWLTL) from approximately 350 feet south of Dodson Way to Fair Oaks Avenue where it becomes an exclusive southbound left-turn lane. On-street parking is allowed on the west side of Halcyon Road north of the end of the TWLTL to Dodson Way, and then on both sides of the street north of Dodson Way. North of Park Way, on-street parking is allowed on the west side of the street only. No bike lanes are provided. Contfnuous sidewalks exist on both sides of the street, which vary in width from 5 to 7 feet. Issues in Context Zone 2 include:  Poor traffic signal tfmings,  Speeding,  Lack of accessible curb ramps,  Poor crosswalk visibility,  Narrow and degraded sidewalks,  Limited visibility caused by on-street parking, and  Inconsistent or confusing lane configuratfons Context Zone 2: No Current Room for Bicycles Context Zone 2: Crosswalk at East Grand Avenue Page 144 of 354 Page 8 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan Context Zone 3: Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike Halcyon Road in Context Zone 3 is approximately 0.44 miles long and passes through a neighborhood area. This neighborhood Context Zone is predominantly developed with single-Family residences between Fair Oaks Drive and the southern City limits. This Context Zone also includes a small area of existfng mobile homes within a portfon of unincorporated San Luis Obispo County, at the northeast corner of Halcyon Road and the southern City limits of Arroyo Grande (i.e., The Pike). City and County of San Luis Obispo (County) land use designatfons and City zoning designatfons within this zone are listed below.  General Plan Land Use Designatfons  Community Facilitfes  Single-Family Residentfal - Medium Density  Zoning Designatfons  Public Facility  Single-Family  San Luis Obispo County Land Use Designatfons  Residentfal Multf-Family Notable land uses within this zone include Harloe Elementary School and the school fields at the northern end of the zone. The neighborhood Context Zone also includes mature trees and landscaping adjacent to the existfng roadway, as well as existfng utflity lines, signage, street lightfng, fencing, and other infrastructure. Speeds and Right-of-Way Consistent with the recommended speed noted in the 2018 Citywide Engineering and Traffic Survey, the posted speed limit is 40 mph with a school zone speed limit of 25 mph in the vicinity of Harloe Elementary School. A marked yellow pedestrian crossing with rectangular rapid flashing beacons is located at the side-street stop-controlled intersectfon of Halcyon Road and Sandalwood Avenue, south of the elementary school. The right of way in this zone is approximately 80 feet with a street width varying from 52 (South of Cameron Court) to 64 feet (North of Cameron Court). There are two travel lanes in each directfon with a TWLTL untfl just south of Olive Street and then the street transitfons to one travel lane in each directfon with a TWLTL. No designated bike lanes are provided. A contfnuous sidewalk of width varying from 5 to 7 feet is provided on both sides of the street except between The Pike and Cameron Court where no sidewalk exists on the east side of the street. Issues in Context Zone 3 include:  Speeding, especially during school hours,  Lack of contfnuous sidewalk and accessible curb ramps,  Limited visibility caused by on-street parking, inconsistent or confusing lane configuratfons, and  Poor crosswalk visibility Context Zone 3: Wide Road with Long School Crosswalk Context Zone 3: No Current Room for Bicycles Context Zone 3: Speeding is a Concern Halcyon Road Page 145 of 354 Page 9 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Environmental Conditions and Potential Constraints Potentfal environmental constraints associated with project development are summarized in Appendix B based on a memorandum by SWCA Environmental Consultants dated September 7, 2016 and updated on [CITY TO PROVIDE DATE] (provided in Appendix C). Existing Traffic Characteristics Table 1 presents the existfng mode of travel split, based on the 2015-2019 American Community Survey five-year estfmates for Means of Transportatfon to Work by Selected Characteristfcs, and compares the commutfng patterns of Arroyo Grande to the adjacent citfes of Grover Beach and Oceano, San Luis Obispo County, California statewide, and natfonwide. The commutfng patterns within Arroyo Grande present how residents currently travel to work. Although commute patterns may also be correlated to commute tfmes and distances to work, travel between non-work related trips will vary by mode. As shown in Table 1 and the Chart to the right, the City of Arroyo Grande’s commute patterns reflect similar commute patterns to the adjacent citfes and San Luis Obispo County, but with a lower amount of people carpooling to work or using public transportatfon. Statfstfcs for the bicycle mode were grouped with taxicab, motorcycle, or other means of travel. Overall, these statfstfcs indicate a consistent trend of a large percentage of commuters driving alone and more people working at home than using other modes of transportatfon besides car, truck, or van. The average travel tfme to work is also relatfvely consistent with the adjacent citfes and San Luis Obispo County. The travel tfmes between Arroyo Grande and the City of San Luis Obispo are typically 20-30 minutes in the PM peak period during the weekday via US 101. This same route would take approximately one hour via public transit (San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority). Existing Traffic Conditions & Analysis An analysis of the existfng traffic conditfons was performed for the corridor to evaluate traffic volumes, existfng capacity and deficiencies, LOS, and collision history. Along the Halcyon Road corridor, 11 key intersectfons, three of which are signalized intersectfons, and eight roadway segments were selected for the analysis. The technical parameters, methodologies, and results detailing existfng multfmodal intersectfon analysis including LOS tables are contained in the Existing Conditions Analysis Memorandum, included in Appendix D. An updated analysis is also provided separately, in the Existing Conditions Background Report (November 2020, GHD), prepared during the update of the City Circulatfon Element. Existfng weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volume counts were collected for the corridor in September 2014, September 2016, and November 2019. The AM peak hour is defined between 7:00 am and 9:00 am while the PM peak hour is defined between 4:00 pm and 6:00 pm on a typical weekday with school in session. The following eight intersectfons were analyzed under existfng weekday AM and PM peak hour conditfons:  Halcyon Road/El Camino Real  Halcyon Road/Bennett Avenue  Halcyon Road/East Grand Avenue  Halcyon Road/Dodson Way  Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue  Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue  Halcyon Road/Sycamore Drive  Halcyon Road/The Pike In additfon, Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes were collected for the eight study segments along the corridor. The following eight study roadway segments were analyzed under existfng daily conditfons:  Between El Camino Real and Bennett Avenue  Between Bennett Avenue and East Grand Avenue  Between East Grand Avenue and Dodson Way  Between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue  Between Fair Oaks Avenue and Farroll Avenue  Between Farroll Avenue and Sycamore Drive Existing Mode of Travel Split 2019 Means of Transportation to Work Arroyo Grande Grover Beach Oceano San Luis Obispo County California United States Car, Truck, or Van 88.4% 85.0% 92.4% 84.7% 84.0% 85.5% Drove Alone 74.5% 69.9% 81.5% 74.0% 73.7% 76.4% Carpooled 14.0% 15.1% 10.9% 10.7% 10.3% 9.1% Public Transportatfon 0.7% 2.0% 1.3% 1.2% 5.1% 5.0% Walked 2.1% 3.7% 2.4% 4.3% 2.7% 2.7% Bicycle, Taxicab, Motorcycle, or Other 1.8% 2.5% 3.7% 3.0% 2.6% 1.8% Worked from Home 7.1% 6.7% 0.3% 6.7% 5.7% 4.9% Total Workers 16 years+: 8,529 6,768 3,458 128,339 17,904,213 150,571,044 Travel tfme to work (minutes): 22.7 20.5 23.4 22.2 29.3 26.6 Source: U.S. Census American Community Survey 5-year estimates 2015-2019 Table 1: Existing Modal Split Page 146 of 354 Page 10 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan Level of Service Analysis Level of Service, or LOS, is a qualitatfve measure of traffic operatfng conditfons, whereby a letter grade A through F is assigned to an intersectfon or roadway segment representfng progressively worsening traffic conditfons. LOS is a measure of actual traffic conditfons and the perceptfon of such conditfons by motorists. The peak hour traffic volumes were analyzed at the study intersectfons to quantffy operatfons for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle modes. The daily traffic counts were analyzed along the study roadway segments to quantffy vehicular operatfons. The analysis was conducted using LOS based on the methodologies within the Transportatfon Research Board’s publicatfon Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition, (HCM 6). Additfonally, Alta Planning & Design analyzed the existfng bicycle conditfons for the roadway segments (detailed in a memorandum provided in Appendix E) utflizing a standardized Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis. The analysis methodology used for the LTS analysis was adapted from the 2016 Oregon Department of Transportatfon (ODOT) Analysis Procedure Manual. The approach outlined in the ODOT report uses roadway network data, including the posted speed limit, the number of travel lanes, and the presence and character of bicycle lanes as a proxy for bicyclist comfort level in urban context, and ADT and shoulder or bike lane width in rural settings. The analysis uses these roadway characteristfcs to rate the roadway on a scale of 1 being most comfortable, or least stressful, to 4 being least comfortable, or most stressful. Level of Service Policies Consistent with City General Plan Circulatfon Element policy, LOS D is the threshold for acceptable operatfons for roadways and intersectfons within the City. Consistent with County General Plan policy, LOS C is the threshold for roadways and intersectfons within County and Caltrans jurisdictfons for acceptable operatfons. The City has developed the following policy regarding multfmodal analysis. The County of San Luis Obispo has not developed bicycle and pedestrian LOS/LTS policies or modal priority policies. Existing Conditions Multimodal Analysis Results Figure 1 to the left presents the existfng vehicular intersectfon LOS (worse of AM or PM peak). Overall, most intersectfons within the corridor currently operate at an acceptable LOS (D within City limits, otherwise C or better) with the exceptfon of one intersectfon: Halcyon Road & Farroll Avenue (LOS E). For the three signalized intersectfons (El Camino Real, East Grand Avenue, and Fair Oaks Avenue), pedestrian LOS was determined to be at LOS B on all approaches, while bicycle mode operated at LOS C or better on all approaches with the exceptfon of LOS D northbound at Grand Avenue in the AM peak hour. All roadway segments along Halcyon Road are currently operatfng at acceptable LOS D or better for vehicular traffic on a daily basis, with existfng volumes ranging from 8,500-14,000 vehicles per day along the corridor. Pedestrian Facilities In additfon to the signalized intersectfon analysis, a thorough field assessment of the existfng pedestrian facilitfes, including sidewalks and crosswalks was conducted for each Context Zone along Halcyon Road. Along the study corridor, there are three signalized intersectfons with crosswalks, two unsignalized marked crossings at Dodson Way and at Sandalwood Avenue near the elementary school. The following Figures (Figures 2 through 5) present the existfng pedestrian and bicycle facilitfes, including gaps in sidewalk connectfvity (shown in red) and depictfons of current cross-sectfons for each Context Zone. Overall, gaps in the connectfvity of the sidewalk along Halcyon Road are located on the east side, in Context Zone 1 north of Bennett Avenue, and in Context Zone 3 north of The Pike to Cameron Court. However, some of the sidewalk gaps in Context Zone 3 have recently been constructed. C Figure 1: Existing Vehicular Level of Service at Intersections C C C D E B C Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Policy: CT9 Strive to attain and maintain bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) 3 or better on all bicycle facilities. Strive to attain and maintain designated low-stress networks. Page 147 of 354 Page 11 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 2 - Existing Conditions for Context Zone 1 Page 148 of 354 Page 12 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 3 - Existing Conditions for Context Zone 2 Page 149 of 354 Page 13 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 4 - Existing Conditions for Context Zone 3 Note: As part of the 2022 Pedestrian Crossing Improvements, several ADA ramps and sidewalk gap closures were constructed on t he east side of Halcyon Rd between Cameron Ct and Virginia Dr. Page 150 of 354 Page 14 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan Bicycle Facilitfes In additfon to the signalized intersectfon analysis, Alta Planning & Design analyzed the existfng bicycle conditfons for the roadway segments (detailed in Appendix E) utflizing a standardized Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis. The analysis methodology used for the LTS analysis, as previously stated, was adapted from the 2016 Oregon Department of Transportatfon (ODOT) Analysis Procedure Manual. The approach outlined in the ODOT report uses roadway network data, including the posted speed limit, the number of travel lanes, and the presence and character of bicycle lanes as a proxy for bicyclist comfort level in urban context, and ADT and shoulder or bike lane width in rural settings. The analysis uses these roadway characteristfcs to rate the roadway on a scale, with 1 being most comfortable or least stressful, to 4 being least comfortable or most stressful. LTS 1 is assigned to roads that would be suitable for most children to ride, and to multf-use paths that are separated from motorized traffic. LTS 2 is assigned to roads that could be comfortably ridden by the average adult populatfon. LTS 3 is the level assigned to roads that would be acceptable to current “enthused and confident” cyclists while LTS 4 is assigned to segments that are only acceptable to “strong and fearless” bicyclists, who will tolerate riding on roadways with higher motor traffic volumes and speeds. Examples for each level of traffic stress are shown in the graphic below using streets found in Rochester, New York. For the analysis, the roadway links received up to three scores based on its characteristfcs. The first score was based on its segment (along), the space of roadway between intersectfng streets. The second score was based on its approach, the area of the segment with turn lanes approaching an intersectfon, where present. A third score was based on its intersectfon, where one segment crosses another. Signalized intersectfons do not receive an LTS score. All roadways received a segment score. However, not all roadways received an intersectfon or an approach score (across). For example, a midblock portfon of a street link received a segment score, but because it does not intersect another street, nor does it have turn lanes, neither an intersectfon nor approach score was assigned. These three scores, (when all were assigned), determined the overall LTS score, and is based on a “weakest link” methodology. The resultfng analysis performed and detailed in Alta Planning & Design’s Memorandum helps highlight locatfons where potentfal improvements are expected to have the biggest effect on the experience of bicycle users along Halcyon Road. The analysis found that the existfng conditfons of Halcyon Road do not provide adequate comfort for bicyclists. The corridor consistently scored an LTS 4 along Halcyon Road in all Context Zones. Context Zone 1 scored an LTS 2 at intersectfon approaches and crossings. Context Zones 2 and 4 scored an LTS 3 at intersectfon approaches and crossings. Context Zone 3 scored an LTS 3 at most intersectfon approaches and crossings, except near Harloe Elementary school where an LTS 4 is present at intersectfon approaches and crossings along Halcyon Road. Figure 6 on the following page depicts the LTS scores for each zone along the roadway and across or approaching intersectfons. While the LTS completed focuses on bicycle travel, improvements for bicyclists generally translate into improved conditfons for pedestrians, as well. This is partfcularly true for crossing conditfons, as improvements are measured in terms of reduced exposure to motor vehicle travel speed and the number of travel lanes crossed.  Comfortable for all ages and abilitfes  Traffic speeds are low and intersectfons easy to cross  Can include residentfal streets, and separated bike paths/cycle tracks  Comfortable for teenagers and most adults  Traffic speeds are slightly higher, low speed differentfals  Can include collector-level streets with Bike Lanes or a central business district  Uncomfortable for most, suitable for experienced and skilled cyclists  Higher traffic volumes and speeds, wider streets  Can be perceived as unsafe and are difficult to cross  Narrow or no Bike Lanes provided  Comfortable for confident adult bicyclists  Traffic speeds are moderate, roadways can be five lanes wide  Can include low speed arterials with Bike Lanes or moderate speed non-multflane roadways Page 151 of 354 Page 15 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Figure 6 - Existing Bicycle LTS Page 152 of 354 Page 16 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan Transit Services The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) provides public transit fixed-route bus service in the City of Arroyo Grande. SLORTA also provides regional connectfon to South County with Regional Transit Authority (RTA) Route 10, which stops at a transfer hub on El Camino Real just east of Halcyon Road. SLORTA South County Transit (SCT) Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28, provide local routes. Routes 21 and 24 provide service between Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach with stops near Halcyon Road at East Grand Avenue and El Camino Real (park and ride lot/transfer hub). Routes 27 and 28 provide service between Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Oceano with stops near Halcyon Road on El Camino Real (park and ride/transfer hub) and Fair Oaks Avenue (Hospital). The routes cross Halcyon Road without providing direct service along the Halcyon Road corridor. Park and Ride Facilities The Halcyon Park and Ride Lot located on the north side of El Camino Real just east of Halcyon Road is one of 15 formal park & ride lots in San Luis Obispo County. The lot has 85 parking spaces and includes eight bike lockers. RTA Route 10 and SCAT Route 23 serve a bus stop at the facility. Park & Ride Lot at the north end of Halcyon Road SCT crosses Halcyon Road, but there is no transit on Halcyon Road. Page 153 of 354 Page 17 Complete Streets Plan 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Traffic Collisions Collision Data within the Halcyon Road study corridor area was obtained from California Highway Patrol's Statewide Integrated Traffic Records Systems (SWITRS) and from the Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis System (TASAS) database (Caltrans) for a 5-year period between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015. Subsequently, A review of the data shows that approximately 120 total collisions occurred along the Halcyon Road study corridor during this 5-year period, however, there were no fatalitfes. Approximately 92 of the collisions occurred at intersectfons or within 100 feet of an intersectfon along the corridor. The majority of these collisions occurred at East Grand Avenue (14 collisions), Fair Oaks Avenue (14 collisions), Farroll Avenue (8 collisions), and The Pike (14 collisions). Collision rates and fatality plus injury percentages for each Context Zone segment, and detailed collision history at Halcyon Road and The Pike are contained in the Existing Conditions Analysis Memorandum, included in Appendix D. Collisions Involving Bicyclists or Pedestrians Of those collisions that occurred at intersectfons along the Halcyon Road study corridor, one collision at East Grand Avenue involved a bicycle being struck by a westbound vehicle making a right-turn while the bicyclist was travelling eastbound on the wrong side of the road. One collision at Halcyon Road and The Pike involved a pedestrian being struck by a vehicle traveling southbound on Halcyon Road. The pedestrian was reported to be in the road/shoulder. Collision rates were calculated for the three Context Zones in terms of "accidents per million vehicle miles traveled", and are based on the number of collisions per year, and the vehicle miles traveled per year (equal to the ADT volumes multfplied by the length of the segment). The calculated collision rates were then compared with statewide average rates compiled by Caltrans as published in their most recent 2014 Collision Data on California State Highways1 document. The document provides basic average accident rates for various types of roadways and intersectfons categorized by number of lanes, travel speed, terrain, and area type, and are derived from the California SWITRS data. Fatality and injury (F+I) rates were also calculated as a percentage of total recorded collisions. In summary, Context Zone 2 exceeds both the statewide F+I percentage and the statewide collision rate for similar roadway facilitfes, and Context Zone 4 exceeds the statewide average F+I percentage for similar roadway facilitfes. Additfonally, the City has completed a Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSAR, GHD 2021) and a Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP, GHD 2021) which evaluated collisions citywide between 2014 and 2018, and F+I collisions also through 2020. These collisions along Halcyon Road are presented in the image to the left. The SSAR identffied Halcyon Road at The Pike and at Farroll Avenue as within the top 10 highest ranked intersectfons for equivalent property damage only (EPDO) collisions, where higher severity has higher weight. Halcyon Road segment from E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue was ranked third highest EDPO. The SSAR identffies installing a pedestrian hybrid beacon at Farroll Avenue. At Halcyon Road/ E. Grand Avenue, the SSAR identffies improving signal hardware, crossings, and implementfng a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI). Halcyon Road at The Pike The intersectfon of Halcyon Road and The Pike was improved to an all-way stop control in 2019, from the prior two-way stop control on The Pike, based on the multf-way stop control warrant analysis conducted as part of this study in 2018 and the collision data (see Appendix D). Based on the collision history between 2011 and 2015, there were at least five collisions susceptfble to correctfon by a multf-way stop control, which therefore supported the installatfon of a multf-way stop control measure. This intersectfon presents the transitfon between the City and the County, where the speed limit goes from 45 mph to 40 mph as you approach the intersectfon from the south. Additfonally, visibility to oncoming traffic from The Pike is limited due to the existfng hill approaching the intersectfon. Speed Surveys Recent speed surveys have been conducted within the City and County for the following segments of Halcyon Road:  Context Zone 1 between East Grand Avenue and Bennett Avenue (2018);  Context Zone 2 between Park Way and Dodson Way (2018);  Context Zone 2 between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue (2018); and  Context Zone 3 between Fair Oaks Avenue and The Pike (2018) 1. California Department of Transportation 2014 Collision Data on California State Highways (road miles, travel, collisions, collision rates), Division of Traffic Operations, Sacramento, CA. Halcyon Road Corridor Collision Locations Page 154 of 354 Page 18 2. EXISTING CONDITIONS Complete Streets Plan The 85th percentfle speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of vehicles are traveling. The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road from East Grand Avenue to Bennett Avenue is 35 mph, and the 85th percentfle directfonal speeds were measured at 35.6 mph (northbound) and 35.1 mph (southbound). The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road between Park Way and Dodson Way is 35 mph and the 85th percentfle speed was measured at 37.0 mph in both northbound and southbound directfons. The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue is 40 mph and the 85th percentfle speed was measured at 38.0 mph in both northbound and southbound directfons. The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road from The Pike to SR 1 is 45 mph based on the most recent speed survey conducted by the County. The County does not currently have 85th percentfle speed data on Halcyon Road between The Pike and SR 1. The posted speed limits are in conformance with the California Vehicle Code whereby the posted speed is the nearest 5 mph increment from the measured 85th percentfle speed. Note that a slight reductfon (1 mph or more) in the 85th percentfle speed on Halcyon Road between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue would result in a reductfon in a 5 mph reductfon in the posted speed limit, from 40 mph to 35 mph. Existing Conditions Analysis Summary Although the existfng vehicular traffic conditfons operate at acceptable service levels along most of the Halcyon Road corridor, pedestrian and bicycle conditfons are inadequate at several locatfons with lack of connectfvity between residentfal, retail, recreatfonal, and employment areas, as well as access to transit services. The key findings of this existfng conditfons analysis of Halcyon Road between El Camino Real and The Pike in the City of Arroyo Grande are as follow:  Although pedestrian LOS is adequate at signalized intersectfons, unsignalized crossings are long and do not provide median refuge;  Bicycle LOS at the signalized intersectfon of Halcyon Road and East Grand Avenue is calculated to be LOS D in the AM and PM peak hours;  No dedicated bicycle facilitfes currently exist on Halcyon Road in the City of Arroyo Grande;  Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is level 4 (uncomfortable for most riders) along the entfre length of the Halcyon Road corridor. In additfon to the lack of dedicated bike lanes north of The Pike, the speed and volumes of vehicles traveling along Halcyon Road, the presence of on-street parking, and the wide roadway width present difficultfes for cyclists attemptfng to travel along and across Halcyon Road;  Within the City of Arroyo Grande, the sidewalk network has numerous gaps and does not provide contfnuous pedestrian access along the Halcyon Road corridor;  Contfnuous pedestrian access is also key for transit accessibility. Currently, pedestrian access is provided on Halcyon Road near the East Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue bus stops. However, contfnuous pedestrian facilitfes are not provided further south in the residentfal areas of the City (Context Zone 3). However, as part of the 2022 Pedestrian Crossing Improvements Project, several ADA ramps and sidewalk gap closures were constructed on the east side of Halcyon Rod between Cameron Ct and Virginia Dr. Sidewalk gaps stfll remain on the east side of Halcyon Rd between The Pike and Virginia Dr. In Context Zone 1, there are several gaps in the sidewalk for access to the Park & Ride lot on El Camino Real.  Pedestrians have made evident pathways adjacent to the roadway where there are gaps in the sidewalk.  Harloe Elementary schoolchildren and parents, Arroyo Grande High School students, hospital employees, and residents have expressed concerns for safely crossing Halcyon Road; and  The collision rate in Context Zone 2 exceeds the statewide average for similar facilitfes, and the rate of fatality and injury collisions in Context Zone 2 exceeds the statewide average. Presently, the Halcyon Road corridor does not provide necessary bicycle accommodatfons and lacks adequate pedestrian accommodatfons. Unsignalized crossings and intersectfons with poor visibility, lack of sidewalk connectfvity, the absence of bike lanes, unclear or poorly marked lane markings, and high vehicle speeds present challenges to overall corridor safety. Page 155 of 354 Page 19 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Complete Streets Plan Public Participation Program Goals  Solicit feedback to understand the needs and expectatfons of residents, business owners, and other community members.  Convey technical designs, limitatfons, and opportunitfes in a clear and concise manner.  Provide optfons and opportunitfes for alternate plans and facilitate the means to provide the community the opportunity to determine which trade-offs they are comfortable with.  Use excitfng and engaging forms of community collaboratfon, including new technology, to ensure broad partfcipatfon throughout the planning process. Stakeholder Participation The City formed a Stakeholder Advisory Group (33 members) to discuss the corridor and provide input on key areas of concern and potentfal improvements. Invitatfons were sent out to various key members in the community asking for representatfves from the Planning Commission, Traffic Commission, and a wide-range of community stakeholder groups. The advisory group also assisted in relaying informatfon about the planning process to their respectfve constftuents, as well as advising on the development of conceptual design alternatfves. 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION As part of the Halcyon Road Plan, Alta Planning & Design led the Public Partfcipatfon Plan during the initfal planning stages in 2016 and 2017, with assistance from Chuck Anders of Strategic Initfatfves, through the use of various types of outreach and opportunitfes for community input. These included social media, printed media, pop-up workshops, community charrettes, and stakeholder meetfngs. This public outreach process was inclusive, interactfve, and productfve in order to build support and momentum for Complete Streets while conveying technical issues in a clear and easy-to-understand manner. Alta Planning & Design also provided Spanish translatfon services at community outreach events, for written materials, and for websites. Appendix F provides the memorandum by Alta Planning & Design, dated March 13, 2017, which details the outreach and results. Public Outreach Participation Plan The Public Partfcipatfon Plan (PPP) engaged citfzens by providing a straightiorward communicatfon style through direct outreach and the use of the latest technology. The public outreach methods included the following various opportunitfes for community input:  Pop-Up Outreach & Surveys (August 12-14, 2016)  Community Charrettes 1&2 (September 14 & 15, 2016)  Map & Facility Boards  Breakout Groups  Instant Votfng  Comment Cards  Community Charrettes 3&4 (April 12 & 13, 2017)  Recommended Plan  Polling and Discussion  Online: Interactfve Map, Online Survey, and Text Messages  Stakeholder Advisory Group Meetfngs Project Team Meeting Page 156 of 354 Page 20 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Complete Streets Plan Pop-Up Outreach Survey A Pop-Up Outreach Survey was conducted between August 12th and 14th at three community events:  Arroyo Grande Summer Carnival at Elm Street Park (Friday, August 12th);  Olohan Alley Farmers’ Market (Saturday August 13th); and  Summer Concert at the Heritage Square Park (Sunday, August 14th) This 14-questfon survey asked respondents, including members of the Stakeholders Advisory Group, for their familiarity with the project area, to rate the conditfons of the facility, and their desire for changes. The majority of respondents stated that they did not stop on Halcyon Road, but used it primarily to get to destfnatfons in other places, while stakeholder group members stated that work and shopping were their most frequent destfnatfons along Halcyon Road. Drivers mostly rated the street as good or fair while walking/bicycling conditfons were mostly rated fair or poor. Overall, the majority of people responded that it was very important or important to improve conditfons for all modes. Community Charrettes Four interactfve charrette-style meetfngs were held at Harloe Elementary School on Halcyon Road in order to engage the community to learn about the project and provide input on the vision and objectfves for the corridor. At the beginning of all four meetfngs, attendees reviewed and provided insightiul comments on aerial maps and street cross-sectfons along the corridor. The meetfngs also consisted of presentatfons to explain the challenges and opportunitfes along Halcyon Road and gather feedback on each of the four “Context Zones” along the corridor. At the first round of meetfngs, the presentatfon and discussion focused around community prioritfes and potentfal locatfons in need of improvement. At the second round of meetfngs, the presentatfon and discussion focused around proposed designs and improvements that addressed the initfal input. The presentatfons were followed by an interactfve questfon-and-answer session with the project team. Strategic Initfatfves, the public meetfng facilitator, provided polling key pads (clickers) for attendees to anonymously answer questfons about their interactfon with Halcyon Road. After opinions were collected, Strategic Initfatfves opened the floor up for discussion where attendees shared their specific concerns and brought attentfon to problem areas along the corridor. The primary purpose was to listen to the community and gain an understanding of their current concerns and desires for the future of the corridor moving forward. Interactfve polling technology was utflized to collect informatfon regarding the charrette partfcipant’s preferences in real tfme. The partfcipants were able to prioritfze the importance of issues relatfng to Complete Streets along the corridor and then the results were immediately presented back to the group for a focused discussion. Comment cards were also utflized for partfcipants to voice their opinions and suggest potentfal improvements. People favored increasing safety for pedestrians by installing more traffic calming devices like warning lights, traffic signals, and stop signs. Several partfcipants specifically called for stop signs in all directfons at The Pike, and a road diet along Halcyon Road. One comment emphasized the need for better sidewalks connectfng Harloe Elementary School to housing in Zone 3. Comments around congestfon relief on Halcyon Road focused on stacking lanes on Grand Avenue, eliminatfng parking between Sandalwood Avenue and Farroll Avenue, and installing additfonal access points to Arroyo Grande High School to avoid Halcyon Road altogether. Partfcipants were also concerned with aggressive drivers running red lights and not yielding at crosswalks. Charrettes 1 & 2 (September 14 and 15, 2016) In order to gauge the community's desire for changes to Halcyon Road and determine what issues or areas are most important to the community and stakeholders, two community charrettes were held at Harloe Elementary School in the Fall of 2016. Forty-one people signed in on the September 14th charrette and 25 people signed in on the 15th. Citizen going over the questionnaire at one of the pop-up events Residents in attendance at one of the Community Charrettes Page 157 of 354 Page 21 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Complete Streets Plan Charrettes 3 & 4 (April 12 and 13, 2017) Once proposed changes and alternatfve designs were developed, two additfonal community charrettes at Harloe Elementary School were hosted in the spring of 2017. Twenty three people signed in on the September 12th charrette and twenty two people signed in on the 13th. The interactfve votfng system showed that roughly half of the partfcipants had attended the previous meetfngs. Overall, there was support for many of the proposed changes, with roughly 50-60% supportfng the changes and another 10-20% remaining neutral. There was near unanimous support for safety improvements to The Pike - and a clear desire for these improvements to move forward quickly regardless of the rest of the project. There was also frustratfon regarding the confusion caused by the transitfon from two southbound lanes to one lane south of Fair Oaks Avenue. Many partfcipants expressed support for removing parking between El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue for contfnuity. When asked if individuals supported a roundabout or a traffic signal at Fair Oaks Avenue, 11 of the 16 respondents supported the roundabout. Additfonally, a storyboard was utflized in order to tally which design elements would be most favored. Attendees were given three stfckers and were asked to place them next to their preferred examples of typical Complete Streets engineering treatments on a “What is a Complete Street” board. The stfckers were used to show their support for one or more treatments they would like to see along Halcyon Road. Overall, the most preferred were high visibility crosswalks (12 dots) and on-street separated bikeways (11 dots). The storyboard used to show the preferred treatments Polling results for Community Charrettes 1 & 2 Residents providing feedback at one of the pop-up events Residents provided comments with sticky notes on the large aerial of the proposed improvements Strong support for Roundabouts 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Category of Greatest Concern (Select Top Three) Polling Results -Charrettes 1 & 2 Combined Context Zone 1 Context Zone 2 Context Zone 3 Context Zone 4 69% 25% 6% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Alt 1 - Road Diet / Roundabout Alt 2 - Signalized Intersection Other Which Alternative do You Prefer? Charrette #3 -April 12, 2017 Based on the survey conducted, safety was the number one concern for attendees and most attendees (53%) lived or worked in Context Zone 3. Page 158 of 354 Page 22 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Complete Streets Plan Social Media and Online Engagement A project specific website was created for postfng project informatfon and allowing the public to provide further input in additfon to the pop-up outreach and community charrettes. The website provided informatfon on the project and Complete Streets in general, proposed plans for the Context Zones and simulatfon videos, past public workshop presentatfons, related links to local and regional planning and policy documents, community meetfng informatfon and flyers, and links to the online survey and interactfve map. Online Survey A five-page, 59-questfon online survey was posted in both English and Spanish in order to better understand the key issues that are discouraging people from walking and bicycling, and improvements that would encourage greater use of existfng or new multfmodal facilitfes. Seventeen people completed the survey, and of those, 15 live less than one mile from Halcyon Road. Overall respondents felt it is important or very important to improve bicycling/walking conditfons along Halcyon Road and were in favor or building more sidewalk and traffic calming/crosswalk measures. Online Survey Results for Bicycle Improvements Online Survey Results for Walking Improvements New or improved sidewalks Traffic calming (slower speeds) Benches Lightfng Landscaping (e.g., street trees, planted areas) Improved crosswalk facilitfes Access improvements for people with limited mobility (ADA compliance) New or improved sidewalks Traffic calming (slower speeds) Benches Lightfng Landscaping (e.g., street trees, planted areas) Improved crosswalk facilitfes Access improvements for people with limited mobility (ADA compliance) Other Page 159 of 354 Page 23 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Complete Streets Plan Online Interactive Map An interactfve map was also provided to post comments at specific locatfons as another method utflized for public outreach and to view others’ comments. The map appeared to have attracted a more technical crowd, who provided detailed design recommendatfons. Of the few comments posted on the website’s interactfve map, users’ comments called for:  Removing on-street parking in Context Zones 1, 2 and 3,  Improving intersectfon efficiency at Halcyon Road/ East Grand Avenue,  Improving intersectfon efficiency at Halcyon Road/ Fair Oaks Avenue,  Providing bike lanes,  Providing a two-way center left-turn lane,  Concern for congestfon and safety with the proposed roundabout at Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue. Social Media The Alta Planning & Design team collaborated with City staff to develop an effectfve social media campaign to reach a broad audience. Alta Planning & Design created Facebook and Twitter accounts (English and Spanish language posts) to educate, promote, and document the project’s process for stakeholders and community members. E-Mail Updates Alta Planning & Design maintained a mailing list of people interested in the project via sign-up forms at meetfngs and events. E-mails were also provided in English and Spanish languages and sent to promote upcoming opportunitfes for community engagement including public workshops. The City has provided an Online Interactive Map for the project Page 160 of 354 Page 24 3. COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Complete Streets Plan 2023 Outreach: Stakeholder & Neighborhood Group Meetings [PLACEHOLDER PAGE FOR ADDING CONTENT RELATED TO NEW NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP & STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH—2023. Stakeholder and Neighborhood Group Outreach is antfcipated to begin in March 2023 Page 161 of 354 Page 25 4. COMPLETE STREETS ELEMENTS Complete Streets Plan 4. COMPLETE STREETS ELEMENTS A Complete Street is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the street’s functfon and context. Every Complete Street looks different, according to its context, community preferences, the types of road users, and their needs. These streetscape components can be used to unify the Halcyon Road corridor, as well as distfnguish the different Context Zones. The proposed improvements to Halcyon Road include some elements of Complete Streets, which were selected based on feedback from the public and stakeholders, and given the context and constraints of the project area. For many projects across the United States, transportatfon engineers prioritfzed the fast movement of motor vehicles over the safety of neighbors and users of the road. Complete streets work to create streets that contfnue to efficiently convey vehicular traffic, but are also welcoming and pleasant for everyone and, most importantly, safe for everyone. Like any large-scale project, the proposed designs of Halcyon Road are made of a cumulatfve impact of smaller elements. These elements are founded on local and natfonal guidelines and apply standard traffic engineering tools and designs. Key street features recommended in these guidelines are described below. For more specific details about the tools, facilitfes and design elements referred within, refer to Caltrans Complete Streets Resources and Complete Streets Elements Toolbox (Version 2.0), the 2012 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, the 2004 AASHTO Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Second Edition, the NACTO Urban Street Design Guide, and the NACTO Urban Street Stormwater Guide. Types of Complete Streets Elements The following are types of street treatments and streetscape components that have become defining elements of Complete Streets. Planted Medians, Landscaping, & Street Trees can reduce head-on and turning collisions and provide refuge for pedestrian crossings, all while beautffying the area (pictured on the left). Street trees and medians also work to visually narrow the roadway and calm traffic. Sidewalk plantfngs can provide shade and a pleasant street experience for people walking and create a buffer between pedestrians and vehicle traffic (pictured below). Landscaping elements can provide for stormwater management opportunitfes, including treatment and infiltratfon to reduce runoff and flooding. Drought tolerant plants can be used to help conserve water and reduce irrigatfon requirements. Landscape Buffer Page 162 of 354 Page 26 4. COMPLETE STREET ELEMENTS Complete Streets Plan Curb Extensions and Median Refuge Areas improve visibility for pedestrians crossing and reduce pedestrian crossing distances. Curb Extensions also reduce vehicle speeds by reducing turning radius, which increase the chance of survival for a pedestrian in the event of a collision. High Visibility Crosswalks include additfonal paint, often in a zebra stripe pattern, that can enhance a motorist’s awareness of a crosswalk. Near schools, crosswalks are painted yellow for additfonal visibility, and in accordance with the MUTCD. In- roadway lightfng can further enhance crosswalk visibility. Leading Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) give pedestrians the opportunity to enter the crosswalk at an intersectfon 3-7 seconds before vehicles are given a green indicatfon. Pedestrians can better establish their presence in the crosswalk before vehicles have priority to turn right or left. LPIs increase the likelihood of motorists yielding to pedestrians, enhance safety by increasing visibility of crossing pedestrians, and reduce conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. Flashing Crossing Beacons like the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) enhance the visibility of crosswalks marked by just paint. Flashing lights and additfonal signage alert motorists to the presence of crosswalks and pedestrian traffic. These are used for unsignalized or mid-block crossings. They can be actfvated by pedestrians manually by a push button or passively by a pedestrian detectfon system. Flashing School Zone Signs enhance the visibility of school zones by adding flashing beacons to the speed limit signs. Flashing lights alert motorists to the presence of the school zone and schoolchildren. Curb Extensions Pedestrian Median Refuge Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI) Flashing Crossing Beacons High Visibility Crosswalk School Zone Speed Limit Sign with Flashing Beacons Page 163 of 354 Page 27 4. COMPLETE STREETS ELEMENTS Complete Streets Plan Shared-Use/Multi-Use Paths (Class I Bikeway) provide exclusive right-of- way for bicyclists and pedestrians outside of the roadway, and with cross flows by motor traffic minimized. Class I facilitfes provide for both recreatfonal and commutfng opportunitfes. In this Plan, a 10-foot wide Class I facility is proposed at the roundabout at Halcyon Road at Fair Oaks Avenue and connects to the adjacent on-street facilitfes. On-Street Separated or Protected Bikeways (Class IV) provide full physical separatfon between bicyclists and motor vehicles, but are part of the roadway network. Class IV bicycle facilitfes can also be two-way Cycle Tracks. On-Street Separated Bikeways, or Protected Bike Lanes, are increasingly common across California and provide additfonal protectfon and space via a raised median or curb, or a painted buffer with bollards, planters, signs or other physical protectfon or barrier. Bike Lanes (Class II) provide a designated space for bicyclists to ride, helping to define where each mode of traffic can travel easily. Bike lanes can be installed along a curb or between parked cars and traffic. Bike lanes may be distfnguished using color, lane markings, signage, and intersectfon treatments. Bike lanes should be 5 feet wide, at a minimum with gutter (refer to MUTCD Figure 9C-102(CA) for further guidance). Buffered Bike Lanes are conventfonal bike lanes paired with a designed buffer space separatfng the bike lane from the vehicular lane and/or parking lane. The buffer area should be marked with diagonal or chevron hatching if 4 feet or wider. The buffer shall be a minimum of 18 inches (MUTCD Figure 9C-104(CA)). 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 positfoning 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. Due to Halcyon Road’s posted speed limits and heavy vehicle volumes, this feature is only included as an optfon to share the roadway when navigatfng the roundabout, and approaching E. Grand Avenue southbound where the roadway width is constrained. Green Colored Pavement for Bikeways may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle lane through an intersectfon or transitfon trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane markings. Buffered Bike Lane Bike Lane Shared Lane Marking Protected Bikeway Shared-Use Path Green Colored Pavement for Bike Lane in Merge Area Page 164 of 354 Page 28 4. COMPLETE STREET ELEMENTS Complete Streets Plan The contrastfng color makes the bike lane more conspicuous to all travelers, increasing awareness that bicyclists may be present. Green colored pavement is proposed in this Plan in the Bike Box, Bike Lanes approaching signalized intersectfons, and in conflict areas such as where traffic crosses the Bike Lane to enter a right turn lane, and across commercial driveways such as the Arroyo Grande Hospital. The pattern of the green colored pavement may be dotted/dashed in a manner that matches the pattern of the dotted lines per MUTCD. Protected Intersections reduce turning conflicts between drivers and bicyclists by providing clear and protected paths for each user. These are relatfvely new to the United States and have been shown to reduce collisions. In conjunctfon with separated bikeways, the design provides corner islands that keep cyclists to the right and adjacent to the crosswalk, and also facilitates left turns. A similar, less intensive version can include Bike Boxes. Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the crosswalk at signalized intersectfons. 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 utflized to facilitate left turn positfoning and gives priority to cyclists. Road Diets reduce the number of vehicular lanes; the most typical type of road diet converts street with four-lanes to two-lanes with center turn lane and bike lanes. Separatfng the left-turning vehicles from through traffic can reduce the chance of both rear end and left turning collisions. The extra space can also be used for planted medians, pedestrian refuges, or curb extensions. Roundabouts have been proven to reduce collisions, as well as the severity of collisions. Roundabouts also provide safer, two-stage crossings for pedestrians. Roundabouts have been proven to allow for a greater capacity of vehicle traffic, improving traffic flow without widening roadways. Trucks are also accommodated through the design and implementatfon of the truck apron. Speeding through the intersectfon is controlled throughout the design. Roundabouts improve safety overall. Bike Ramps at Roundabouts provide entry and exit between the Bike Lanes on the roadways and the Class I path off-street. The design of the bike ramps are not subject to ADA requirements, but are designed per the guidelines outlined in NCHRP Report 672: Roundabouts an Informational Guide. The Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan proposes to utflize many of these standard elements of Complete Streets to create a street that will help to improve the safety, convenience, and beauty of Arroyo Grande, while maintaining the character and nature of the public realm. While it may be possible to implement some of these elements in an ad hoc manner, the cumulatfve improvements of the entfre proposal will have the largest impact on the area and stakeholders. Protected Intersection Road Diet Modern Roundabout Bike Ramp to Shared-Use Path Bike Box in City of San Luis Obispo Page 165 of 354 Page 29 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS This sectfon discusses the proposed multfmodal Plan for each Context Zone, addressing the circulatfon needs for pedestrians, bicycles, transit users, and automobiles. While not every street can be designed to serve all users equally, there are opportunitfes to enhance service for all users while maintaining its principal transportatfon functfon. The Complete Street Plan for Halcyon Road incorporates community values and retains the distfnctfve transitfons between the adjacent land uses while ensuring safety and mobility for all users. Throughout the Halcyon Road corridor, pedestrian and bicycle facility conditfons are inadequate at several locatfons with lack of connectfvity between residentfal, retail, recreatfonal, school, and employment areas, as well as access to transit services. Implementatfon of various Complete Streets improvements along Halcyon Road corridor were initfally compared to find the best possible outcome for all modes of travel based on the project goals and current policies. Overall, this Complete Street Plan includes buffered bike lanes where achievable, a road diet with a center turn lane south of East Grand Avenue, improved pedestrian crossings and signage, including some curb extensions, and installing sidewalks where there are gaps in connectfvity. Design concepts, alignments, and improvements presented in this Plan should be considered conceptual in nature and may be adjusted during future processes to respond to additfonal site- specific informatfon, community concerns, or environmental factors. Multfple alternatfves were evaluated for the intersectfon of Fair Oaks Avenue at Halcyon Road. Ultfmately, two alternatfves for the intersectfon of Halcyon Road at Fair Oaks Avenue were identffied, as well as an optfon for implementatfon of a Class IV protected bikeway between East Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue (Context Zone 2), which are the only variatfons between the alternatfves of the entfre corridor. The alternatfves analyzed have the same vehicular lane geometrics at all intersectfons, except at the intersectfon of Fair Oaks Avenue and Halcyon Road. The operatfonal analysis of the two alternatfves for the Fair Oaks Avenue intersectfon improvements are detailed in this Chapter. Alternative 1 proposes improving the traffic signal at Fair Oaks Avenue with enhanced bicycle facilitfes, improved signal tfmings, and to limit the impact on existfng rights-of-way via contfnuatfon of the proposed road diet and single through lanes. Alternatfve 1 is shown in Figure 13. Alternative 2 proposes installing a single-lane compact roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue/ Halcyon Road, presented in Figure 14. This Chapter first presents and describes in detail the proposed multfmodal improvements for each Context Zone, outside of the two selected alternatfves for the Fair Oaks Avenue intersectfon. Then, a comparatfve analysis of the two alternatfves is presented. The Plan also supports sustainable growth and livability, while preserving the community values. Roundabout Concept at Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue Halcyon Road at Fair Oaks Avenue  Alternative 1: Traffic Signal with Road Diet  Alternative 2: Single-lane Compact Roundabout Page 166 of 354 Page 30 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Context Zone 1: Urban (El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue) Context Zone 1 is predominantly developed with urban uses oriented toward El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue; two arterial streets which provide critfcal access to important commercial and retail areas of the City, including downtown. The proposed typical roadway cross-sectfons for this segment generally include one travel lane in each directfon and Class II Buffered Bike Lanes. On-street parking (1-hour) will only be available in front of the Arroyo Grande Police Department. Bicycle Facilities Class II Buffered Bike Lanes are proposed for both sides of North Halcyon Road throughout the majority of Context Zone 1, apart from areas near the El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue intersectfons, where space is limited. At the intersectfon of North Halcyon Road and El Camino Real, the northbound approach will utflize a Bike Box to better accommodate left turning bicycle traffic and provide safe and adequate visibility of cyclists to motorists. The Bike Box will provide priority to cyclists and connectfvity to the Class III Bike Route on El Camino Real. Green pavement treatment will also be provided for the conflict zone of left-turning bicycle traffic and motorists making a right at El Camino Real, (i.e., the transitfon where there is a dedicated right-turn lane). This color treatment will make bicyclists more visible and provide a clearly defined route for bicycles to access the Bike Box. Just north of the intersectfon of N. Halcyon Road and East Grand Avenue, the southbound approach lane configuratfons are proposed to be modified with a left turn pocket and a shared through and right turn lane in order to accommodate the Bike Lane. This improved configuratfon also addresses the existfng issue with the lane alignments through the intersectfon and includes traffic signal tfming improvements. Pedestrian Facilities Existfng sidewalk gaps will be filled to provide complete sidewalk infrastructure in the northbound directfon. A curb ramp is also proposed at the northeast corner of Bennett Avenue and Halcyon Road. Figure 7 presents closer views of each sectfon of the context zone. Figure 8 on the following page presents the proposed multfmodal improvements for the entfre Context Zone 1 and the proposed cross-sectfons. Figure 7 - Recommended Context Zone 1: Sections 1—3 Plan Context Zone 1 Section 1 Context Zone 1 Section 2 Context Zone 1 Section 3 Page 167 of 354 Page 31 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 8 - Context Zone 1: Recommended Complete Streets Plan & Cross-Sections Page 168 of 354 Page 32 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Context Zone 2: Urban Transition (East Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue) Context Zone 2 is a mix of multf-family, single-family, medical professional buildings, and the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. There are generally three proposed typical roadway cross-sectfons for this segment:  A three-lane sectfon with two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and buffered Class II Bike Lanes with on-street parking southbound between Grand Avenue and Dodson Way. In this sectfon, the southbound bike lane has a buffer area on both sides between the parking for the door zone, and between the travel lane.  A brief sectfon south of Dodson Way has a three-lane segment with a Bike Lane northbound, and a Class IV parking-protected Bike Lane southbound. Four on- street parking spaces are provided southbound in front of the Arroyo Grande Optometry building at Dodson Way.  The third typical cross-sectfon is between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Boulevard. This is also a three-lane segment with two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and Class II Buffered Bike Lanes northbound and southbound where achievable. Figures 9A, 9B, and 9C present closer views of each sectfon of the context zone. Figure 9 on the following page presents the proposed multfmodal improvements for Context Zone 2 and the proposed cross-sectfons. Bicycle Facilities Class II Buffered Bike Lanes are proposed for the majority of both sides of Halcyon Road from Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue, with two small portfons of protected bike lane. Where a buffered bike lane is not achievable, a striped Bike Lane is proposed without the striped buffer. A Class IV Separated Bikeway is provided from Dodson Way to approximately 130’ feet south, in between the sidewalk and the parking zone, via a separated landscaped median. The transitfon to this area through the intersectfon at Dodson Way is depicted in Figure 9B. Additfonally, a Class IV Separated Bikeway is provided northbound, with a separated landscaped median, from the main hospital driveway to approximately 120’ north to avoid any conflicts with bicyclists and right-turning vehicular traffic and provide a safe area for bicyclists between the two driveways. At the intersectfon of Halcyon Road/Grand Avenue, the conflict zone between northbound bicycle traffic and right turning motorists should be separated and treated with green pavement markings. Green pavement markings should also be placed in the Bike Lane at all conflict zones and driveways. Buffered Bike Lanes and Curb Extensions at Halcyon Road and Dodson Way Pedestrian Facilities The existfng marked pedestrian crossing located at Halcyon Road/Dodson Way will remain, but with the additfon of a marked crossing on the north side of the intersectfon. Curb extensions are proposed at all corners of the Dodson Way intersectfon. The curb extension in the southwest corner of Dodson Way will accommodate pedestrian access and initfate the Class IV Separated Bikeway. Figure 9A - Recommended Context Zone 2: Section 1 Plan Page 169 of 354 Page 33 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 9 - Context Zone 2: Recommended Complete Streets Plan & Cross-Sections Context Zone 2 Section 2 Context Zone 2 Section 3 Figure 9C - Recommended Context Zone 2: Section 3 Plan Figure 9B - Recommended Context Zone 2: Section 2 Plan Page 170 of 354 Page 34 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 10A - Recommended Context Zone 3: Section 1 Plan Figure 10B - Recommended Context Zone 3: Section 2 Plan Context Zone 3: Neighborhood (Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike) Context Zone 3 serves primarily single-Family residentfal areas and provides access to Harloe Elementary School. The proposed typical cross-sectfon for this segment is generally three lanes, with two travel lanes, a center turn lane, and Class II Buffered Bike lanes where achievable. On-street parking is proposed along Halcyon Road northbound between Cameron Court and 130’ north of Sandalwood Avenue. Additfonally, the Plan proposes to restrict left turns out of Farroll Avenue due to the severe delays currently experienced by turning motorists, multfple turning conflicts, and safety concerns with vehicles and schoolchildren at this intersectfon. Figure 10A and 10B to the right present closer views of each sectfon of the context zone. Figure 11 on the next page presents the proposed multfmodal improvements for the entfrety of Context Zone 3 and the proposed cross-sectfons. Bicycle Facilities Class II Bike Lanes are proposed southbound, without a striped buffer, between Olive Street and Sandalwood Avenue. Class II Buffered Bike Lanes are proposed for both sides of Halcyon Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Olive Street, and between Sandalwood Avenue and The Pike. Northbound, a Class IV Separated Bikeway via a landscaped median, is proposed from Farroll Avenue to the first driveway downstream, approximately 130 feet. For the intersectfons of Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue and Halcyon Road/The Pike, the conflict zones between southbound bicycle traffic and right turning motorists will be treated with green pavement markings, (i.e., the transitfon where there is a dedicated right-turn lane, and through the intersectfon). This color treatment will make bicyclists more visible and provide a clearly defined route. Pedestrian Facilities There are 3 uncontrolled pedestrian crossings identffied in this sectfon, at Farroll Avenue (new), Sandalwood Avenue, and Sycamore Avenue (new). These improved pedestrian crossings will have high visibility markings and a flashing beacon (RRFB) is proposed at the crossing at Sandalwood Avenue. There is an existfng RRFB at Sandalwood Avenue that has recently been improved, as it is the first uncontrolled crossing north of The Pike. Two new two-stage crossings with RRFBs are proposed with a refuge island in the center lane: one on the north side of Sycamore Drive, and the second on the north side of Farroll Avenue. Restrictfng the left turns out of Farroll Avenue allows for this opportunity to provide a safer pedestrian crossing at this intersectfon. At Farroll Avenue, the northbound left turns will stfll be allowed in to access Page 171 of 354 Page 35 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 11 - Context Zone 3: Recommended Complete Streets Plan & Cross-Sections Farroll Avenue, and the southbound right turn lane will also remain. A new marked crosswalk has recently been installed for crossing Sandalwood Avenue. Several curb extensions are proposed at various intersectfons. New curb ramps are also proposed at various corners where crossing or sidewalk improvements are proposed. Improvements to the intersectfon of Halcyon Road at The Pike include additfonal pedestrian crossings and curb ramps. A contfnuous 6-foot wide sidewalk is proposed on the east side of Halcyon Road from The Pike to Willow Lane, and a 7-foot wide sidewalk is proposed from Willow Lane to Cameron Court. For the sidewalk to be implemented north of The Pike, a retaining wall will be required. As part of the 2022 Pedestrian Crossing Improvements several ADA ramps and sidewalk gap closures were constructed along the east side of Halcyon approximately 140' north of Willow Lane to Virginia Dr. Page 172 of 354 Page 36 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Table 2: On-Street Parking Segment Existing Proposed Road Diet Spaces Lost SB NB SB NB SB NB Start End Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces Spaces El Camino Real Faeh 9 5 0 0 9 5 Faeh Bennett 10 9 0 0 10 9 Bennett Grand Avenue 16 13 0 2 16 11 Subtotal Context Zone 1 35 27 0 2 35 25 Grand Avenue Park 6 2 0 0 6 2 Park Dodson 21 14 21 0 0 14 Dodson Fair Oaks 8 0 4 0 4 0 Subtotal Context Zone 2 35 16 25 0 10 16 Fair Oaks Farroll 0 7 0 0 0 7 Farroll Sandalwood 5 4 1 4 4 0 Sandalwood Willow 10 7 0 7 10 0 Willow Virginia 6 0 0 0 6 0 Virginia The Pike 7 2 0 0 7 2 Subtotal Context Zone 3 28 20 1 11 27 9 Total 98 63 26 13 72 50 161 Existing 39 Retained 122 Lost Grand Total Notes: EB = Eastbound, WB = Westbound, NB = Northbound, SB = Southbound Parking As described for each Context Zone, a limited number of on-street parking will remain available, where feasible. Table 14 presents the number of standard on-street parking spaces available under the proposed plan for each directfon of travel and each Context Zone, compared to the existfng available spaces and the total amount of spaces being removed. As shown in Table 2, currently there are an estfmated 161 available parking spaces, with the majority in Context Zone 1. The plan proposes to keep the one-hour parking zone in front of the police statfon in Context Zone 1. The Plan also proposes to keep 21 spaces on Halcyon Road southbound between Park Way and Dodson Way, and another four spaces south of Dodson Way in Context Zone 2 for the local adjacent businesses. The Plan proposes to provide 11 parking spaces northbound and 1 space southbound between Farroll Avenue and Willow Lane south of the school in Context Zone 3. Currently, there are no on-street parking spaces designated in Context Zone 4 and the plan does not propose any new spaces for this segment. Overall, 39 on-street parking spaces (24%) are proposed to be retained, with the majority located in Context Zone 2. This could potentfally present impacts to the adjacent residentfal streets, and a parking utflizatfon survey should be conducted by the City for each Context Zone along the Halcyon Road corridor to further determine any impact. On-street parking utflizatfon throughout the day and at peak tfmes can be analyzed to determine when and where on-street parking is being used and the relatfonship to the adjacent land uses. Page 173 of 354 Page 37 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Future Traffic Operations Analysis & Alternatives Comparison With future development in Arroyo Grande, the surrounding Five-Citfes area, and regional growth on SR 1 and US 101, traffic volumes are projected to increase on Halcyon Road. For planning purposes, traffic forecasts and operatfons were evaluated approximately 20 years out. The traffic is a mix of local, regional, and interregional users throughout the Halcyon Road corridor. Forecast Year 2040 Traffic Volume Projections Caltrans and other agencies typically require 20 years or more of design life span for improvements to their transportatfon facilitfes. Recognizing these concerns, Year 2040 was determined to be the cumulatfve or long- term future conditfons. Year 2040 is also consistent with the SLOCOG Regional Transportatfon Plan (RTP), the Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulatfon Element, and the County’s General Plan. The SLOCOG regional travel demand model was utflized in developing the Year 2040 forecast traffic volumes for this analysis, given that the study area serves regional traffic in additfon to local traffic. The model was modified to consider any planned or approved developments within the City that were not already considered in the model. Projected ADT volumes on Halcyon Road under Year 2040 conditfons are estfmated at 10,000 - 16,000 vehicles per day along the corridor. The proposed Road Diet along Halcyon Road is projected to operate at LOS C/D, which is under the City’s LOS threshold and within the capacity of the roadway as a two-lane arterial with a center turn lane (south of East Grand Avenue). As new roadway connectfons are planned and constructed in the southeastern area of the City, traffic patterns on Halcyon Road may shift. Under existfng lane geometrics and control, some of the study intersectfons are projected to operate acceptably; however, Halcyon Road at Fair Oaks Avenue is projected to worsen to LOS E during the AM peak hour, and Farroll Avenue is projected to worsen to LOS F conditfons during both AM and PM peak hours. Fair Oaks Avenue Intersection Alternatives This Plan presents conceptual alternatfves that would need to be further refined for ultfmate design of a preferred concept. The preliminary concepts in this Plan and alternatfves analysis are based on the long-term traffic projectfons. Another alternatfve to improve the signalized intersectfon with added lanes to accommodate future traffic operatfons was considered but ultfmately deemed infeasible due to the impacts to adjacent propertfes. Additfonally, a modern roundabout with a larger central island and larger inscribed circle diameter was considered, however the modern roundabout footprint would encroach into the property in the southeast corner. Therefore, a smaller, compact roundabout concept with a mountable center island was developed as the proposed Alternatfve 2. Alternative 1: Traffic Signal Upgrade with Road Diet Alternatfve 1 maximizes the lane usage of the intersectfon with the proposed road diet while providing enhanced bicycle and pedestrian facilitfes and minimizing impacts to existfng rights-of-way. The proposed improvements to the intersectfon include installing green-colored Class II Bike Lanes on all approaches and delineatfng the bike lane through the intersectfon with green paint markings. Where right turn lanes are proposed, the Bike Lane would be located to the left of the right turn lane. This type of improvement reduces the risk of collisions between right-turning vehicles and bicyclists. All approaches propose Bike Boxes behind the crosswalks, in front of where vehicles would stop, which Buffered Bike Lanes and Curb Extensions at Halcyon Road and Dodson Way (Both Alternatives) Page 174 of 354 Page 38 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to motorists by getting ahead of the queue during the red signal phase. Additfonally, two-stage left-turn boxes for bicycles are proposed on all approaches to facilitate left turns for bicyclists when they have the green indicatfon. Both types of bicycle boxes provide a designated space for turning cyclists. Cyclists would use either the bike box (when the light is red) or the two- stage bicycle turn box (when the light is green) to safely turn left and reduce conflicts with vehicles. In additfon, this alternatfve proposes to improve the signal tfmings to improve vehicle throughput and efficiency to reduce traffic delays. The signal tfmings will be upgraded to have a Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), which allows pedestrians to enter the crosswalk before vehicles have the green indicatfon. Upgrading the traffic signal will require new signal poles, heads, and mast arms. This alternatfve prioritfzes bicycle and pedestrian safety and access through the intersectfon, and minimizes right-of-way acquisitfon needs. As such, a single through lane on each approach is proposed, with turn lanes where feasible, that will result in additfonal delays and queues during peak tfmes (as presented subsequently). Pedestrian crossing distances across vehicular lanes will also be reduced with Alternatfve 1 compared to existfng conditfons, which has a single through lane in each directfon, turn lanes on the northbound, southbound, and westbound approaches, and buffered bike lanes on all of the receiving lanes. Alternatfve 1 proposes to have the left turn lanes set back to accommodate truck turning radii for large trucks making left turns. of the corridor, and improve intersectfon efficiency, without the need for multfple lanes on each approach. The roundabout will provide a contfnuous flow of traffic, which will in turn discourage cut-through traffic on Todd and Olive Streets. The crosswalks at Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue would be improved with the Roundabout to become two-stage crossings by allowing pedestrians to focus on one traffic stream at a tfme while crossing and taking refuge in the splitter islands of the roundabout, as opposed to crossing the entfre road at once as presented in the signal alternatfve. Pedestrian crossings at roundabouts can also have signage with rectangular rapid flashing beacons. The crosswalks are set back from the vehicle yield line at the intersectfon so that pedestrians have a safe space to cross and vehicles have space to yield before entering the roundabout. The proposed roundabout will also provide a 10-foot wide multf-use path for both pedestrians and bicyclists to safely navigate around the perimeter of the roundabout. The multf-use path is separated from the roadway by a landscaped buffer. The proposed roundabout at Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue will provide bike ramps at all approaches leading to the multf-use path, for cyclists to easily maneuver their way to the shared-use path. For more confident cyclists who wish to remain on the road, shared lane markings are present through the roundabout. The implementatfon of both bike ramps and shared lane markings will accommodate all levels of cyclists. The roundabout is designed to accommodate the turning radii of large vehicles. Large trucks, including emergency vehicles like fire trucks, will be Two-stage turn queue boxes offer bicyclists a safe way make left turns at multi-lane signalized intersections from a right side bike lane or cycle track. They improve bicyclist ability to safely and comfortably make left turns, provide a formal queuing space for bicyclists making a two -stage turn, and reduce turning conflicts between bicyclists and motor vehicles. (Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2nd Ed., NACTO) Two-stage Bicycle Turn Box Bicycle Box However, this alternatfve does not propose to modify the corners to accommodate turning radii of large trucks, and proposes to retain the curb lines as they are today. The only exceptfon is the northeast corner, by the hospital, where Alternatfve 1 proposes to widen the approach to accommodate a Class II Bike Lane and a right turn lane. The northeast corner is the only corner that would require right-of-way acquisitfon, for Alternatfve 1. Figure 13 presents the layout concept of Alternatfve 1. Alternative 2: Compact Roundabout Alternatfve 2 would replace the existfng traffic signal at Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue with a modern compact roundabout with single entry and exit lanes, except for the westbound approach which proposes a right turn lane and a shared thru/left lane. There would be a single circulatfng lane around the roundabout. Motorists at the roundabout would be required to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians and bicyclists. The single-lane roundabout would provide adequate capacity for the diverse travel needs Pedestrian Crossings at Roundabouts Page 175 of 354 Page 39 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan able to easily navigate the roundabout. The roundabout’s center island will have be fully mountable that large trucks can comfortably use when navigatfng through the roundabout. The truck apron is designed for large vehicles to use, and would not be comfortable for passenger vehicles, as it is slightly raised from the pavement. The roundabout will allow all vehicle types to easily perform turns and U-turn maneuvers. While the northeast and southwest corners of the roundabout would require more right-of -way acquisitfon needs than the signalized intersectfon (Alternatfve 1), the signal design would result in long traffic delays, and the roundabout would provide acceptable traffic operatfons with contfnuous traffic flow. The roundabout alternatfve would not encroach into any existfng building structures (i.e., residences), and most of the acquisitfon needs being to the northeast corner where the hospital is. Figure 14 presents the layout concept of Alternatfve 2. Roundabouts can have a traffic calming effect because they reduce vehicle speeds through and approaching the intersectfon as a result of the geometric design. Roundabouts may be an optfmal choice for intersectfon control in the vicinity of schools because of the reduced speeds and the significantly reduced number of conflict points (as shown in the below image) as compared to a traffic signal. Roundabouts also provide substantfal cost savings to society due to the reductfon in crashes, partfcularly fatal and injury crashes. A four-leg single-lane roundabout has 75% fewer vehicle conflict points and no crossing conflict points compared to a conventional intersection. (NCHRP Report 672 Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, 2nd Ed. 2010.) Figure 12 above presents the potentfal right-of-way impacts at the intersectfon and along Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue for Alternatfve 2. As shown, the proposed roundabout would encroach into the right-of-way at the northeast and southwest corners of the intersectfon, and would not affect existfng building structures. The right of way dedicatfon required for the northwest corner was provided with the recordatfon of Tract Map 3101 in April 2022. The proposed concept would be further refined in its design in the future if selected. Figure 12 - Alternative 2 Potential Right of Way Impacts Traffic Signal Roundabout Number of Conflict Points by Control Type Page 176 of 354 Page 40 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 13 — Alternative 1 Lane Geometrics (Traffic Signal with Road Diet at Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue) Arroyo Grande Community Hospital FAIR OAKS Avenue Harloe Elementary School SOUTH HALCYON Road TODD Lane Page 177 of 354 Page 41 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 14 — Alternative 2 Lane Geometrics (Compact Roundabout at Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue) Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Harloe Elementary School Page 178 of 354 Page 42 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Traffic Operations Analysis Table 3 presents the forecasted daily traffic volumes along the roadway segments for each Context Zone for Alternatfve 1 with the traffic signal. Table 4 presents the forecasted daily traffic volumes along the roadway segments for each Context Zone for Alternatfve 2 with the roundabout. As shown, constructfon of the roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue would provide additfonal capacity for the two-lane roadway, and all segments are projected to operate at LOS C or better, which is an improvement compared to the traffic signal alternatfves. Tables 5, 6, 7 and 8 on the following page present projected intersectfon Level of Service (LOS) for vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle modes, under Forecast Year 2040 conditfons for both Alternatfves, based on HCM 6 methodologies. Overall, all intersectfons are projected to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better for Caltrans facilitfes (El Camino Real), and LOS D or better for roadway segments or intersectfons within City of Arroyo Grande. For Alternatfve 1, the proposed signal at Fair Oaks Avenue is projected to operate at LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. For Alternatfve 2, the proposed roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue is projected to operate at LOS B in the AM and PM peak hours . For the other two signalized intersectfons along Halcyon Road (El Camino Real and East Grand Avenue), pedestrian and bicycle LOS are projected to be at LOS C or better. Northbound and southbound Halcyon Road Bike LOS scores with the proposed Bike Lanes are at LOS A/B. Without the complete street improvements along Halcyon in place, the Bike LOS would be at LOS C/D. Although methodologies have not yet been developed to address the effect of all-way stop control or yield control on intersectfon performance from a pedestrian or bicycle perspectfve, it is reasoned that this type of control has negligible influence on pedestrian service at the unsignalized intersectfons. In additfon to the intersectfon operatfons in terms of LOS, queuing analysis was performed for the intersectfon of Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue for both alternatfves. Table 9 presents the comparison of the 95th percentfle queue lengths for the two alternatfves. Table 3 - Alternative 1: Forecast Year 2040 Roadway Segment Conditions with Traffic Signal Context Zone Segment on Halcyon Road No. of Lanes Target LOS ADT Classification Volume LOS 1 El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue 2 C 10,740 C 2-Lane Arterial (no left-turn lane) 2 E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue 2 C 16,130 D 2-Lane Arterial (with left-turn lane) 3 Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike 2 C 14,490 C 2-Lane Arterial (with left-turn lane) Table 4 - Alternative 2: Forecast Year 2040 Roadway Segment Conditions with Roundabout Segment on Halcyon Road No. of Lanes Target LOS ADT Classification Context Zone Volume LOS 1 El Camino Real to Bennett Avenue 2 C 10,740 C 2-Lane Arterial (no left-turn lane) 2 E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue 2 C 16,130 B 2-Lane Arterial with Roundabout 3 Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike 2 C 14,490 B 2-Lane Arterial with Roundabout Intx. # Intersection Control Type1 Target LOS2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 N. Halcyon Road & El Camino Real3 SIGNAL C 20.1 C 24.3 C 2 N. Halcyon Road & Bennett Avenue TWSC D 20.7 C 30.0 D 3 Halcyon Road & E. Grand Avenue SIGNAL D 19.7 B 23.7 C 4 S. Halcyon Road & Dodson Way TWSC D 20.7 C 19.8 C 5 S. Halcyon Road & Fair Oaks Avenue See Table 6 for Alternatives 6 S. Halcyon Road & Farroll Avenue TWSC D 10.9 B 10.9 B 7 S. Halcyon Road & Sycamore Drive TWSC D 11.0 B 14.1 B 8 S. Halcyon Road & The Pike AWSC D 31.4 D 13.7 B 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, Signal, RNDBT 3. Operations calculated using Synchro and HCM 2000 methodology for signalized intersections due to non-standaRoad NEMA phasing Table 5 - Forecast Year 2040 Intersection Conditions: Vehicular LOS Intx. # Intersection Control Type Target LOS1 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Delay LOS Delay LOS 5 S. Halcyon Road & Fair Oaks Avenue SIGNAL D 53.2 D 22.7 C 5 S. Halcyon Road & Fair Oaks Avenue RNDBT D 13.7 B 10.7 B Notes: 1. LOS = Delay based on average of all approaches for Signal and RNDBT. Operations calculated using Synchro HCM 6methodology for the traffic signal. Operations calculated using SIDRA standard methodology which considers geometric delays for the roundabout. Table 6 - Alternatives Analysis Forecast Year 2040 Intersection Conditions: Vehicular LOS Page 179 of 354 Page 43 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Table 8 - Forecast Year 2040 Intersection Conditions Bicycle LOS Table 7 - Forecast Year 2040 Intersection Conditions: Pedestrian LOS Intersection Approach AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Ped. Cross- walk Score LOS Ped. Cross- walk Score LOS N. Halcyon Road/El Camino Real EB NP1 - NP1 - WB 2.01 B 2.06 B NB 2.39 B 2.38 B SB NP1 - NP1 - Halcyon Road/E. Grand Avenue EB 2.79 C 2.84 C WB 3.01 C 2.88 C NB 2.69 B 2.69 B SB 2.29 B 2.31 B Notes: 1. NP = Pedestrian crossing not permitted. Intersection Approach AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Bicycle LOS Score LOS Bicycle LOS Score LOS N. Halcyon Road/El Camino Real EB 1.62 A 2.25 B WB 1.36 A 1.39 A NB 1.75 A 1.50 A SB NP1 - NP1 - Halcyon Road/E. Grand Avenue EB 2.96 C 3.19 C WB 2.85 C 2.77 C NB 2.75 B 2.28 B SB 1.91 A 2.19 B Notes: 1. NP = Pedestrian crossing not permitted. Table 9 - Forecast Year 2040 Conditions Queuing Analysis for Halcyon Road & Fair Oaks Avenue Alternatives As shown, Alternatfve 1 would have a 95th percentfle queue length of approximately 625 feet on the northbound through lane during the AM peak hour that would exceed or block turn lanes, and would extend back to Farroll Avenue. The 95th percentfle queues estfmated for Alternatfve 1 (traffic signal with road diet) are projected to exceed available storage lengths for most turn lanes, and have excessive queues during both the AM and PM peak hours. The queue on the westbound approach would potentfally effect access for the Arroyo Grande Hospital. Emergency vehicles will be able to contfnue to access the Arroyo Grande Hospital on both Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue via the center turn lane provided. However, “Keep Clear” pavement markings should be installed on westbound Fair Oaks Avenue at the full-access driveway nearest to the intersectfon to maintain ingress and egress of emergency vehicles. The roundabout (Alternatfve 2) presents queue lengths that are significantly lower than the Signal Alternatfve 1 on all approaches of the intersectfon. Intersection Available Storage #of Lanes AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Queue (ft)1 Queue (ft)1 Alternative 1: Traffic Signal with a Road Diet Eastbound Left 120 1 195 135 Eastbound Thru/Right 560 1 375 180 Westbound Left 150 1 255 230 Westbound Thru 900 1 355 190 Westbound Right 65 1 145 120 Northbound Left 200 1 125 50 Northbound Thru 650 2 625 215 Northbound Right 200 1 225 130 Southbound Left 150 1 240 155 Southbound Thru 950 1 220 280 Southbound Right 150 1 75 120 Intersection Available Storage #of Lanes AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Queue (ft)1 Queue (ft)1 Alternative 2: Single-lane Roundabout Eastbound Left/Thru/Right 570 1 180 140 Westbound Left/Thru 900 1 110 65 Westbound Right 200 1 75 20 Northbound Thru/Left/Right 650 1 385 90 Southbound Left/Thru/Right 560 1 135 235 1. 95th Percentfle Queue per Lane; outputs calculated using Sim-Traffic for Signals, and Sidra Page 180 of 354 Page 44 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Implementatfon of protected bikeways are generally low-cost by making use of existfng pavement and drainage and by using a parking lane as a barrier. More informatfon regarding design guidance and standards can be found in the Urban Bikeway Design Guide, Natfonal Associatfon of City Transportatfon Officials, 2nd Editfon, (NACTO 2014). Figure 15 on the next page presents the proposed layout of the Class IV Protected Bikeway optfon in Context Zone 2 with parking on southbound Halcyon Road, and without parking northbound. As shown, the protected bikeway would be 6 to 9.5 feet wide, have a 3- to 6-foot curb between the bikeway and the travel lane or parking lane, and would have intermittent breaks where driveways exist to allow vehicles access. The bikeway would be marked and signed accordingly, so that the bikeway and travel lanes are clearly assigned. The implementatfon of the protected bikeway could also use a painted buffer with flexible posts as well, if desired. Protected Bikeway Option Protected bikeways are also known as Class IV bikeways, Separated Bike Lanes, or Cycle Tracks. They are at street level and use a variety of methods for physical protectfon from passing traffic including combinatfons of horizontal separatfon (e.g., buffer distance) and vertfcal separatfon (e.g., curb, parking, flexible posts, or planters). The physical separatfon and barrier from traffic provides an area on the street exclusively for bicyclists to ride separated from moving traffic and eliminates the risk of over-taking vehicles or vehicles parking, stopping, or loading in the bike lane. Protected bikeways improve comfort and safety and make riding a bike a pleasant and practfcal way for many more people. A protected bikeway could be implemented along portfons of Halcyon Road, if desired. This Complete Street Plan identffies a protected bikeway as an Optfonal Alternatfve for Context Zone 2. Implementfng a protected bikeway along Halcyon Road would provide a more attractfve bicycle facility for bicyclist of all ages and abilitfes. Example of Class IV Protected Bikeway Example of Class IV Protected Bikeway with Parking Page 181 of 354 Page 45 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 15 – Class IV Protected Bikeway Option (with and without on-street parking) Page 182 of 354 Page 46 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Figure 16 - Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Comparison Note: with Traffic Signal at Fair Oaks Avenue Note: with Traffic Signal at Fair Oaks Avenue Bicycle LTS Analysis In additfon to the vehicular traffic operatfons analysis, the bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) was evaluated along the roadway and at unsignalized intersectfons. Alta Planning & Design performed a bicycle LTS analysis for the Halcyon Road corridor evaluatfng existfng conditfons, and two bicycle alternatfves that were being considered, with and without Buffered Bike Lanes. Alta’s detailed analysis is provided in Appendix E. The analysis demonstrates that Buffered Bike Lanes are preferred, but would not result in lower LTS where higher speeds exist without additfonal implementatfon of traffic calming measures or providing a physical separatfon for the bikeway. GHD has updated the analysis to evaluate the proposed alternatfves in this study. Figure 16 presents the Bicycle LTS analysis results for Existfng Conditfons, Alternatfve 1 (Traffic Signal with Road Diet), Alternatfve 2 (Roundabout), and the Class IV Optfon for Zone 2. LTS scores are shown for each zone along the roadway and at intersectfon crossings. Both alternatfves propose the installatfon of Buffered Bike Lanes throughout the corridor, and a ‘Road Diet’ in Context Zone 2 south to Farroll Avenue. While both alternatfves improve the comfort of bicyclists over the existfng conditfons, Alternatfve 2 provides the greatest benefit to people who walk and bike, both in terms of travel along and across Halcyon Road. The Class IV Protected Bikeway optfon in Zone 2 would provide a LTS 1 as it is separated from vehicular traffic with both a horizontal buffer and a vertfcal barrier. While the LTS analysis focuses on bicycle travel, improvements for bicyclists generally translate into improved conditfons for pedestrians, as well. This is partfcularly true for crossing conditfons, as improvements are measured in terms of reduced exposure to motor vehicle travel speed and the number of travel lanes crossed. Page 183 of 354 Page 47 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan average for costfng the value of tfme for automobiles and trucks was used. An average delay cost of $18.65/person/hour was used—a value escalated from the original value in the published data by Caltrans for Vehicle Operatfon Costs Parameters for 2016 (https://dot.ca.gov/programs/ transportatfonplanning/ economics-datamanagement/transportatfon- economics/vehicle-operatfon-cost-parameters). The rate was grown by 12% from the 2016 values, based on 2% per year, and was weighted based on heavy vehicle percentages. The delay reductfon benefit, therefore, includes the reductfon in delay in dollar amounts compared to No Build conditfons. Fuel Benefit To calculate the fuel cost for the alternatfves, the vehicle operatfng costs were quantffied. The fuel costs (vehicle operatfng costs) were computed using the delay for the AM and PM peak hour periods of all alternatfves. An average fuel price for regular unleaded automobile fuel of $4.09 was used based on the last year’s average price at the pump adjusted to rates. Environmental Benefit To calculate the environmental cost, the greenhouse gas emissions costs were quantffied for the project. The health cost of Carbon Monoxide (CO) in a rural/suburban California town is $84/ton. The health cost of Nitrogen Oxide is $15,568/ton. The methodology for using the environmental costs comes from the Caltrans Intersectfon Control Evaluatfon (ICE) guidelines. Construction Cost Based on the concept-level preliminary project costs estfmates, the total estfmated project constructfon costs (including design, environmental, right of way, constructfon, and constructfon management costs) for each alternatfve are presented in the Life Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis results tables below. Other Costs Operatfon and maintenance costs are other important components of the cost associated within the various alternatfves. The operatfon and maintenance costs for a traffic signal include providing power service to the signal and street lightfng ($750/year), signal retfming ($1,000/year), and signal maintenance for power outages/new detector loops/etc. ($1,500/year). The roundabout alternatfve would have lower operatfon and maintenance costs limited to power service for street lightfng ($750/year). These values are typical industry averages. Life Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis Table 9 presents a summary of the life cycle benefits and costs for the two proposed intersectfon alternatfves at Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue, and Table 10, on the following page, presents the summary of the benefit/ cost analysis. Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis This sectfon briefly discusses the parameters used to assess and monetfze the life-cycle benefits and costs for the two proposed alternatfves at the intersectfon of Halcyon Road at Fair Oaks Avenue. The benefits are evaluated against a “No Build” scenario which would not improve the existfng intersectfon configuratfon or traffic signal over a 20- year period. The analysis of the roundabout was based on a preliminary alternatfve considered without the westbound right turn lane and presents a conservatfve analysis, because the concept was modified per City directfon after the analysis was completed. Safety Benefit To calculate the safety benefit, the cost of collisions is evaluated based on the existfng collision rate, forecasted traffic volumes, and collision reductfon factors for the proposed improvements. To compute the existfng collision rate, existfng collision data over a five year period was utflized. The intersectfon ADT was converted to a Million Vehicle Entering (MVE) per year. The number of collisions were then divided by the total number of vehicles to obtain a collision rate (collision/MVE). This determines the base cost of collisions for existfng conditfons. In the future as traffic volumes increase, more collisions may occur without any improvements, therefore improving the intersectfon would result in a larger safety benefit over the 20-year life-cycle. Costs associated with collisions antfcipated for each proposed intersectfon alternatfve were quantffied using the Caltrans Intersectfon Control Evaluatfon Collision Cost Analysis spreadsheet. As previously mentfoned, the benefits of convertfng to a roundabout includes reducing the number of conflict points for vehicles. Additfonally, roundabouts reduce the entry speed of vehicles which in turn reduce the severity of collisions. Signal improvements aim to reduce congestfon, which would in turn reduce potentfal collisions, however higher speeds and right-angle collisions are not reduced. Vehicular Delay Reduction Benefit To calculate the delay reductfon benefit, the value of travel tfme was quantffied for each proposed alternatfve. Costs associated with vehicular delay were computed using the delay for the AM and PM peak hour periods of all the alternatfves. In assessing the delay costs, the weighted Life Cycle Costs (20 year design) No Build Traffic Signal Alternative 1 Roundabout Alternative 2 Collision and Mobility Costs Collision Costs of predicted crashes $6,535,000 $6,318,000 $307,000 Delay Costs $1,650,000 $2,210,000 $1,230,000 Fuel and GHG Costs $2,122,000 $2,253,000 $2,143,000 Project Costs Including Design, Construction and Maintenance Operatfons and Maintenance Costs $55,000 $55,000 $31,000 Constructfon Costs $0 $1,843,700 $3,908,900 Total Life Cycle Costs $10,362,000 $12,679,700 $7,619,900 Notes: 1. Existing geometry is analyzed for Ultimate Design Year traffic volumes. 2. The collision costs presented within this table were derived using the Caltrans tool for Intersection Control Evaluation Collision Cost Analysis and B/C Table 9 - Life-Cycle Costs Comparison Summary Page 184 of 354 Page 48 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan As shown, the Roundabout Alternatfve has a B/C of 2.2 while the Traffic Signal has a B/C of –0.3. Generally, B/C ratfos less than 1.0 are unfavorable, and a negatfve value is antfcipated with Alternatfve 1 as the increase in delays and GHGs are antfcipated to not be beneficial . Other potentfal benefits of roundabouts, which are not quantffied here, include partfculate matter/pollutants for air quality consideratfons. The B/C analysis is presented for comparison of the two alternatfves at the Fair Oaks Avenue intersectfon, and does not present the benefit of the corridor as a whole. Alternatives Analysis Summary If the existfng intersectfon at Halcyon and Fair Oaks Avenue is not improved to either an improved traffic signal with signal tfming adjustments or improved with installatfon of a roundabout, then traffic operatfons will deteriorate with severe delays and queueing. With implementatfon of a road diet and either improving the traffic signal or installing a roundabout at Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue, the multfmodal improvements identffied in this Complete Street Plan will enhance pedestrian and bicycle safety, providing a contfnuous multfmodal corridor along Halcyon Road. However, improving the traffic signal at Fair Oaks Avenue with the proposed road diet while remaining within existfng rights-of-way has limitatfons on the capacity and throughput during the peak hours. Constructfng a roundabout at Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue will provide a safer and more comfortable environment for vulnerable road users including schoolchildren, pedestrians, and bicyclists alike, as well as provide a safer and more efficient intersectfon for motorists. Retaining a traffic signal at Fair Oaks Avenue will operate less effectfvely when compared to the roundabout with excessive queues during peak hours. Constructfng a roundabout at Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue in conjunctfon with the proposed road diet between East Grand Avenue and Farroll Avenue is projected to provide acceptable traffic operatfons at both the intersectfon and adjacent roadway segments due to the added capacity and improved operatfons that the roundabout provides. Although Alternatfve 1 improves the traffic signal to enhance and provide safer pedestrian and bicycle access through the intersectfon, it does not address the operatfonal issues antfcipated and the potentfal for more severe right-angle collisions remains. Roundabouts:  Improve safety  Promote lower speeds and traffic calming  Reduce conflict points  Lead to improved operational performance  Meet a wide range of traffic conditions because they are versatile in size, shape, and design Roundabouts | Intersectfon Safety - Safety | Federal Highway Admin- istratfon (dot.gov) Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Ratio No Build VS Improved Signal Alt. 1 No Build VS Roundabout Alt. 2 Safety Benefit $ 217,000 $ 6,228,000 Delay Reduction Benefit $ (560,000) $ 1,550,000 Fuel and GHG Benefit $ (131,000) $ 590,000 Total Benefits $ (474,000) $ 8,368,000 Added Operations & Maintenance Costs $ - $ (24,000) Construction Costs $ 1,843,700 $ 3,908,900 Total Costs $ 1,843,700 $ 3,884,900 Life Cycle Benefit/Cost Ratio (0.3) 2.2 Table 10 - Benefit/Cost Analysis Results Page 185 of 354 Page 49 5. ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS & RECOMMENDATIONS Complete Streets Plan Metric Alternative 1: Traffic Signal Alternative 2: Compact Roundabout Traffic Operatfons  ✓  Significant improvements would be needed to provide efficient operatfons for future travel demand, including widening the intersectfon approaches to provide additfonal turn lanes and turn lane extensions.  Forecasted operatfons are LOS D in AM peak hour, and LOS C in PM peak hour. ✓ ✓  Would provide a contfnuous flow of traffic, where entering vehicles yield to circulatfng traffic, bicyclists, and pedestrians.  Forecasted operatfons are LOS B in AM and PM peak hours. 95th Percentfle Queue Lengths   Northbound traffic in the AM peak is heaviest and results in the longest projected queue length at 625 feet. ✓  Shorter queue lengths compared to the traffic signal alternatfve. Longest projected queue length is in the AM peak northbound at 385 feet. Pedestrian and Bicycle Accessibility ✓    Dedicated bike lanes on all approaches with Bike Boxes two-stage turn boxes, and green paint through the intersectfon.  Long crossings without median refuges. Pedestrians and cyclists wait for signal.  Priority is given to vehicles, but must yield to pedestrians and bicyclists when turning. Increased risk for right-turn collisions with pedestrians during green light. ✓ ✓ ✓  10-foot wide shared-use path along the perimeter of the roundabout for both walking and biking.  Shorter, safer pedestrian crossings with median refuges. Pedestrians cross one directfon of travel at a tfme.  Priority is given to pedestrians and bicyclists. Vehicles yield to pedestrians before entering and after leaving the roundabout. Safety   ✓  Higher speeds during green light and off-peak periods. Does not calm traffic.  Potentfal for high-severity collisions with more conflict points and multfple travel lanes.  Would provide a leading pedestrian interval (LPI) for all crossings. ✓ ✓ ✓  Slower speeds approaching and circulatfng due to geometric design. Single lane of travel.  Fewer conflict points and low-risk for severe collisions.  Would provide optfons for bicyclists to traverse the roundabout either via the shared-use path or via the roundabout’s circulatfng lane Right-of-Way Impact ✓  Both alternatfves would encroach on the northeast corner. Retains existfng ROW as much as possible. ✓  Impacts to intersectfon corners, but would not affect any existfng building structures. Constructfon Cost (preliminary/ conceptual)   $1.8 Million— funding not identffied ✓  $3.9 Million with State funding awarded Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost   Lower Constructfon Cost but increased delays and GHGs. Low safety benefit.  B/C is –0.3 ✓  Very high safety benefit. Lower delays and GHGs. Lower Operatfons & Maintenance costs.  B/C is 2.2. Table 10 - Alternatives Analysis Summary The planning-level conceptual alternatfves presented in this Plan do not represent the ultfmate designs. Additfonal details (i.e., surveying, utflitfes) will be needed and evaluated to refine the preferred concept. Roundabouts are a Proven Safety Countermeasure, per the Federal Highway Administratfon, and are an effectfve alternatfve to the conventfonal intersectfon. Both the road diet and the roundabout will significantly enhance safety and improve multfmodal connectfvity for all roadway users while maintaining the urban/suburban interface. Table 10 presents a summary comparison of the two alternatfves. Page 186 of 354 Page 50 6. FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES & IMPLEMENTATION Complete Streets Plan 6. FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES & IMPLEMENTATION This chapter provides potentfal phasing for implementatfon of the Complete Streets Plan as well as a listfng of available funding sources with a brief descriptfon of each source, and the processes for obtaining the funds. Some funding sources are designed for planning and preliminary engineering level studies while other sources are intended for design and constructfon of improvements. Phasing Potential The key elements of the Plan as presented in Chapter 5 consists of a road diet in Context Zone 2, and buffered bike lanes throughout. The road diet reduces the number of through lanes in Context Zone 2 and provides width to stripe buffered bicycle lanes and construct curb extensions at the Dodson Way crosswalks. Should a phased approach to implementfng the plan be considered, intersectfon improvements at Fair Oaks Avenue would need to be constructed prior to the installatfon of buffered bike lanes and crosswalk enhancements in Context Zone 2. Assuming funding for the largest projects will take the longest to secure, a phased approach with the lesser cost items that could be constructed with or without the roundabout/road diet could follow the following sequence:  Construct sidewalk gap closure projects in all Context Zones  Construct crosswalk enhancements in Zone 3  Slurry seal and restripe with Buffered Bike Lanes in Context Zones 1 and 3  Construct signalized intersectfon improvements  Construct roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue; construct crosswalk enhancements at Dodson Way; slurry seal and restripe with Buffered Bike Lanes in Context Zone 2 Communities Betterment Grant This grant is administered by SLOCOG and is for community-level infrastructure improvements that support sustainable transportatfon goals. The City of Arroyo Grande was awarded $750,000 for a majority of the Zone 3 improvements, as part of the phased implementatfon, including installing buffered bike lanes and pedestrian improvements from Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike. Funding Opportunities Funding for the constructfon of bike and pedestrian improvement projects is available through various State & Federal Programs (i.e. Actfve Transportatfon Program). The road diet concept between E. Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue is made possible by the conversion of the signalized intersectfon at Fair Oaks Avenue to a roundabout. Funding for the constructfon of the roundabout could possibly come from the federal Congestfon Mitfgatfon and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program or the Regional Surface Transportatfon Program (RSTP). Federal Funding Programs Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality The Congestfon Mitfgatfon and Air Quality (CMAQ) program was implemented to support surface transportatfon projects and other related efforts that contribute air quality improvements and provide congestfon relief. Funds are directed to transportatfon projects and programs, which contribute to the attainment and maintenance of Natfonal Ambient Air Quality Standards in non-attainment or air quality maintenance areas for ozone, carbon monoxide, or Page 187 of 354 Page 51 6. FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES & IMPLEMENTATION Complete Streets Plan partfculate matter under provisions in the Federal Clean Air Act. Eligible CMAQ projects include public transit improvements; high occupancy vehicle lanes; Intelligent Transportatfon System Infrastructure; traffic management and traveler informatfon systems (i.e., electric toll collectfon systems); employer-based transportatfon management plans and incentfves; traffic flow improvement programs (signal coordinatfon); fringe parking facilitfes serving multfple occupancy vehicles; shared ride services; bicycle and pedestrian facilitfes; flexible work-hour programs; outreach actfvitfes establishing Transportatfon Management Associatfons; fare/fee subsidy programs; and under certain conditfons, Partfculate Matter improvement projects. Surface Transportation Block Grant Program (STBG) The STBG is a program under the Bipartfsan Infrastructure Law (BIL) and has the most flexible eligibilitfes among all Federal-Aid highway programs. The STBG promotes flexibility in State and local transportatfon decisions and provides flexible funding to best address State and local transportatfon needs. (See RSTP) Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) The intent of this program is to significantly reduce public roadway fatalitfes and serious injuries. The emphasis will be at locatfons that are data and strategically driven. The HSIP has several major program features; separate fact sheets are available on each of these:  Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP)  High Risk Rural Roads (HRRR)  Reportfng Requirements (HSIP Reports) The project must be on any public road or publicly owned bicycle, pedestrian pathway, or trail. Projects must identffy a specific safety problem that can be corrected or improved substantfally. City or County transportatfon planning agencies can apply for these funds. The maximum funding amount for a project is $1 million, and the federal reimbursement rate is 90 percent. Caltrans district staff will solicit candidate projects from eligible public agencies. Interested agencies must submit an applicatfon by the due date to compete for funding. Caltrans staff will evaluate applicatfons based on a Safety Index (calculated based on traffic safety data). A notfce is made once a year to local agencies to submit applicatfons for candidate HSIP projects. Improvements to Halcyon Road at Sandalwood and sidewalk improvements along the east side of Halcyon Road between Cameron Court and Virginia Street have been partfally funding through the 2018 Safe Routes to School Capital Program (Cycle 2), for a $100,000 grant and $23,900 from the City Sidewalk Repair Fund. HSIP Cycle 10 set-aside funding was recently awarded for pedestrian crossing enhancements at the intersectfons of Halcyon Road at Sandalwood Avenue and at Farroll Avenue to completely fund these projects. A total of $250,000 was awarded to be divided between 3 intersectfons (another crossing on Grand Avenue not apart of this study). $100,000 Safe Routes to School Grant. State Funding Programs State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) At the State level, these funds are divided into two programs: (1) the Regional Improvement Program (RIP) funded from a local share of the 75 percent of State Highway Account (SHA) funds set aside for regional transportatfon agency programming, and the Interregional Improvement Program (IIP), funded from the remaining 25 percent available for State programming. SLOCOG has authority to decide how to program the San Luis Obispo County regional share of RIP funds, subject to STIP eligibility guidelines. To be eligible, projects must be nominated by the regional agency in their Regional Transportatfon Improvement Program (RTIP). Caltrans has the authority to program the Interregional Transportatfon Improvement Funds. Similar to the RTIP, Caltrans must nominate projects within the ITIP. STIP funds are primarily intended for capital projects. Eligible projects include constructfng and widening state highways, local roads, public transit (including buses), pedestrian and bicycle facilitfes, grade separatfons, intermodal facilitfes, and safety projects. While these funds may also be used for local road rehabilitatfon, the California Transportatfon Commission (CTC), which has authority over the STIP, has not supported the programming of STIP funds for road rehabilitatfon projects in recent STIP cycles. State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) The State Highway Operatfng and Protectfon Plan (SHOPP) is a four‐year program of projects that have the purpose of collision reductfon, major damage restoratfon, bridge preservatfon, roadway preservatfon, roadside preservatfon, mobility enhancement, and preservatfon of other transportatfon facilitfes related to the state highway system. Non‐capital projects are programmed through the SHOPP. The SHOPP is adopted simultaneously with the STIP every two years. While SLOCOG is allowed input to the SHOPP, the State has sole discretfonary authority over the use of SHOPP funds. The SHOPP program includes projects designed to maintain the safety and operatfonal integrity of the state highway system. Most of the projects are for pavement rehabilitatfon, bridge rehabilitatfon, and traffic safety improvements. Other projects may include such things as operatfonal improvements (e.g. traffic signalizatfon) and roadside rest areas. It does not include projects to add through lanes to increase capacity. Active Transportation Program (ATP) On September 26, 2013, Governor Brown signed legislatfon creatfng the Actfve Transportatfon Program (ATP) in the Department of Transportatfon (Senate Bill 99, Chapter 359 and Assembly Bill 101, Chapter 354). The ATP consolidates existfng federal and state transportatfon programs, including the Transportatfon Alternatfves Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportatfon Account (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School (SR2S), into a single program with a focus to make California a natfonal leader in actfve transportatfon. The ATP is administered by the Division of Local Assistance, Office of Actfve Transportatfon and Special Programs. The purpose of ATP is to encourage increased use of actfve modes of transportatfon by achieving the following goals:  Increase the proportfon of trips accomplished by biking and walking  Increase safety and mobility for non-motorized users  Advance the actfve transportatfon efforts of regional agencies to Page 188 of 354 Page 52 6. FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES & IMPLEMENTATION Complete Streets Plan achieve greenhouse gas reductfon goals  Enhance public health  Ensure that disadvantaged communitfes fully share in the benefits of the program  Provide a broad spectrum of projects to benefit many types of actfve transportatfon users. The City of Arroyo Grande was awarded funding for implementation of this Plan for ATP Cycle 6. Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Surface Transportatfon Block Grant Program funds are apportfoned to States to provide flexible funding that may be used by States and localitfes for projects to preserve or improve conditfons and performance on any Federal-Aid highway, bridge projects on any public road, facilitfes for actfve transportatfon, transit capital projects and public bus terminals and facilitfes. Fifty percent of a State’s funds are to be distributed to areas based on populatfon, known as Regional Surface Transportatfon Program (RSTP) funds. In additfon, a portfon of its RSTP funds is to be set aside for bridges not on Federal-Aid highways. Furthermore, a special rule is provided to allow a portfon of funds reserved for rural areas to be spent on rural minor collectors. Examples of projects eligible for RSTP include highway projects; bridges (including constructfon, reconstructfon, seismic retrofit, and paintfng); transit capital improvements; carpool, parking, bicycle, and pedestrian facilitfes; safety improvements and hazard eliminatfon; research; traffic management systems; surface transportatfon planning; transportatfon enhancement actfvitfes and control measures; and wetland and other environmental mitfgatfon. Safe Routes To School Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is an approach that promotes walking and bicycling to school through infrastructure improvements, enforcement, tools, safety educatfon, and incentfves to encourage walking and bicycling to school. Separate state and federal Safe Routes to School programs serve California. Caltrans distributes Safe Routes funding from the Federal Highway Administratfon. Local Streets and Roads (LSR) Program The purpose of the program is to provide approximately $1.5 billion per year to citfes and countfes for basic road maintenance, rehabilitatfon, and critfcal safety projects on the local streets and roads system. Developer In-Kind Contributions Infrastructure frontage improvements in correlatfon with land development are typically the responsibility of the developer, unless other funding sources can be identffied. This cost would be included within the project budget. Developer-responsibility for improvements within the Halcyon Road corridor would include frontage roads providing access to commercial and/or residentfal development east and west of Halcyon Road. City Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) and County Road Impact Fee (RIF) Programs The City of Arroyo Grande and San Luis Obispo County each have their own transportatfon impact fee programs consistent with Government Code 66000, which was created by AB 1600. Recognizing the arterial functfon of Halcyon Road, this roadway and its intersectfons have been and will contfnue to be in their respectfve impact fee programs, for the segments of this roadway that are contained in each jurisdictfon. Therefore, transportatfon impact fees could be a resource for at least a portfon of the costs for the identffied improvements in this Plan. The transportatfon impact fee programs fund the expansion of existfng traffic facilitfes and the constructfon of new facilitfes that will be needed to provide and maintain adequate traffic circulatfon within the fee area to support new development. Currently, improvements to State Route 1 at Halcyon Road intersectfons are programmed in the South County planning area Capital Improvements Program and RIF. Additional Grant Programs Additfonal grant programs that may fund actfve transportatfon improvements like those included in this Plan include:  Clean Mobility Optfons  Local Partnership Program  Office of Traffic Safety Grant Program  Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A)  Solutfons for Congested Corridors  Sustainable Transportatfon Equity Project  Transformatfve Climate Communitfes  Transportatfon Development Act Funding Page 189 of 354 Page 53 APPENDIX Complete Streets Plan APPENDIX Page 190 of 354 Page 54 APPENDIX Complete Streets Plan Appendix A - Current Policy, Planning Documents & References This sectfon summarizes current policies and planning documents that guide or regulate transportatfon planning decisions related to Complete Streets. The Complete Streets Plan aims to align its recommendatfons with these available documents. To the extent feasible, the following documents were referenced for this study: South Halcyon Road Corridor Study The South Halcyon Road Corridor Study was conducted in 2014 and reviews and addresses safety and mobility concerns for pedestrian and bicyclists. The study assesses existfng and future multfmodal conditfons of Halcyon Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and The Pike, and recommends Complete Street improvements including Class II Bike Lanes, and pedestrian crosswalk enhancements. City of Arroyo Grande General Plan The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan was adopted in 2007 and presents a set of policies and programs that form a plan for long-term development within the City. The General Plan aims to meet local and regional planning requirements, and guides City development. It is a basis for decision-making on land use, housing, city services, public works, conservatfon, safety, and economic development. The Circulatfon Element, updated in 2021, provides objectfves and policies related to roadway standards, Level of Service (LOS), Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS), alternatfve circulatfon and transportatfon systems, and coordinatfon with the Land Use Element. 2015/16 County Bikeways Plan The County Board of Supervisors, Department of Public Works, and the Bicycle Advisory Committee prepared the County’s Bikeways Plan. It promotes the increased use of bicycles as a transportatfon mode. The plan considers policies and programs related to bicycling from the Regional Transportatfon Plan and General Plan. The plan provides recommendatfons Streets Bill/Act. Effectfve January 1, 2011, AB 1358 requires revisions to a County’s or City’s Circulatfon Element to include provisions for the accommodatfon of all roadway users including bicyclists, pedestrians, and transit vehicles. The legislatfon impacts local general plans by adding the following language to Government Code sectfon 65302(b)(2)(A) and (b)(2)(B): “(A) Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantial revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multi-modal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of the streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan; (B) For the purposes of this paragraph, - users of streets, roads, and highways‖ means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.” Urban Bikeway Design Guide, 2nd Edition, NACTO The Natfonal Associatfon of City Transportatfon Officials (NACTO) published this guide in 2014. This guide provides innovatfve design solutfons for bicycle related treatments within urbanized areas and conforms with policy and guidance of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). For each treatment identffied, this guide provides required, recommended, and optfonal features. Urban Street Design Guide, NACTO NACTO published this guide in 2013 and it provides innovatfve multfmodal design solutfons for urban environments, focusing on city streets and public places. The guide also conforms with policy and guidance of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). for goals and implementatfons to close gaps in existfng bikeways, to provide connectfons between communitfes, and to provide multfmodal access to transit. The plan serves to identffy and prioritfze bikeway facilitfes within the unincorporated areas of San Luis Obispo County over the next 20 years. SLOCOG Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS): Connecting Communities The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) is responsible for preparing the RTP, a major transportatfon planning document for the entfre region. The Plan supports the policies of the RTP’s Motorized and Non-motorized Transportatfon Program. City Climate Action Plan The City of Arroyo Grande Climate Actfon Plan (CAP) was adopted in November 2013. The CAP is a long- range plan to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from City government operatfons and community actfvitfes within Arroyo Grande and prepare for the antfcipated effects of climate change. The CAP establishes the baseline 2005 GHG emissions, identffies the quantfty of GHG emissions reductfon required to meet the emissions target of 15 percent below 2005 levels by year 2020 (consistent with AB 32), and identffies strategies and implementatfon measures to achieve the emissions reductfon target. The CAP also provides procedures to implement, monitor, and verify the effectfveness of the CAP measures in order to adapt efforts as necessary. The CAP helps achieve multfple community goals including lowering energy costs, reducing air pollutfon, supportfng economic growth, and improving quality of life. California AB 1358 - Complete Streets Act The California Assembly Bill (AB) 1358 of 2008 is known as the Complete Page 191 of 354 Page 55 APPENDIX Complete Streets Plan California AB 32 The Global Warming Solutfons Act of 2006, Assembly Bill 32, sets the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reductfon goal into law. It directs the California Air Resources Board to begin developing discrete early actfons to reduce greenhouse gases while also preparing a scoping plan to identffy how best to reach the 2020 limit. City of Arroyo Grande Bicycle and Trails Master Plan The City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan was adopted in 2012 and builds upon the recommendatfons from the first adopted bicycle plan in 2006. The current Bicycle & Trails Master Plan identffies existfng and proposed bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, which encourage improvements that enhance safety for actfve transportatfon modes. The plan serves as a guide for actfve transportatfon improvements within the City and prioritfzes improvements in order to guide federal, state, and local funding and planning mechanisms. As shown in the graphic to the right , Class II Bike Lanes are designated for Halcyon Road within the Bicycle and Trails Master Plan. The Complete Streets Plan proposes to accommodate Class II Bike Lanes as a minimum requirement along Halcyon Road. Road Diet Informational Guide, FHWA The Federal Highway Administratfon (FHWA) published this guide in November 2014. It provides the definitfon of a road diet and the supportfng documentatfon that road diets improve safety for both motorists and pedestrians while improving multfmodal accessibility and mobility. This guide also presents factors that determine feasibility of a road diet, and how road diets are implemented as a Complete Street solutfon, including design consideratfons, as utflized within this plan. Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, Second Edition (2010) (NCHRP Report 672) The report was part of the Natfonal Cooperatfve Highway Research Program (NCHRP) conducted by the Transportatfon Research Board, and builds on the first editfon published by FHWA. The guide contfnues to be comprehensive to both professionals and the public for introductory material, planning and design guidance, operatfonal and safety performance evaluatfon, constructfon and maintenance, and presents a wide range of potentfal applicatfons. Main Street, California: A Guide for Improving Community and Transportation Vitality, 2003 The report, published by Caltrans, provides planning, design, maintenance, and operatfonal concepts for main street projects and serves as a guide to Complete Streets and actfve transportatfon planning along State Highways. Complete Streets Implementation Action Plan 2.0 (CSIAP 2.0), June 2014 - June 2017 The CSIAP was prepared by Caltrans to describe the Complete Streets policy framework currently held by Caltrans for planning and implementatfon of Complete Streets on the state highway system. The CSIAP 2.0 is required by the Deputy Directive 64-Revision 2: Complete Streets - Integrating the Transportation System (DD-64-R2), which is an update of the State’s Complete Streets policy signed in October 2014. DD- 64-R2 provides the following Caltrans policy on Complete Streets: “The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) provides for the needs of travelers of all ages and abilities in all planning, programming, design, construction, operations, and maintenance activities and products on the State highway system [and] recognizes bicycles, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system.” DD-64-R1 is limited to state owned and maintained streets, roads, and highways and focuses on the planning, constructfon, and maintenance of Complete Streets and, when possible given the Caltrans‘s limited jurisdictfon, on the creatfon of multfmodal networks. Nonetheless, the goals of DD-64-R1 provide important guidance for the design of the streets that make up a local integrated multfmodal transportatfon Bicycle Facilities Map near Halcyon Road, Bicycle and Trails Master Plan Page 192 of 354 Page 56 APPENDIX Complete Streets Plan network. Safe Routes to School In 2005, the United States Congress passed the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient, Transportatfon Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Act (SAFETEA-LU). This transportatfon reauthorizatfon bill included funding for the Federal Safe Routes to School (SRTS) program. The objectfve of the SRTS program is to support the use of safe, actfve transportatfon modes (i.e. walking and bicycling) for children to and from schools. The availability of actfve transportatfon modes can increase children‘s actfvity levels and decrease the likelihood of childhood diseases. This is especially important as childhood obesity rates and other illnesses related to inactfvity are rapidly increasing both natfonally and in California. The SRTS program is administered by the Federal Highway Administratfon (FHWA), which distributes program funds to individual State Departments of Transportatfon. Local multfmodal transportatfon networks should address the needs of parents and children by providing safe alternate transportatfon optfons (i.e. walking and bicycling) to and from schools. Doing so can reduce vehicle trips, reduce congestfon, and improve road safety near schools, and increase children‘s actfvity levels. While the general plan itself is not eligible for funding, SRTS programs can help implement part of a connected, safe multfmodal transportatfon network. Schools are an important node to include in the development of a local multfmodal transportatfon network. Park and Ride lot. The urban, urban transitfon, and neighborhood Context Zones (Context Zones 1, 2, and 3) would be subject to the plans and policies of the Arroyo Grande General Plan. The small portfon of the neighborhood Context Zone in unincorporated County areas would also be subject to the South County Area Plan, County of San Luis Obispo Land Use Ordinance, and County of San Luis Obispo General Plan. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) In additfon to the environmental constraints analysis, the project’s potentfal impacts on transportatfon have also been evaluated. Per SB 743, VMT is the measure to determine transportatfon impacts under CEQA. Per the City’s VMT guidance, which are consistent with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (OPR, 2018), a Road Diet, or reductfon of number of through lanes, would not likely lead to a substantfal increase in VMT, and therefore should not require an induced travel analysis. This applies to the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan. Additfonally, this Plan proposes to improve and enhance pedestrian and bicycle facilitfes along the corridor, and install a roundabout, which are all identffied as transportatfon projects which would not likely lead to an increase in VMT. Therefore, the proposed Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan does not have a significant impact on VMT. Appendix B - Potential Environmental Constraints Potentfal environmental constraints associated with project development are summarized in this sectfon, based on a memorandum by SWCA Environmental Consultants dated September 7, 2016 (Appendix C) and updated on [CITY TO PROVIDE DATE]. Context Zones 1, 2, and 3: Urban, Urban Transition, and Neighborhood Potential Construction Impacts: Environmental constraints within these Context Zones are antfcipated to be predominantly limited to constructfon-related impacts. These zones contain a high number of sensitfve receptors, including residences, schools, and the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital. Constructfon-related impacts could include:  Constructfon noise and traffic,  Dust generated from grading and demolitfon actfvitfes,  Vehicle emissions from heavy equipment,  Increased congestfon and bicycle/pedestrian and traffic detours,  Temporary loss of access and/or parking, and  Temporary degradatfon of visual setting. Each of these effects could temporarily adversely impact proximate residences and businesses within these zones. Constructfon-related congestfon and loss of access could also affect emergency access to and from the Arroyo Grande Police Statfon and Arroyo Grande Hospital. Improvements within the existfng road shoulder areas could require removal of mature street trees and utflity relocatfons. Each of these potentfal impacts are mitfgated by measures in the Mitfgatfon Monitoring and Reportfng Program (Appendix J of the Environmental Document). Consistency with Other Plans The Halcyon Road Plan is intended to improve circulatfon along Halcyon Road for all modes of travel, including connectfvity of pedestrian and bicycle facilitfes throughout. The Plan should consider and be consistent with improvements associated with the proposed Brisco-Halcyon Road/ US 101 Interchange Modificatfon Project and the existfng El Camino Real Page 193 of 354 Complete Streets Plan Appendix D Existing Conditions Analysis Memorandum Page 194 of 354 943 Reserve Drive l Suite 100 l Roseville, CA 95678 l p. 916.782.8688 l omnimeans.com Concord l Napa l Redding l Roseville l San Luis Obispo l Visalia Memorandum To: City of Arroyo Grande Date: April 18, 2018 Attn: Matt Downing, Planning Manager Project: Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan From: Martin Inouye Rosanna Southern, EIT Job No.: 11144937 Re: Existing Conditions Analysis File No.: C2170MEM003.DOCX Introduction Funded in large part by the Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grant Program, the City of Arroyo Grande has retained Omni-Means to prepare the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (Plan) for the Halcyon Road corridor in the City of Arroyo Grande and the County of San Luis Obispo. The California Complete Streets Act (AB 1358) of 2008 was signed into law on September 30, 2008. Beginning January 1, 2011, AB 1358 requires circulation elements to address the transportation system from a multimodal perspective. This project will develop a plan for an improved transportation corridor that provides for multi-modal safety, mobility, and accessibility needs. This memorandum summarizes the existing transportation (vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle) conditions for the Halcyon Road corridor and identifies deficiencies in relation to complete streets and multi-modal circulation priorities. The results of this analysis will inform subsequent project objectives to improve circulation through all modes of travel, and will be used in the development of a comprehensive complete streets plan for the Halcyon Road corridor. Setting The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated city located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis Obispo, in the County of San Luis Obispo. The City is 5.84 square miles in area, and is adjacent to the incorporated areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west. The Halcyon Road study corridor extends approximately 1.7 miles north-to-south from its junction with US Route 101/El Camino Real in Arroyo Grande, to its junction with State Route (SR) 1 in the County of San Luis Obispo. For the purposes of this report "Halcyon Road" will be used for both North Halcyon Road (north of E. Grand Avenue) and South Halcyon Road (south of Grand Avenue). Halcyon Road transitions from City to County jurisdiction at The Pike, and reaches Caltrans jurisdiction at its junction with SR 1. Further south beyond the study area, Halcyon Road continues south to the community of Nipomo. For the purposes of this plan, the study corridor is divided into four (4) Context Zones to illustrate the changes in adjacent land uses and roadway character along the corridor. The Context Zones are identified as follows, and as shown on Figure 1. Context Zone 1: Urban (El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue) Context Zone 2: Urban Transition (E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue) Context Zone 3: Neighborhood (Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike) Context Zone 4: Rural (The Pike to SR 1) Page 195 of 354 Bri s co Road 0 Scale: 1"= 650 650' omni means 2170EX001.dwg Figure 1 July 18, 2016Arroyo Grande, California HALCYON ROAD COMPLETE STREETS PLAN HALCYON ROAD CONTEXT ZONES Halcyon Road U.S. 101Grand AvenueFair Oaks AvenueThe PikeHighway 1Halcyon Road CONTEXT ZONE 1 Urban CONTEXT ZONE 2 Urban Transition CONTEXT ZONE 3 Neighborhood CONTEXT ZONE 4 Rural Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Harloe Elementary School Old Halcyon Town Site Arroy o G r a n d e C r e e k Arroyo Grande Police DepartmentEl Camino RealContext Zone 2 (Looking Northbound)Context Zone 3 (Looking Northbound)Context Zone 1(Looking Southbound)Context Zone 4 (Looking Northbound) Page 196 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 3 Context Zones The Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan will evaluate the corridor relative to each segment's context, and the four distinct contexts found in the study corridor are discussed in detail below. Figures A-1 through A-4 illustrating each context zone are included in the Appendix. Context Zone 1: Urban The urban context zone on Halcyon Road extends approximately 0.3 miles from El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue. Both El Camino Real and E. Grand Avenue are signalized intersections, and the posted speed limit is 35 mph. Halcyon Road through this context zone is a two-lane roadway with on-street parking permitted on approximately 25% of the curb faces, and approximately 20 access points including private driveways and three local roads. There is completed sidewalk infrastructure in the southbound direction, and incomplete sidewalk infrastructure in the northbound direction. Sidewalk width ranges from 5 feet to 10 feet. There are no designated bike lanes in this zone. The following land uses are located within this context zone: Arroyo Grande Police Department; a church; a cemetery; professional office buildings; commercial buildings; and a convenience store. Context Zone 2: Urban Transition The urban transition context zone on Halcyon Road extends approximately 0.4 miles from E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue. Both E. Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue are signalized intersections. The posted speed limit is 35 mph south of E. Grand Avenue and transitions to 40 mph south of Dodson Way, with a school zone speed limit of 25 mph beginning just north of Fair Oaks Avenue. Halcyon Road through this context zone is a four-lane roadway with a two-way left-turn lane begins south of Dodson Way, and continues south to Fair Oaks Avenue. On-street parking is permitted on approximately 60% of the curb faces, and there are approximately 26 access points including private driveways, two local roads, and several side streets. There is completed sidewalk infrastructure in both the southbound and northbound directions. Sidewalk width ranges from 5 feet to 7 feet. There are no designated bike lanes in the urban transition context zone. A marked pedestrian crossing with signage is located at the Halcyon Road/Dodson Way intersection, which is side-street stop-controlled. Harloe Elementary School is located just south of the Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue intersection, and the school zone begins just north of Fair Oaks Avenue, with a posted 35 mph/25 mph when children are present speed limit. Marked pedestrian crossings and pedestrian signal phases are provided across all legs of the Fair Oaks Avenue intersection. The following land uses are located within this context zone: Arroyo Grande Community Hospital; residential houses and apartment buildings; professional office buildings; and commercial buildings. Context Zone 3: Neighborhood The neighborhood context zone on Halcyon Road extends approximately 0.44 miles from Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike. The Halcyon Road/The Pike intersection is two-way stop controlled for The Pike (note the driveway on the east side of the intersection forms the fourth leg). The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road is 40 mph, with a school zone speed limit of 25 mph beginning just north of Sandalwood Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue for Harloe Elementary School. Halcyon Road through this context zone transitions from a four-lane roadway to a two-lane roadway with a two-way left-turn lane just south of Olive Street. The two-way left-turn lane ends Page 197 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 4 just south of Virginia Drive. There are approximately ten local roads that connect with Halcyon Road within this context zone, and approximately 16 private driveways with direct access to Halcyon Road. There is completed sidewalk infrastructure in the southbound direction, and incomplete sidewalk infrastructure in the northbound direction, ranging from 5 feet to 7 feet in width. There is a bike route sign on Halcyon Road at The Pike and another just north of Farroll Avenue; there is a bike route sign at the Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue intersection directing bicycle traffic eastbound on Fair Oaks Avenue. Fair Oaks Avenue has Class II bike lanes west of Halcyon Road, and east of Halcyon Road a Class II bike lane exists in the eastbound direction. In the westbound direction, the Class II bike lane on Fair Oaks Avenue terminates at the Arroyo Grande Community Hospital Driveway. There are no designated bike lanes along Halcyon Road in the neighborhood context zone. Harloe Elementary School is located on the west side of Halcyon Road, just south of the Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue intersection. Arroyo Grande High School is located approximately 0.8 miles east of Halcyon Road along Fair Oaks Avenue. The neighborhood context zone is residential south of Fair Oaks Avenue. Context Zone 4: Rural The rural context zone on Halcyon Road extends approximately 0.58 miles from The Pike to State Route (SR) 1, and falls within County jurisdiction. There is a Class II bike lane sign in the southbound direction; however, no bike lane markings are provide, the edge line stripe is four inches, and the shoulder width between The Pike and SR 1 varies and in most cases is less than the required minimum for Class II bike lanes. There is no existing sidewalk infrastructure along Halcyon Road within this rural context zone. There is no allowed on-street parking within this rural context zone. South of Temple Street, there are three residential houses with direct access to Halcyon Road, with residential density increasing north of Temple Street to The Pike. The surrounding landscape is primarily open space and agriculture land. Page 198 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 5 Existing Transportation System According to the City of Arroyo Grande 2001 General Plan Update, Halcyon Road is classified as a two-lane and four-lane arterial in the City of Arroyo Grande. According to the County of San Luis Obispo 2014 circulation map for Oceano Urban Reserve Limit, Halcyon Road is classified as a two-lane collector. Roadway Facilities The following roadway facilities service the existing Halcyon Road corridor in the study area. State Freeways Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other roadways, railways, or pedestrian pathways, and instead are served by interchange facilities are classified as Freeways. Freeways usually have posted speed limits up to 70 mph. The following freeway services the Halcyon Road corridor: U.S. Highway 101 (US 101) is a major north-south interstate 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 Los Angeles urban basin to the south, the San Francisco Bay Area to the north, and beyond to Oregon and Washington. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major connections between and through several cities. Through South County, US 101 represents a major commuter travel route and has a four-lane divided cross- section. Within the study area of Nipomo, US 101 forms full access interchanges with Los Berros Road/Thompson Avenue, Willow Road, Tefft Street, and SR 166. Between the Los Berros Road/Thompson Avenue and Traffic Way interchanges, US 101 is an expressway with at-grade intersections. 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 up to 55 mph. The following highway services the Halcyon Road corridor: State Route 1 (SR 1/Highway 1) is a state highway that runs predominantly in a north- south direction. SR 1 branches off of US 101 within Pismo Beach and traverses south through the Fee Study Area and beyond, to the southern County line. SR 1 connects the South County area to the Five Cities area to the north, and connects to Guadalupe and Santa Maria to the south. SR 1 represents a significant parallel commuter route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route. Through South County, SR 1 is a conventional two-lane highway. Arterial Streets Major 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. In addition, two lane arterial facilities with two-way left-turn lanes generally have limited access to adjacent land uses and have a maximum design capacity of 15,000 vehicles per day. E. Grand Avenue, Fair Oaks Avenue, and The Pike service the Halcyon Road corridor, and are considered arterials in the City of Arroyo Grande. Page 199 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 6 Collectors and Local Streets Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets providing access to residential, commercial, and industrial property. Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic. Local streets are characterized by low daily volumes. A network of collectors and local streets service the Halcyon Road corridor. Existing Multi-Modal Facilities Along the study corridor, there are three signalized intersections with crosswalks, and two unsignalized pedestrian crossings, including one near the elementary school. There are currently no classified bike routes on Halcyon Road in the City of Arroyo Grande. South of The Pike, signs are installed along Halcyon Road indicating Class II bike lanes, however the width of the paved bike lane is below the required minimum of 4 feet. Class II bike lanes are located along El Camino Real and pass east-west through the Halcyon Road/US Route 101/El Camino Real intersection. Similarly, Fair Oaks Avenue provides Class II bike lanes on either side of Halcyon Road. Sidewalk infrastructure is incomplete or non-existent north of Bennett Avenue and south of The Pike. The City of Arroyo Grande 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan recognizes three classes of bikeways: Class I Multi Use Path typically known as bike paths, 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 II Bike Lane known as bike lanes, Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one way bicycle travel on each side of a street or highway. The minimum width for bike lanes ranges between four and five feet. Bike lanes are demarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement legends. Class III Bike Route known as bike routes, 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. Note the City's Bicycle & Trails Master Plan identifies the entire length of Halcyon Road within the City Limits as a proposed Class II bike facility. The County of San Luis Obispo Bikeways Plan, 2016 Update (adopted August 9, 2016) recognizes the above classes of bikeways and adds a fourth: Class IV Bikeway (Cycle Tracks or Separated Bikeways) promote active transportation and provide a right-of-way designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to a roadway and which are protected from vehicular traffic. Types of separation include, but are not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking. Page 200 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 7 Transit Facilities San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA) operates numerous routes which serve the study corridor. As shown in Figure 2, Routes 21, 23, 24, and Regional RTA Route 10 provide service stops near Halcyon Road. Nearby transit stops are at the following locations:  El Camino Real (Route 28 and Route 10 located at the Park & Ride Lot)  E. Grand Avenue (westbound Route 21 located east of Halcyon Road, and eastbound Route 24 located west of Halcyon Road at Alder Street), and El Camino Real (RTA Route 10 and westbound Route 23 at the park and ride lot on El Camino Real east of Halcyon Road), and  Fair Oaks Ave (westbound Route 27 and, eastbound Route 28, both located east of Halcyon Road). Park and Ride Facilities The Halcyon Park and Ride Lot located on the north side of El Camino Real just east of Halcyon Road is one of 15 formal park & ride lots in San Luis Obispo County. The lot has 85 parking spaces and includes 8 bike lockers. A bus stop at the facility is served by RTA Route 10 and SCAT Route 23. Figure 2: Transit Service Page 201 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 8 Analysis Methodology and Technical Parameters The following section outlines the analysis methodology and technical parameters used to quantify operations for all transportation modes using Level of Service (LOS) determined using methodologies within the Transportation Research Board publication Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis (HCM 6). The following subsections outline the methodology and analysis parameters used to quantify the multi-modal traffic operations on roadway segments and at study intersections. Roadway LOS Methodologies Roadway segment LOS is estimated using HCM 6 methodologies. Table 1 presents the ADT- based capacity thresholds applied in this study (for determining roadway capacity conditions). TABLE 1: DAILY ROADWAY CAPACITIES BY FACILITY TYPE LOS A LOS B LOS C LOS D LOS E 4-Lane Arterial (with left-turn lane)22,000 25,000 29,000 32,500 36,000 4-Lane Arterial (no left-turn lane)18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000 2-Lane Roundabout Arterial 14,300 16,250 18,850 20,800 23,400 2-Lane Arterial (with left-turn lane)11,000 12,500 14,500 16,000 18,000 2-Lane Arterial (no left-turn lane)9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000 2-Lane Roundabout Collector 7,800 9,750 11,700 13,650 15,600 2-Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000 Roadway Segment Type Total Two-Way Average Daily Traffic (ADT) Based on methodologies within the Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, Transportation Research Board, 2016. 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 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. Traffic exceeding LOS E thresholds is LOS F. Intersection LOS Methodologies LOS are calculated for various intersection control types using the methods documented in the HCM 6. 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. Vehicular Parameters For signalized intersections and All-Way-Stop-Controlled (AWSC) intersection, the intersection delays and LOS are average values for all intersection movements. For Two-Way-Stop- Controlled (TWSC) intersections, the intersection delays and LOS is representative of those for the worst-case movement. LOS definitions for different types of intersection controls and vehicular threshold criteria are outlined in Table 2 on the following page. The Synchro Version 10 software suite by Trafficware has been used to implement the HCM 6 analysis methodologies. The peak hour capacity tables contained in this report present the intersection delay and LOS estimates as calculated using the Synchro software. Existing traffic signal timing information was obtained from the City and Caltrans and is input into the Synchro model to accurately represent the existing conditions at the signalized intersections. Page 202 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 9 TABLE 2: VEHICULAR LOS CRITERIA FOR INTERSECTIONS Level of Service Type of Flow Delay Maneuverability Stopped Delay/Vehicle Signalized Two-Way Stop All-Way Stop 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 < 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 and < 20.0 >10.0 and < 15.0 >10.0 and < 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 and < 35.0 >15.0 and < 25.0 >15.0 and < 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 and < 55.0 >25.0 and < 35.0 >25.0 and < 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 and < 80.0 >35.0 and < 50.0 >35.0 and < 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 > 50.0 Page 203 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 10 Multi-Modal Level of Service LOS for bicyclists and pedestrians is calculated using HCM 6 analysis methodologies within Synchro. Bicycle and pedestrian LOS is calculated based on existing bicyclist and pedestrian volumes at signalized intersections. Pedestrian LOS is further determined for each approach based on the available pedestrian area at the corner which corresponds to the crosswalk, the effective walk time, crosswalk length, and the permitted vehicular flow rate during the pedestrian phase. The bicycle LOS is further determined for each approach based on the bicycle lane and shoulder widths, cross-street width, curb presence, effective green time, and on-street parking presence. Pedestrian Parameters Pedestrian LOS at intersections was also determined using Synchro 10. Synchro 10 uses HCM 6 methodologies for determining pedestrian LOS, and requires technical inputs beyond those included for vehicular LOS. Table 3 presents critical technical parameters required and our assumptions. Any parameters not included in Table 3 will use software default values. For signalized intersections, LOS determination is based on the Pedestrian LOS Score for each crosswalk, which is influenced by the traffic signal timings, right and left turning vehicles allowed during the pedestrian phase, crosswalk length, and pedestrian areas at corners. Table 4 presents the pedestrian LOS criteria for intersections, per HCM 6. TABLE 3: PEDESTRIAN TECHNICAL PARAMETERS FOR INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Parameter Assumption 1. Right Corner Size A, Size B, and Curb Radius Estimated from Aerials 2. Number of Right-Turn Islands Identified from Aerials 3. Crosswalk Widths Default Value of 10 feet 4. Ped Left-Right Flow Rate Half of Two-Way Flow Rate 5. Ped Right-Left Flow Rate Half of Two-Way Flow Rate 6. Ped R Sidewalk Flow Rate Same as Crossing Volume 7. Vehicle Perm Left Flow in Ped Phase Based on Synchro Calculations 8. Vehicle Perm Right Flow in Ped Phase Based on Synchro Calculations 9. Vehicle Right Turn on Red Based on Synchro Calculations TABLE 4: PEDESTRIAN LOS CRITERIA FOR INTERSECTIONS Ped LOS Score LOS by Average Pedestrian Space (ft2/p) >60 >40-60 >24-40 >15-24 >8.0-15a <8.0a ≤2.00 A B C D E F >2.00-2.75 B B C D E F >2.75-3.5 C C C D E F >3.5-4.25 D D D D E F >4.25-5.00 E E E E E F >5.00 F F F F F F Notes: 1. Based on Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition: A Guide on Multimodal Mobility Analysis, Transportation Research Board, 2016 2. All thresholds are approximate and assume ideal roadway characteristics. Actual thresholds for each LOS listed above may vary depending on a variety of factors including (but not limited to) roadway curvature and grade, intersection or interchange a In Cross-Flow situations, the LOS E/F threshold is 13 ft2/p Page 204 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 11 Procedures have not been developed yet to address the effect of all-way stop control or yield control on intersection performance from a pedestrian or bicycle perspective. HCM 6 Methodologies for the pedestrian mode at two-way stop-controlled intersections is limited to the uncontrolled crossing. No methodology exists for evaluating pedestrian performance for the stop-controlled approach (cross-street). However, it is reasoned that this type of control has negligible influence on pedestrian service along the segment. Bicycle Parameters Intersection bicycle LOS was also determined using Synchro 10. Synchro 10 uses HCM 6 methodologies for determining bicycle LOS, and requires technical inputs beyond those included for vehicular and pedestrian LOS. Table 5 presents critical technical parameters required and our assumptions. Any parameters not included in Table 5 will use software default values. For signalized intersections, LOS determination is based on the Bicycle LOS Score for each approach. The Bicycle LOS Score is influenced primarily by the traffic signal timings, but also takes into account the roadway cross-section including number of lanes, width of the cross- street, presence of curb and gutter, on-street parking and occupancy, vehicular lane width, bicycle lane width (if present), paved shoulder width, and vehicular demand flow rates. The Bicycle LOS Score can be calculated for any intersection approach, regardless of whether it has marked bike lanes. However, this calculation does not take into account any delay cyclists incur due to weaving with vehicles turning right, or if drivers do not acknowledge the bicycle right -of- way. Table 6 presents the bicycle LOS criteria for intersections, per HCM 6. TABLE 5: BICYCLE TECHNICAL LOS PARAMETERS FOR INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Parameter Assumption 1. Bike Flow Rate From Counts 2. Bike Lane Width Measured from Aerials 3. Paved Shoulder Width Measured from Aerials 4. Curb is Present Identified from Aerials 5. On Street Parking Identified from Aerials 6. Pavment Condition Identified from Aerials TABLE 6: BICYCLE LOS CRITERIA FOR INTERSECTIONS LOS Criteria for Bicycle and Transit Modes LOS LOS SCORE A ≤2.00 B >2.00-2.75 C >2.75-3.5 D >3.50-4.25 E >4.25-5.00 F >5.00 Notes: 1. Based on Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition: A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, Transportation Research Board, 2016 Page 205 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 12 Level of Service Policies The City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Circulation Element specifies minimum level-of-service standards for all the streets and intersections within the City's jurisdiction. In section CT2, the City establishes the following performance standards for acceptable LOS: "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." Per the County of San Luis Obispo 2004 South County Circulation Study Update: “The current County policy calls for LOS “D” or better service on roadways in urban areas and LOS “C” on rural roads.” Halcyon Road south of The Pike is classified as rural in the Circulation Element of the County's General Plan and therefore LOS "C" will be used as the minimum acceptable in Context Zone 4. In addition to the City of Arroyo Grande designated LOS “C” as the minimum acceptable LOS standard on City facilities, Caltrans LOS policy for state highways will also be considered. The Caltrans published Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies (dated December 2002) states the following: “Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target LOS at the transition between LOS “C” and LOS “D” on State highway facilities, however, Caltrans acknowledges that this may not be always feasible and recommends that the lead agency consult with Caltrans to determine the appropriate target LOS.” Consistent with Caltrans policies quoted above and City policies, LOS “C” has been taken as the general threshold for acceptable operations at study intersections and roadway segments maintained by the City, and at study intersections and roadways maintained by the State. Halcyon Road south of The Pike is classified as rural in the Circulation Element of the County's General Plan and therefore LOS "C" was used as the minimum acceptable service level in Context Zone 4. Bicycle and Pedestrian Level of Service Multi-modal objectives and level of service thresholds are in development in agencies across the state, however at this time neither the City of Arroyo Grande nor County of San Luis Obispo have bicycle and pedestrian Level of Service policies. Existing Traffic Operations Study Intersections and Roadway Segments The following intersections were selected for analysis within this study for weekday AM and PM peak hour conditions: 1. Halcyon Road/El Camino Real 2. Halcyon Road/Bennett Avenue 3. Halcyon Road/E. Grand Avenue 4. Halcyon Road/Dodson Way 5. Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue Page 206 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 13 6. Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue 7. Halcyon Road/Sycamore Drive 8. Halcyon Road/The Pike 9. Halcyon Road/La Due Street 10. Halcyon Road (North leg)/SR 1 11. Halcyon Road (South leg)/SR 1 The following roadway segments along Halcyon Road were selected for analysis for average daily travel (ADT) conditions: 1. Between El Camino Real and Bennett Avenue 2. Between Bennett Avenue and E. Grand Avenue 3. Between E. Grand Avenue and Dodson Way 4. Between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue 5. Between Fair Oaks Avenue and Farroll Avenue 6. Between Farroll Avenue and Sycamore Drive 7. Between The Pike and La Due Street 8. Between La Due Street and SR 1 Existing Volumes Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour traffic volume counts for the study intersections of Halcyon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue, Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue, and Halcyon Road/The Pike were collected by Omni-Means in September 2014. Existing weekday AM and PM traffic volume counts for the remaining study intersections were collected by Omni-Means in May 2016. Bicycle and pedestrian volumes were collected at all study intersections. The AM peak hour is defined as one hour of peak traffic flow (which is the highest total volume count over four consecutive 15-minute count periods) counted between 7:00 am and 9:00 am on a typical weekday. The PM peak hour is defined as one hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 pm and 6:00 pm on a typical weekday. Existing roadway segment counts on Halcyon Road between El Camino Real and Bennett Avenue were conducted in September 2015. Existing counts for the remaining roadway segments were conducted in May 2016. Figure 3 shows the existing intersection lane geometrics and traffic control for all study intersections. Figure 4 shows the existing peak hour traffic volumes. Page 207 of 354 Page 208 of 354 Page 209 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 16 Existing Intersection Operations Tables 3, 4, and 5 present existing intersection LOS conditions for vehicle, pedestrians, and bicyclists, respectively. As shown in Table 3, Halcyon Road S/SR 1 is currently operating at unacceptable LOS in the AM peak hour, and Halcyon Road N/SR 1 and Halcyon Road S/SR 1 are currently operating at unacceptable LOS in the PM peak hour. All other intersections are currently operating at acceptable LOS in both the AM and PM peak hours. As shown in Table 4, under AM and PM peak hour conditions, the three signalized intersections along the study Halcyon Corridor are currently operating at acceptable LOS B for pedestrians. TABLE 3 EXISTING CONDITIONS: VEHICULAR LEVEL OF SERVICE Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 N. Halcyon Road & El Camino Real 3 SIGNAL C 22.7 C 29.2 C 2 N. Halcyon Road & Bennett Ave TWSC C 15.3 C 18.7 C 3 Halcyon Road & E. Grand Ave SIGNAL C 24.2 C 27.2 C 4 S. Halcyon Road & Dodson Way TWSC C 18.2 C 18.6 C 5 S. Halcyon Road & Fair Oaks Ave SIGNAL C 20.8 C 22.6 C 6 S. Halcyon Road & Farroll Ave TWSC C 16.6 C 17.7 C 7 S. Halcyon Road & Sycamore Drive TWSC C 10.4 B 12.4 B 8 S. Halcyon Road & The Pike TWSC C 19.2 C 19.8 C 9 S. Halcyon Road & La Due Street TWSC C 13.0 B 14.2 B 10 S. Halcyon Road (N leg) & SR 1 AWSC C 24.3 C 38.6 E 11 S. Halcyon Road (S leg) & SR 1 AWSC C 57.3 F 96.7 F Notes: Target LOS 2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for AWSC, Signal, RNDBT 3. Operations calculated using Synchro and HCM 2000 methodology for signalized intersections due to non-standard NEMA phasing Intersection Control Type 1,2# 1. AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control; RNDBT = Roundabout AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour TABLE 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS: PEDESTRIAN LEVEL OF SERVICE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Ped. Crosswalk Score LOS Ped. Crosswalk Score LOS EB NP1 -NP1 - WB 2.01 B 2.04 B NB 2.27 B 2.29 B SB NP1 -NP1 - EB 2.69 B 2.76 C WB 2.61 B 2.65 B NB 2.62 B 2.59 B SB 2.23 B 2.29 B EB 2.09 B 2.07 B WB 2.23 B 2.19 B NB 2.57 B 2.61 B SB 2.57 B 2.57 B 1. NP = Pedestrian crossing not permitted. 1 Halcyon Road/El Camino Real 3 Halcyon Road/E. Grand Avenue 5 Halycon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue #Intersection Approach Page 210 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 17 TABLE 5: EXISTING CONDITIONS BICYCLE LEVEL OF SERVICE AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Bicycle LOS Score LOS Bicycle LOS Score LOS EB 1.70 A 2.03 B WB 1.38 A 1.41 A NB 2.80 C 2.73 B SB NP1 -NP1 - EB 3.10 C 3.33 C WB 2.90 C 2.96 C NB 3.92 D 3.52 D SB 2.92 C 3.10 C EB 1.85 A 1.64 A WB 3.16 C 3.21 C NB 2.65 B 2.59 B SB 2.48 B 2.63 B 1. NP = Bicycle acces not permitted on US 101. 5 S. Halycon Road/Fair Oaks Avenue #Intersection Approach 1 N. Halcyon Road/El Camino Real 3 Halcyon Road/E. Grand Avenue As shown in Table 5, the three signalized intersections along the study Halcyon Corridor are currently operating at LOS C or higher for bicyclists in the AM and PM peak hours, with the exception of the northbound Halcyon Road at E. Grand Avenue, which is operating at LOS D in the AM and PM peak hours. Existing Roadway Segment Operations The LOS for the eight roadway segments along the Halcyon Road corridor were established using the capacities in Table 1. Table 6 presents existing roadway average daily traffic (ADT) and LOS conditions. Figure 5 shows the existing ADT along the study corridor. TABLE 6 EXISTING CONDITIONS: ROADWAY SEGMENTS VEHICULAR LEVEL OF SERVICE Segment Volume LOS 1 Halcyon Road El Camino Real to Bennett Avenue 2 C 9,089 B 2 Halcyon Road Bennett Avenue to E. Grand Avenue 2 C 8,658 A 3 Halcyon Road E. Grand Avenue to Dodson Way 4 C 13,216 A 4 Halcyon Road Dodson Way to Fair Oaks Avenue 4 C 14,095 A 5 Halcyon Road Fair Oaks Avenue to Farroll Avenue 4 C 12,685 A 6 Halcyon Road Farroll Avenue to The Pike 2 C 11,757 B 7 Halcyon Road The Pike to La Due Street 2 C 8,406 A 8 Halcyon Road La Due Street to SR 1 2 C 8,127 C Street No. Lanes Target LOS Average Daily Traffic As presented in Table 6, all segments along Halcyon Road are currently operating at acceptable LOC C or better for vehicular traffic. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are not evaluated using LOS criteria for roadway segments in this memorandum, rather an inventory of existing bicycle lane and sidewalk facilities, any gaps in the network, are discussed in the Context Zones section of this memorandum and presented on Figures A-1 through A-4 in the Appendix. Page 211 of 354 Page 212 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 19 Collision History Collision data within the Halcyon Road study corridor was obtained from California Highway Patrol's Statewide Integrated Traffic Records Systems (SWITRS) and from the Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis System (TASAS) database (Caltrans) for a 5-year period between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015. A review of the data shows that approximately 120 total collisions occurred along the Halcyon Road study corridor during this 5-year period. Table 7 presents the collision type and severity of the 120 total reported collisions. No fatalities were reported during this 5-year period. TABLE 7 5-YEAR: COLLISION TYPE AND SEVERITY Injury (Compaint of Pain) Injury (Other Visible) Injury (Severe) Property Damage Only Total 2011 3 1 4 8 Hit Object 1 1 2 Rear End 2 4 6 2012 3 1 5 9 Broadside 1 2 3 Head-On 1 1 Overturned 1 1 Rear End 1 1 Sideswipe 3 3 2013 13 2 24 39 Broadside 5 1 4 10 Hit Object 2 4 6 Overturned 1 1 2 Rear End 3 1 12 16 Sideswipe 2 3 5 2014 11 1 23 35 Broadside 4 5 9 Head-On 1 2 3 Hit Object 1 4 5 Rear End 6 8 14 Sideswipe 2 2 Other 2 2 2015 6 3 20 29 Broadside 1 1 1 3 Head-On 2 2 Hit Object 1 5 6 Rear End 4 1 6 11 Sideswipe 5 5 Vehicle/Ped 1 1 Other 1 1 Total 36 6 2 76 120 As shown in Table 7, 73 collisions were reported as occurring on Halcyon Road from El Camino Real to The Pike, in the City of Arroyo Grande, during this 5-year period. Of the 73 total collisions, there were zero fatalities, 2 resulted in serious injuries, 26 resulted in non-serious injury, and 45 involved property damage only (PDO). One collision involved a bicycle, and no collisions involved a pedestrian. One collision in 2015 involved a pedestrian at Halcyon Road/The Pike intersection. Approximately 47 collisions were reported as occurring on Halcyon Road from The Pike to State Route 1, in the County of San Luis Obispo, during this 5-year period. Of the 47 collisions, 31 involved property damage only (PDO) accidents, and 16 resulted in some degree of injury. Page 213 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 20 Intersection Collisions Approximately 76 of the 120 reported collisions occurred within 100 feet of an intersection along the Halcyon Road study corridor. To account for collisions resulting from rear-ends within 300 feet of an intersection, an additional 16 collisions are considered to have occurred at an intersection along the Halcyon Road study corridor, with a total of 92 collisions. Of the 92 intersection collisions, the majority occurred at E. Grand Avenue (14 collisions), Fair Oaks Avenue (8), Farroll Avenue (8), The Pike (14), and State Route (SR) 1 (28). (Note: There are two intersections at Halcyon Road/SR1 within 235 feet of each other; these collisions recorded at Halcyon Road/SR 1 occurring at the western or eastern intersection are not distinguished. However, due to the proximity of these intersections to one another, collisions occurring at either intersection are assumed within the abovementioned total number of collisions (28).) Bicycle and Pedestrian Accidents Of those collisions that occurred at intersections along the Halcyon Road study corridor, one (1) collision at E. Grand Avenue involved a bicycle being struck by a westbound vehicle making a right-turn while the bicyclist was travelling eastbound on the wrong side of the road. One (1) collision at The Pike involved a pedestrian being struck by a vehicle traveling southbound on Halcyon Road. The pedestrian was reported to be at fault. Turning Movement Collisions Twenty-two (22) of the 92 intersection collisions resulted from a left-turn movement, with 10 vehicles making left turns from Halcyon Road onto a side street, and 12 vehicles making left turns onto Halcyon Road from a side street. Five (5) left-turn collisions occurred at Halcyon Road/The Pike; four (4) left-turn collisions occurred at Halcyon Road/Farroll Avenue; and 11 left-turn collisions occurred at Halcyon Road/SR 1 (see Note above). Four (4) collisions resulted from a right-turn movement, with one (1) making a right turn off of Halcyon Road onto E. Grand Avenue, and one (1) making a right turn onto Halcyon Road from The Pike. Rear End Collisions Forty-six (46) of the 92 intersection collisions resulted from a rear end incident. The majority of those collisions involved vehicles proceeding straight, and one involved vehicles changing lanes, one entering traffic, or 7 stopping or slowing in the travel lane. Eight (8) rear end collisions occurred at the E. Grand Avenue/Halcyon Road intersection, with 3 in the northbound, 1 in the southbound, 2 in the westbound, and 2 in the eastbound direction (1 proceeding direction was not reported). Twelve (12) rear end collisions occurred at the SR1/Halcyon Road intersection, with 3 in the northbound, 3 in the southbound, 3 in the westbound, and 3 in the eastbound direction. Roadway Segment Collisions In addition to collisions occurring at intersections along the Halcyon Road study corridor, approximately 24 collisions occurred on Halcyon Road, located more than 100 feet from the nearest intersection and not resulting from a rear end incident. As such, these collisions are not analyzed as intersection collisions, but rather as roadway collisions. Fourteen (14) additional collisions occurred on major side streets intersecting with Halcyon Road, located more than 100 feet from the intersection and not resulting from a rear end incident. Context Zone 1: Urban One (1) collision occurred on Halcyon Road between El Camino Real and E. Grand Avenue in 2015, when a northbound vehicle struck a parked vehicle while proceeding straight on Halcyon Road. Page 214 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 21 Context Zone 2: Urban Transition Nine (9) collisions occurred on Halcyon Road between E. Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue, resulting in 5 accidents with one or more injuries, and 4 property damage reports. No collisions involved a bicyclist or pedestrian. Table 8 provides a summary of collisions that occurred within the urban transition zone. TABLE 8 CONTEXT ZONE 2 ROADWAY SEGMENT COLLISIONS Year Location Description (Collision type: Proceeding movement, direction of travel) 2013 Park Wy 130 ft S of Halcyon Rd Broadside: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Northbound direction 2013 Dodson Wy 352 ft S of Halcyon Rd Broadside: Entering Traffic, traveling in the Eastbound direction 2013 East Grand Av 364 ft S of Halcyon Rd Broadside: Entering Traffic, traveling in the Eastbound direction 2014 Fair Oaks Av 400 ft N of Halcyon Rd Broadside: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Westbound direction 2014 Dodson Wy 237 ft N of Halcyon Rd Hit Object: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction 2014 Dodson Wy 250 ft S of Halcyon Rd Other: Parking Maneuver, traveling in the Southbound direction 2014 Park Wy 149 ft S of Halcyon Rd Broadside: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Eastbound direction 2015 Dodson Wy 345 ft S of Halcyon Rd Rear End: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Northbound direction 2015 Fair Oaks Av 202 ft N of Halcyon Rd Hit Object: Ran Off Road, traveling in the Southbound direction Context Zone 3: Neighborhood One (1) collision occurred on Halcyon Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and The Pike in 2013, when a northbound vehicle was changing lanes and sideswiped a highway construction equipment vehicle proceeding straight in the lane of travel. Context Zone 4: Rural Approximately seven (7) collisions occurred on Halcyon Road between The Pike and State Route 1, five (5) of which occurred near State Route 1, and two (2) occurred south of The Pike. Five resulted in property damage only, and two resulted in injury (complaint of pain). Four (4) were caused by a vehicle hitting a stationary object, two (2) were caused by a vehicle sideswiping another vehicle, and one was caused by a broadside collision. Collision Rates Collision data for the study roadway segments including intersections on Halcyon Road was derived from SWITRS for a five year period between January 2011 to December 2015, and include roadway collisions and intersection collisions within the study corridor. Average daily traffic (ADT) data is provided for the study roadway segments based on traffic counts on Halcyon Road between El Camino Real and Bennett Avenue conducted in September 2015, and counts for the remaining roadway segments conducted in May 2016. Collision rates were calculated in terms of "accidents per million vehicle miles traveled", and are based on the number of collisions per year, and the vehicle miles traveled per year (equal to the average daily traffic (ADT) volumes multiplied by the length of the segment), as shown in the following equation: 𝐶𝑛𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑛 𝑅𝑎𝑠𝑒 =(Number of Collisions) x (1,000,000) Vehicle Miles Traveled The calculated collision rates were compared with statewide average rates compiled by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as published in their most recent document Page 215 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 22 2012 Collision Data on California State Highways1. The document provides basic average accident rates for various types of roadways and intersections categorized by number of lanes, travel speed, etc., and are derived from the California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). Fatality and injury rates were calculated as a percentage of total recorded collisions. Table 9 summarizes the resulting study roadway segment injury and "fatality plus injury" (F+I) percentages and collision rates compared against statewide averages for each context zone along the Halcyon Road study corridor. Context Zone 1 was analyzed as an urban two-lane roadway; Context Zones 2-4 were analyzed as suburban 2-lane roadways. Note that intersection collisions are included in the summary, excepting those which occurred on the side street and not on Halcyon Road itself. Collisions which occurred at an intersection at a Context Zone boundary (i.e. Grand Ave., Fair Oaks Ave and The Pike) where assigned to the Context Zone based on which side of the intersection the collision occurred. TABLE 9 HALCYON ROAD CORRIDOR COLLISION RATES Study Roadway Segments Length (mi) Total Collisions (5 year) Total # Injury (5 year) Fatality (F) + Injury (I) (5 year) Average % F + I Statewide % F + I ADT Collision Rate (ACC/MVM) Statewide Basic Average Rate Context Zone 1: Urban 0.3 10 4 4 0.400 0.425 8874 2.06 2.21 Context Zone 2: Urban Transition 0.4 27 13 13 0.481 0.425 13656 2.71 2.39 Context Zone 3: Neighborhood 0.44 20 6 6 0.300 0.425 11757 2.12 2.39 Context Zone 4: Rural 0.58 15 8 8 0.533 0.425 8267 1.71 2.39 As can be seen in Table 9, Context Zone 2 exceeds both the statewide F+I rate and the collision rate for similar roadway facilities. Context Zone 4 exceeds the statewide F+I rate. 1 California Department of Transportation 2012 Collision Data on California State Highways (road miles, travel, collisions, collision rates), Division of Traffic Operations, Sacramento, CA. Page 216 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 23 Multi-Way Stop Control Warrants The intersection at Halcyon Road/The Pike is currently a two-way stop controlled intersection. Due to the number of collisions which have occurred at this intersection, factors supporting the employment of an multi-way stop control measure were reviewed. The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Section 2B.07 states the following as a criterion which could on its own warrant installation of a multi-way stop control: Five or more reported crashes in a 12-month period that are susceptible to correction by a multi-way stop installation. Such crashes include right-turn and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions. Table 10 presents a collision summary for Halcyon Road/The Pike from January 2011 to December 2015. As shown, nine (9) collisions occurred within a 12-month period between March 2014 and March 2015, and each collision appears to be of a type susceptible to correction with installation of an all-way stop. This includes the March 2015 collision which identified the pedestrian at fault. Providing a controlled intersection and crosswalk may have reduced the likelihood of this type of collision. With the nearest existing pedestrian crosswalk located 1,300 feet to the north at Sandalwood Avenue, pedestrians are currently expected to cross at uncontrolled locations. Page 217 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 24 TABLE 10 5-YR COLLISION HISTORY AT THE INTERSECTION OF HALCYON ROAD/THE PIKE Year Month Day Collision Type Proceeding movement, direction of travel 2011 05 Monday Rear End Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Eastbound direction Involved Party: Slowing/Stopping, traveling in the Eastbound direction 2013 02 Tuesday Rear End Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction Involved Party: N/A 2013 04 Sunday Broadside Driver: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Northbound direction Involved Party: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction 2013 11 Wednesday Broadside Driver: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Eastbound direction Involved Party: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction 2014 03 Friday Broadside Driver: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Eastbound direction Involved Party: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Northbound direction 2014 04 Friday Rear End Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Northbound direction Involved Party: N/A 2014 04 Friday Broadside Driver: Making Right Turn, traveling in the Eastbound direction Involved Party: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction 2014 07 Tuesday Rear End Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction Involved Party: (2 vehicles) Slowing/Stopping, traveling in the Southbound direction 2014 07 Tuesday Rear End Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction Involved Party: Slowing/Stopping, traveling in the Southbound direction 2014 10 Thursday Rear End Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction Involved Party: N/A 2014 10 Thursday Head-On Driver: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Eastbound direction Involved Party: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction 2015 01 Friday Sideswipe Driver: Making Left Turn, traveling in the Westbound direction Involved Party: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction 2015 03 Thursday Vehicle/Ped Driver: Proceeding Straight, traveling in the Southbound direction Involved Party: Pedestrian at fault 2015 08 Tuesday Rear End Driver: N/A Involved Party: N/A Halcyon Road/The Pike Based on the information presented in Table 10, installation of an all-way stop is warranted at the intersection of Halcyon Road and The Pike based on collision history. An engineering study is recommended by the MUTCD in support of a decision to install multi-way stop control. Page 218 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 25 Speed Surveys Recent speed surveys have been conducted within the City and County for the following segments of Halcyon Road:  Context Zone 1 between E. Grand Avenue and Bennett Avenue (2014);  Context Zone 2 between Park Way and Dodson Way (2014);  Context Zone 2 between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue (2016);  Context Zone 3 between Fair Oaks Avenue and The Pike (2014); and  Context Zone 4 between The Pike and State Route 1. The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road from E. Grand Avenue to Bennett Avenue is 35 mph, and the 85th percentile directional speeds were measured at 35.6 mph (northbound) and 35.1 mph (southbound). The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road between Park Way and Dodson Way is 35 mph and the 85th percentile speed was measured at 37.0 mph in both northbound and southbound directions. The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue is 40 mph and the 85th percentile speed was measured at 38.0 mph in both northbound and southbound directions. The posted speed limit on Halcyon Road from The Pike to State Route 1 is 45 mph based on the most recent speed survey conducted by the County. The County does not currently have 85th percentile speed data on Halcyon Road between The Pike and SR 1. The posted speed limits are in conformance with the California Vehicle Code whereby the posted speed is the nearest 5 mph increment from the measured 85th percentile speed. Note that a slight reduction (1 mph or more) in the 85th percentile speed on Halcyon Road between Dodson Way and Fair Oaks Avenue would result in a reduction in a 5 mph reduction in the posted speed limit, from 40 mph to 35 mph. Conclusion The key findings of this existing conditions analysis of Halcyon Road between El Camino Real in the City of Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 in the County of San Luis Obispo are as follow:  Vehicular Level of Service is adequate at all study intersections and roadway segments with the exception of at the Halcyon Road / State Route 1 intersections which experience LOS D in the PM peak hour at the western intersection and LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hours at the eastern intersection;  Although pedestrian LOS is adequate at signalized intersections, unsignalized crossings are long and do not provide median refuge;  Bicycle LOS at the signalized intersection of Halcyon Road and East Grand Avenue is calculated to be LOS D in the AM peak hour; Bicycle LOS is adequate at all study intersections with the exception of at Halcyon Road northbound at E. Grand Avenue which is calculated to be LOS D in the AM and PM peak hours;  No dedicated bicycle facilities currently exist on Halcyon Road in the City of Arroyo Grande;  South of The Pike in the County of San Luis Obispo "bike lane" signs are in place however the shoulder width is less than Class II minimums in most locations;  In the City of Arroyo Grande, the sidewalk network has numerous gaps as shown on Figures A-1 through A-4;  Continuous pedestrian access is also key for transit accessibility. Currently, pedestrian access is provided on Halcyon Road near the East Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue bus stops. However, continuous pedestrian facilities are not provided further Page 219 of 354 Halcyon Road Complete Street Plan – Existing Conditions April 18, 2018 26 south in the residential areas of the City (Context Zone 3). In Context Zone 1, there are several gaps in the sidewalk for access to the Park & Ride lot on El Camino Real.  Pedestrians have made evident pathways adjacent to the roadway where there are gaps in the sidewalk.  Harloe Elementary schoolchildren and parents, Arroyo Grande High School students, hospital employees, and residents have expressed concerns for safely crossing Halcyon Road; The collision rate in Context Zone 2 exceeds the statewide average for similar facilities and the rate of injury collisions in both Context Zone 2 and Context Zone 4 exceeds the statewide average;  The collision rate in Context Zone 2 exceeds the statewide average for similar facilities, and the rate of fatality and injury collisions in both Context Zone 2 and Context Zone 4 exceed the statewide average; and  The intersection of Halcyon Road and The Pike meets collision warrants for installation of multi-way (all-way) stop control. Presently, the Halcyon Road corridor does not provide necessary bicycle accommodations and lacks adequate pedestrian accommodations. Unsignalized crossings and intersections with poor visibility, lack of sidewalk connectivity, the absence of bike lanes, unclear or poorly marked lane markings, and high vehicle speeds present challenges to overall corridor safety. Page 220 of 354 0 Scale: 1"= 80 80'NORTH2170EX002.dwg Figure A-1 April 25, 2018Arroyo Grande, California HALCYON ROAD COMPLETE STREETS PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS - CONTEXT ZONE 1 EXISTING CLASS II BIKE LANE EXISTING CLASS III BIKEWAY EXISTING SIDEWALK GAP Page 221 of 354 0 Scale: 1"= 80 80'NORTH2170EX002.dwg Figure A-2 April 25, 2018Arroyo Grande, California HALCYON ROAD COMPLETE STREETS PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS - CONTEXT ZONE 2 EXISTING CLASS II BIKEWAY EXISTING CLASS III BIKEWAY Page 222 of 354 0 Scale: 1"= 80 80'NORTH2170EX002.dwg Figure A-3 April 25, 2018Arroyo Grande, California HALCYON ROAD COMPLETE STREETS PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS - CONTEXT ZONE 3 EXISTING CLASS II BIKE LANE EXISTING CLASS III BIKEWAY EXISTING SIDEWALK GAP Page 223 of 354 CJ 5 0 N 0 0 X w C) '" C"1 _,,/ C) '" C"1 ,/ 7 Cr' Q_ // ci 2 Q_ 'tj-N Lf) CD 0 N '� LO N '----, 'tj- "f:.�02no. r 1 2 .0' rr 411 EXISTIN;;-,;-C DIKE�, -�---_-_-� -- w > 0 m <C g� w fw (/) w z _J :r: u <C 2 LEGEND 8.HALCYON ROAD EXISTING CLASS II BIKEWAY VARYING SHOULDER EB T Arroyo Grande, California R/W ir4 °1' � -- EXISTING CONDITIONS -CONTEXT ZONE 4 17.1' 12.0' r 12.0' ------ 8.HALCYON ROAD ; ; (0'1, 39.7' � - ED - R/W R/W I l·0r -� HALCYON RD 16.0' 12.0' r 12.0· - ----- 8. HALCYON ROAD ; ; (o 'r =:J ED 83.9' R/W , r :r: u I­<( 2 0 � 0 _J w m 1 w w -==, (/) iw -z _J :r: u I-<C 2 � 80 Scale: 1 "= 80' �omni• means -ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS April 25, 2018 2170EX002.dwg A-4 Page 224 of 354 Complete Streets Plan Appendix E Bicycle LTS Analysis Page 225 of 354 MEMORANDUM 617 W 7th Street, Suite 505 Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 489-7443 To: Nate Stong, PE, Omni-Means From: Marc Caswell & Kim Voros, Alta Planning + Design Date: April 4, 2017 Re: Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Analysis Introduction To help inform the design of the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan, an investigation of existing bicycle riding conditions was completed using a standardized Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis. This analysis uses street characteristics to rate the roadway on a scale of 1 being most comfortable to 4 being least comfortable. The LTS analysis framework was then used to evaluate two alternative roadway configurations. The resulting analysis performed and detailed below will help highlight locations where potential improvements are expected to have the biggest effect on the experience of bicycle users along Halcyon Road. This analysis compared the existing facilities on Halcyon Road, as well as two proposed alternatives. Broadly, the designs which were compared are as follows:  Existing condition of Halcyon Road includes only a standard Class II bike lane in Context Zone 4; the remainder of the corridor have no bicycle facilities.  Alternative 1 proposes the installation of Buffered Bike lanes throughout the corridor, and a ‘Road Diet’ in Zone 2. The bike lane is widened in Zone 4.  Alternative 2 proposes the installation of Buffered Bike lanes in Zone 1 and standard Class II bike lanes throughout the corridor with intermittent buffers in Zone 2. The bike lane is widened in Zone 4. This analysis found that the existing conditions of Halcyon Road do not provide adequate comfort to bicyclists, and the corridor consistently scored an LTS 4 throughout the corridor. While both alternatives improved the comfort of bicyclists over the existing conditions, the analysis found that Alternative 1 provided the greatest benefit to people who walk and bike, both in terms of travel along and across Halcyon Road. A map detailing these findings is included at the end of this memorandum. Page 226 of 354 2 | Alta Planning + Design While the LTS completed focuses on bicycle travel, improvements for bicyclists generally translate into improved conditions for pedestrians, as well. This is particularly true for crossing conditions, as improvements are measured in terms of reduced exposure to motor vehicle travel speed and the number of travel lanes crossed. The methods used for the Level of Traffic Stress Analysis were adapted from the 2016 Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) Analysis Procedure Manual.1. The approach outlined in the ODOT report uses roadway network data, including posted speed limit, the number of travel lanes, and the presence and character of bicycle lanes, as a proxy for bicyclist comfort level in urban context and ADT and shoulder or bike lane width in rural settings. Road segments are classified into one of four levels of traffic stress based on these factors. The lowest level of traffic stress, LTS 1, is assigned to roads that would be suitable for most children to ride, and also to multi-use paths that are separated from motorized traffic. LTS 2 roads are those that could be comfortably ridden by the average adult population. The higher levels of traffic stress, LTS 3 and 4, correspond to types of cyclists characterized by Portland’s bicycle coordinator Roger Geller in his Four Types of Cyclists report,2 a categorization of cyclist types which is commonly accepted throughout the U.S. bicycle planning field. LTS 3 is the level assigned to roads that would be acceptable to current “enthused and confident” cyclists while LTS 4 is assigned to segments that are only acceptable to “strong and fearless” bicyclists, who will tolerate riding on roadways with higher motor traffic volumes and speeds. The definitions for each level of traffic stress are shown in Table 1. Figure 1 shows examples of each LTS level using streets found in Rochester, New York. 1 Analysis Procedure Manual methodology relies heavily on the 2012 Mineta Transportation Institute Report 11-19: Low-Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity 2 Source: Roger Geller. Four Types of Cyclists. http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/237507 Page 227 of 354 3 | Arroyo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project, Level of Traffic Stress Analysis Table 1. Levels of Traffic Stress Definitions Source: ODOT Analysis Procedure Manual, Version 2 LTS 1 Represents little traffic stress and requires less attention, so is suitable for all cyclists. This includes children that are trained to safely cross intersections (around 10 yrs. old/5th grade) alone and supervising riding parents of younger children. Generally, the age of 10 is the earliest age that children can adequately understand traffic and make safe decisions which is also the reason that many youth bike safety programs target this age level. Traffic speeds are low and there is no more than one lane in each direction. Intersections are easy to cross by children and adults. Typical locations include residential local streets and separated bike paths/cycle tracks. LTS 2 Represents little traffic stress but requires more attention than young children can handle, so is suitable for teen and adult cyclists with adequate bike handling skills. Traffic speeds are slightly higher but speed differentials are still low and roadways can be up to three lanes wide in total for both directions. Intersections are not difficult to cross for most teenagers and adults. Typical locations include collector-level streets with bike lanes or a central business district. LTS 3 Represents moderate stress and suitable for most observant adult cyclists. Traffic speeds are moderate but can be on roadways up to five lanes wide in both directions. Intersections are still perceived to be safe by most adults. Typical locations include low-speed arterials with bike lanes or moderate speed non-multilane roadways. LTS 4 Represents high stress and suitable for experienced and skilled cyclists. Traffic speeds are moderate to high and can be on roadways from two to over five lanes wide in both directions. Intersections can be complex, wide, and or high volume/speed that can be perceived as unsafe by adults and are difficult to cross. Typical locations include high- speed or multilane roadways with narrow or no bike lanes. Figure 1. The four urban/suburban LTS levels visualized Page 228 of 354 4 | Alta Planning + Design Methodology The categorization of Halcyon Road completed through an analysis of street segments, intersections, and approaches using spatial data, aerial imagery and proposed designs. The Halcyon Road corridor was analyzed using the four Context Zones developed previously. The urban/suburban LTS methodology was used to assess Context Zones 1 – 3 while the rural LTS method was used to assess Context Zone 4. Broadly, every street link (a section of roadway) received up to three scores based on its characteristics. One score was based on its segment, the space of roadway between intersecting streets. Another score was based on its approach, the area of the segment with turn lanes, where present. A third score was based on its intersection, where one segment crosses another. All roadways received a segment score. However, not all roadways received an intersection or an approach score. For example, a midblock portion of a street link received a segment score, but because it doesn’t intersect another street, nor does it have turn lanes, neither an intersection nor approach score was assigned. Figure 2 helps illustrate the three possible sections of a roadway that were scored. Figure 2. A street link showing the three possible scores it could receive. Because not all links have these three sections, some links may instead receive one or two scores. The three scores assigned were based on a link’s characteristics that affect a bicyclist’s feeling of safety and comfort. The scores ranged from 1 to 4, where 1 represents the lowest stress, and 4 represents highest stress and discomfort. These three scores, (when all were assigned), determined the overall LTS score. The overall LTS score a link received was based on a “weakest link” methodology. That is, if a link received a segment score of 2, an approach score of 4, and an intersection score of 3, the overall link score assigned was LTS 4. The following list is a summary of street characteristics that affect a segment, approach, and intersection LTS score a link received, thereby affecting the overall LTS score assigned. Tables 2-8 include detailed descriptions of how street characteristics affected urban/suburban LTS while Tables 9 and 10 detail the rural LTS. Page 229 of 354 5 | Arroyo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project, Level of Traffic Stress Analysis Urban/Suburban Segment  Bike lane or mixed traffic  Width of bike lane, if present  Bike lane along parking lane or curb, if present  Posted speed limit  Number of travel lanes  Frequent lane blockage (commercial vehicles, transit vehicles, etc.)  Presence of centerline  Presence of sharrow markings Table 2. Scoring criteria for bike lane segments without adjacent parking lane (ODOT) 1 Lane per direction ≥2 lanes per direction Prevailing or Posted Speed ≥ 7’ (Buffered bike lane) 5.5’ – 7’ Bike lane ≤ 5.5’ Bike lane Frequent bike lane blockage1 ≥ 7’ (Buffered bike lane) <7’ bike lane or frequent blockage1 ≤30 mph LTS 1 LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 1 LTS 3 35 mph LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 3 LTS 3 LTS 2 LTS 3 ≥40 mph LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 3 LTS 4 1Typically occurs in urban areas (i.e. delivery trucks, parking maneuvers, stopped buses). Table 3. Scoring criteria for bike lane segments with adjacent parking lane 1 Lane per direction ≥2 lanes per direction Prevailing or Posted Speed ≥ 15’ bike lane + parking 14’ – 14.5’ bike lane + parking ≤ 13’ bike lane + parking or Frequent blockage ≥ 15’ bike lane + parking ≤ 14.5’ bike lane + parking or Frequent blockage1 ≤25 mph LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 2 LTS 3 30 mph LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 2 LTS 3 35 mph LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 3 LTS 3 LTS 3 ≥40 mph LTS 2 LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 3 LTS 4 1Typically occurs in urban areas (i.e. delivery trucks, parking maneuvers, stopped buses). Table 4. Scoring criteria for urban/suburban mixed traffic Prevailing Speed or Speed Limit (mph) Unmarked Centerline 1 lane per direction 2 lanes per direction 3+ lanes per direction ≤ 251 LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 30 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 ≥ 35 LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4 1Presesence of “sharrow” markings may reduce the LTS by a level for 25 mph or less sections depending on overall area context. Page 230 of 354 6 | Alta Planning + Design Urban/Suburban Approach  Presence of right turn lanes (where bikes and cars might mix)  Presence of left turn lanes (where a bike must merge/cross to reach left turn)  Length of turn lane  Posted speed limit Table 5. Scoring criteria for approaches with right turn lanes Right-turn lane configuration Right-turn lane length (ft) Bike Lane Approach Alignment Vehicle Turning Speed (mph)2 LTS Single ≤ 150 Straight ≤ 15 2 Single >150 Straight ≤ 20 3 Single Any Left ≤ 15 3 Single1 or Dual Exclusive/ Shared Any Any Any 4 1Any other single right turn lane configuration not shown above. 2This 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. Table 6. Scoring criteria for approaches with left turn lanes Left Turn Lane Criteria Prevailing Speed or Speed Limit (mph) No lane crossed1 1 lane crossed 2+ lanes crossed Dual shared or exclusive left turn lane2 ≤25 LTS 2 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 30 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 ≥ 35 LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4 1For shared through left lanes or where mixed traffic conditions occur (no bike lanes) 2Any other single left turn lane configuration not shown above. Page 231 of 354 7 | Arroyo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project, Level of Traffic Stress Analysis Urban/Suburban Intersection  Presence of traffic signal  Number of lanes crossed  Posted speed limit  Presence of median island Table 7. Scoring criteria for unsignalized intersection crossing without median refuge Prevailing Speed or Speed Limit (mph) Total Lanes Crossed (Both Directions) ≤ 3 Lanes 4 -5 Lanes ≥ 6 Lanes ≤ 25 LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 4 30 LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 4 35 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 ≥ 40 LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 Table 8. Scoring criteria for unsignalized intersection crossing with median refuge Prevailing Speed or Speed Limit (mph) Maximum Through/Turn Lanes Crossed per Direction 1-2 Lanes 2-3 Lanes 4+ Lanes ≤ 25 LTS 11 LTS 11 LTS 2 30 LTS 11 LTS 2 LTS 3 35 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4 ≥ 40 LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 1Refuge 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. Page 232 of 354 8 | Alta Planning + Design Rural Segment  Posted speed of 45 mph or higher  Daily motor vehicle volume  Presence and width of paved shoulder or bike lane Table 9. Unsignalized rural section with posted speeds 45 mph or greater 1,2,3 Daily Volume (vpd) Paved Shoulder Width 0 - < 2 ft 2 - < 4 ft 4 - < 6 ft > 6ft < 400 LTS 2 LTS 2 LTS 2 LTS 2 400 – 1500 LTS 3 LTS 2 LTS 2 LTS 2 1500 – 7000 4 LTS 4 LTS 3 LTS 2 LTS 2 7000 + LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 3 LTS 3 1 Based on p1-3 & Table 1-2 from the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide, 2011. 2 Adequate stopping sight distances on curves and grades assumed. A high frequency of sharper curves and short vertical transitions can increase the stress level especially on roadways with less than 6’ shoulders. Engineering judgement will be needed to determine what impact this will have on LTS level on a particular segment. 3 Segments with flashing warning beacons announcing presence of bicyclists (typically done on narrow long bridges or tunnels) may, depending on judgement, reduce the LTS by one, but no less than LTS 2. 4 Over 1500 AADT, the Oregon Bicycle and Pedestrian Design Guide indicates the need for shoulders. Rural Intersection  Posted speed of 45 mph or higher  Daily motor vehicle volume  Number of travel lanes Table 10. Scoring criteria for unsignalized intersection crossing with median refuge1 Daily Volume (vpd) ≤ 3 Lanes 4 – 5 Lanes ≥ 6 Lanes < 400 LTS 2 n/a n/a 400 – 1500 LTS 2 n/a n/a 1500 – 7000 4 LTS 2 LTS 3 n/a 7000 + LTS 3 LTS 4 LTS 4 1 For roadway being crossed Page 233 of 354 9 | Arroyo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project, Level of Traffic Stress Analysis Results Maps showing the results of the corridor analysis are attached to this memorandum. Overall, while both Alternatives provide an improvement over the existing condition, Alternative 1 provides a greater overall improvement for travel conditions along and across the corridor. Table 11 shows the average LTS score for each zone under existing conditions and each alternative. Table 11. Summary of LTS Alternatives Assessment for Halcyon Corridor . Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Along Across Along Across Along Across Along Across Existing Conditions 4 2 4 3 4 3 4 3 Alternative 1 2 2 2/3 3 3 3 3 3 Alternative 2 2 2 3/4 3 3/4 3 3 3 LTS 1 roadways, which would be shown in dark green are not present along the Halcyon Corridor. Generally LTS 1 facilities are completely separated from motor vehicle traffic or present only on very low traffic local roadways. This condition is not present on the Halcyon Road corridor in either existing or proposed designs. LTS 2 roadways, shown in lighter green, made up a significant portion of improved conditions in zones 1 and portions of zone 2 in Alternative 1. Wide buffered bikeways are the key improvement. LTS 3 roadways, shown in orange, are the prevailing condition in zones 3 and 4 in both improvement alternatives and zone 2 in alternative 2. The proximity and speed of motor vehicle traffic is likely to deter most average adults from these portions of Halcyon Road. LTS 4 roadways, shown in red, represent the existing conditions throughout the corridor at the present time as well as the southern part of zone 2 and northern part of zone 3 in alternative 2. The proximity and speed of motor vehicle traffic is very likely to deter most average adults from these portions of Halcyon Road. Page 234 of 354 10 | Alta Planning + Design Discussion of Improvements Zone 1, Alternatives 1 and 2 (Urban/Suburban LTS) Both proposed alternatives for Zone 1 were identical, so a distinction could not be drawn from this analysis. A summary of the potential improvements over the existing conditions is discussed. Along. Conditions in zone 1 are improved significantly by a buffered bike lanes in both directions. Across. Intersection crossing conditions are still an LTS 2, based on posted speed and number of lanes. Addition of the bicycle lane and subsequently narrowing of the motor vehicle travel lanes may produce some improvement but is not considered within the LTS framework. The improvements created at El Camino Real by the bike box are mitigated by the retention of the slip lane for eastbound traffic. Zone 2, Alternative 1 (Urban/Suburban LTS) Along. Conditions in zone 2 are improved somewhat by standard bike lanes installed in the northern end of the alignment until about 200’ south of Park Way. Buffered bike lanes extend south to the roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue. Most adults would feel comfortable bicycling in this area. At the roundabout bicyclists have the option to take the lane and mix with motor vehicle traffic or take the shared use pathway, which would be comfortable for most users. This alternative assumes a slowed travel speed of 35 mph south of Dodson Way. Across. Both bicyclists and pedestrians crossing Halcyon Way would benefit from the reduced exposure afforded by the road diet. Zone 2, Alternative 2 (Urban/Suburban LTS) Along. Conditions in zone 2 are improved somewhat by standard bike lanes installed in the northern end of the alignment until about 200’ south of Park Way. Buffered bike lanes extend south to the roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue. Most adults would feel comfortable bicycling in this area. Across. Both bicyclists and pedestrians crossing Halcyon Way would benefit from the reduced exposure afforded by the road diet. Zone 3, Alternative 1 (Urban/Suburban LTS) Along. The dual lane approach to the roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue would require cyclists to cross the right turn lane to enter the roundabout and make through or left turn movements, which results in LTS 3 for this northern portion of zone 3. Removing Page 235 of 354 11 | Arroyo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project, Level of Traffic Stress Analysis the exclusive right turn "slip lane" and making the approach as a single lane entry would result in all approaches of LTS 2. In either case, the roundabout includes an LTS 1 pathway for all movements whereby inexperienced cyclists can navigate around the roundabout on a shared use path and cross as a pedestrian at the crosswalks. The existing posted speed limit of 40 mph in zone 3 results in LTS 3 despite the buffered bike lanes throughout. There is the potential for prevailing speeds to be reduced with the proposed addition of an all-way stop at The Pike, a roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue, narrowing of travel lanes to 11 feet, curb extensions at Farroll Ave and Sandalwood Ave, and crosswalk enhancements such as RRFBs. Although it is not possible to quantify the speed reduction at this time, driver behavior is influenced by the physical roadway environment and the proposed changes have the potential to result in some speed reduction. Should prevailing speeds be reduced by 5 mph to 35 mph, the result for zone 3 would be LTS 2. Across. While bicyclists and pedestrians benefit from reduced exposure (number of motor vehicle lanes crossed) the posted travel speed of 40 mph results in a score of LTS 3. There is an improvement over Alternative 2, though not enough to result in a score change. If prevailing speeds were reduced to 35 mph, the score would like be improved to a result of LTS 2. Zone 3, Alternative 2 (Urban/Suburban LTS) Along. Buffered bike lanes and a posted travel posted of 40 MPH result in an LTS score of 3. Intermittent buffer in the northern end of the corridor results in an LTS score of 4. However, there is potential for the proposed intersection treatments at Fair Oaks Avenue and The Pike in combination with roadway reconfiguration to translate to lower motor vehicle speeds. Across. Posted speed and number of lanes results in a crossing score of LTS 3. Zone 4, Alternatives 1 and 2 (Rural LTS) Both proposed alternatives for Zone 4 were identical, so a distinction could not be drawn from this analysis. A summary of the potential improvements over the existing conditions is discussed. Along. Both alternatives propose the installation of wide dedicated bike lanes. This results in a score of LTS 3. Across. The roadway speed and ADT indicate an LTS 3 for the difficulty of crossing. While actual conditions are likely to be better during not peak hours. Traffic during peak times is likely to afford few gaps and create more challenging conditions. Page 236 of 354 12 | Alta Planning + Design Conclusion Based on this LTS assessment by the project team we recommend improvements to Halcyon Road. While both Proposed Alternatives may not address all more stressful locations (e.g., the double right turn lanes into the roundabout at Fair Oaks Avenue or the slip lane at El Camino Real), both proposed designs would significantly improve the comfort of people bicycling and walking along Halcyon Road compared to the existing conditions. Comparing the two Proposed Alternatives, the LTS analysis shows that buffered bike lanes and reduction in the number of travel lanes as described in Alternative 1 would be the preferred option for improved bicycle and pedestrian conditions. Page 237 of 354 W Branch Stel Camino Realel Camino RealWilshire StN Halcyon Rd el Camino RealS Halcyon Rd Br i sco Rd Rodeo Dr S Alpine St Fair Oaks AveThe PikeTemple StMagnolia DrAlder StDodsonWayFaehAveBell St N Alpi n e S t Dodson WayN Rena S t Woodland Dr S Rena St Diana Pl Sycamore DrGrand AveHiawatha Ln ThyrringMaple StDower Ave Helena StCameronCtFarroll AveLinda DrOlive StPecan St Beech StTodd LnAsh StWillow LnCabrillo HwyVirginia DrGaynfair Ter Sunset DrBennett AveS Halcyo n R d Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 HALCYON ROAD COMPLETE STREETS PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS - ALONG LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS ANALYSIS (ALONG CORRIDOR) Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is a measure of bicyclist comfort. A corrdor can be rated on comfort of travel along the corridor and across the corridor. The scores for each direction of travel may be different (e.g., a segment may score LTS 2 in the middle of a segment and an LTS 3 on the intersection approach. The higher score, LTS 3 is used for the overall travel along score. The same segment may score an LTS 4 for travel across.) 0 0.1 0.2 MILES ¹Data provided by the ESRI, Omni Means, Alta Map produced March, 2017.W Branch Stel Camino Realel Camino RealWilshire StN Halcyon Rd el Camino RealS Halcyon Rd Br i sco Rd Rodeo Dr S Alpine St Fair Oaks AveThe PikeTemple StMagnolia DrAlder StDodsonWayFaehAveBell St N Alpi n e S t Dodson WayN Ren a S t Woodland Dr S Rena St Diana Pl Sycamore DrGrand AveHiawatha Ln ThyrringMaple StDower Ave Helena StCameronCtFarroll AveLinda DrOlive StPecan St Beech StTodd LnAsh StWillow LnCabrillo HwyVirginia DrGaynfair Ter Sunset DrBennett AveS Halcyo n R d Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 W Branch Stel Camino Realel Camino RealWilshire StN Halcyon Rd el Camino RealS Halcyon Rd Br i sco Rd Rodeo Dr S Alpine St Fair Oaks AveThe PikeTemple StMagnolia DrAlder StDodsonWayFaehAveBell St N Alpi n e S t Dodson WayN Ren a S t Woodland Dr S Rena St Diana Pl Sycamore DrGrand AveHiawatha Ln ThyrringMaple StDower Ave Helena StCameronCtFarroll AveLinda DrOlive StPecan St Beech StTodd LnAsh StWillow LnCabrillo HwyVirginia DrGaynfair Ter Sunset DrBennett AveS Halcyo n R d Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 ALTERNATIVE 1 - ALONG ALTERNATIVE 2 - ALONG LTS - Rider Type 1 - All Ages and Abilities 2 - Most Adults 3 - Confident Adults 4 - Fearless Adults LTS SCORES WERE CALCULATED USING LTS METHODS DEVELOPED BY THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION (ODOT) AND DOCUMENTED IN THE ANALYSIS PROCEDURE MANUAL. @ Roundabout at Fair Oaks Ave also includes an LTS 1 shared use pathway @ Page 238 of 354 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!W Branch Stel Camino Realel Camino RealWilshire StN Halcyon Rd el Camino RealS Halcyon Rd Br i sco Rd Rodeo Dr S Alpine St Fair Oaks AveThe PikeTemple StMagnolia DrAlder StDodsonWayFaehAveBell St N Alpi n e S t Dodson WayN Rena S t Woodland Dr S Rena St Diana Pl Sycamore DrGrand AveHiawatha Ln ThyrringMaple StDower Ave Helena StCameronCtFarroll AveLinda DrOlive StPecan St Beech StTodd LnAsh StWillow LnCabrillo HwyVirginia DrGaynfair Ter Sunset DrBennett AveS Halcyo n R d Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS - ACROSS 0 0.1 0.2 MILES ¹Data provided by the ESRI, Omni Means, Alta Map produced March, 2017.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!W Branch Stel Camino Realel Camino RealWilshire StN Halcyon Rd el Camino RealS Halcyon Rd Br i sco Rd Rodeo Dr S Alpine St Fair Oaks AveThe PikeTemple StMagnolia DrAlder StDodsonWayFaehAveBell St N Alpi n e S t Dodson WayN Ren a S t Woodland Dr S Rena St Diana Pl Sycamore DrGrand AveHiawatha Ln ThyrringMaple StDower Ave Helena StCameronCtFarroll AveLinda DrOlive StPecan St Beech StTodd LnAsh StWillow LnCabrillo HwyVirginia DrGaynfair Ter Sunset DrBennett AveS Halcyo n R d Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!W Branch Stel Camino Realel Camino RealWilshire StN Halcyon Rd el Camino RealS Halcyon Rd Br i sco Rd Rodeo Dr S Alpine St Fair Oaks AveThe PikeTemple StMagnolia DrAlder StDodsonWayFaehAveBell St N Alpi n e S t Dodson WayN Ren a S t Woodland Dr S Rena St Diana Pl Sycamore DrGrand AveHiawatha Ln ThyrringMaple StDower Ave Helena StCameronCtFarroll AveLinda DrOlive StPecan St Beech StTodd LnAsh StWillow LnCabrillo HwyVirginia DrGaynfair Ter Sunset DrBennett AveS Halcyo n R d Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 ALTERNATIVE 1 - ACROSS ALTERNATIVE 2 - ACROSS HALCYON ROAD COMPLETE STREETS PLAN LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS ANALYSIS (ACROSS CORRIDOR) Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is a measure of bicyclist comfort. A corrdor can be rated on comfort of travel along the corridor and across the corridor. The scores for each direction of travel may be different (e.g., a segment may score LTS 2 in the middle of a segment and an LTS 3 on the intersection approach. The higher score, LTS 3 is used for the overall travel along score. The same segment may score an LTS 4 for travel across.) NOTE: Signalized intersections do not receive an intersection score. LTS - Rider Type 1 - All Ages and Abilities 2 - Most Adults 3 - Confident Adults 4 - Fearless Adults LTS SCORES WERE CALCULATED USING LTS METHODS DEVELOPED BY THE OREGON DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION (ODOT) AND DOCUMENTED IN THE ANALYSIS PROCEDURE MANUAL. Page 239 of 354 Complete Streets Plan Appendix F Outreach Memorandum Page 240 of 354 MEMORANDUM 233 A Street, Suite 703 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 269-5982 www.altaplanning.com   Page 1 To: Nate Stong, Omni Means From: Connery Cepeda and Marc Caswell, Alta Planning + Design Date: July 7, 2017 Re: Outreach Summary for Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan Summary The Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan includes a variety of types of outreach and opportunities for community input. In advance of any planning efforts, the City of Arroyo Grande hired a team of consultants to conduct outreach and solicit feedback from residents, visitors, and other people who use Halcyon Road. This memo serves to summarize many of those responses. Section I describes the responses from the Pop-Up Outreach Survey, conducted between August 12th and 14th at various community events. This 14-question survey asked respondents for their familiarity with the project area, and their desire for changes. The survey was also distributed to nine members of the Stakeholder Advisory Group (SAG), whose responses are described in the narrative below. The SAG responses were not included the full analysis. Section II describes the responses from the attendees at the four community charrettes on September 14th & 15th, 2016 and April 12th & 13th, 2017 at Harloe Elementary School. A total of 66 people signed in at the September 2016 charrettes and 45 people signed in at the April 2017. The responses were collected as meeting notes, votes on interactive poster boards, interactive polling, and comment cards. Section III serves as a placeholder for feedback received from the project website, which is still in progress and open to the public as of the date of this memo. Contents Summary – Page 1  I. Pop-Up Outreach Survey Results Summary - Page 2  II. Community Charrettes Summary – Page 4 III. Online Feedback Summary – Page 8 IV. Appendix - Page 12 Page 241 of 354   Page 2 I. Pop-Up Outreach Survey Results Summary Alta Planning + Design (Alta) staff created a 14-question survey that was conducted at community events on August 12th through the 14th, 2016. Alta staff attended three community events and collected 45 responses to the surveys. The events were: 1. Arroyo Grande Summer Carnival at Elm Street Park (Friday, August 12th); 2. Olohan Alley Farmers’ Market (Saturday, August 13th), and 3. Summer Concert at the Heritage Square Park (Sunday, August 14th). The respondents were screened by asking if they were familiar with Halcyon Road, and if they would be interested in taking survey about their use of the road. Many members of the public declined to participate due to lack of familiarity with the corridor, but were still given a “teaser” flyer to inform them of the upcoming community charrettes. Familiarity with Halcyon Road The majority of the respondents lived close to Halcyon Road. 37% lived within one mile of the road, and an additional 51% lived within 1-5 miles. A third of respondents use Halcyon Road more than 4 times a week, and an additional 44% use it 1-3 times a week. The overwhelming majority of respondents use Halcyon Road in a motor vehicle. These results correspond to additional questions on general travel behavior that found that the majority of respondents (59%) never ride a bike and 22% never walk for more than 5 minutes in a single trip. For the stakeholder group, half lived less than 5 miles from the road, and the other half lived greater than 10 miles away. For those lived close, all used Halcyon Road at least 4+ times per week, mostly by motor vehicle. Those who lived farther away, they used the road less frequently, but a higher percentage use the road for bicycling than those who lived closer. Respondents were asked to identify their destinations on Halcyon Road. The majority of respondents (54%) stated that they did not stop on Halcyon Road, but used it primarily to get to destinations in other places. Interestingly, no respondents stated that they used Halcyon Road to get to school, which seems like an anomaly, since Harloe Elementary School is located on the corner of Halcyon Road and Fair Oaks Avenue. Stakeholder group members stated that work and shopping were their most frequent destinations along Halcyon Road. Page 242 of 354   Page 3 Conditions of Halcyon Road The surveys asked respondents to rate the conditions on Halcyon road by each mode (walking, bicycling, transit, and driving). Many of the respondents stated that they could not sufficiently answer the question if they had not used that mode on the corridor, so the amount of responses for driving is much higher than the other modes. However, those who reported waking or bicycling on Halcyon Road rated the conditions as ‘Fair’ or ‘Poor’ – with no one rating the conditions for waking or bicycling as ‘Excellent.’ Those who drove generally rated the street as ‘Good’ and ‘Fair’ with two rating it as ‘Excellent’ and one rating it as ‘Poor.’ Among the stakeholder group, walking conditions were rated poor or fair, but never excellent, while all but one respondent rated bicycling conditions as ‘Poor.’ Page 243 of 354   Page 4 Desire to Improve Halcyon Road The survey also asked respondents to rate how important it was to improve the conditions on Halcyon road for each mode (walking, bicycling, transit, and driving). Similar to the previous question asking respondents to rate conditions, many felt that they could not sufficiently answer this question if they had not used this mode on Halcyon Road. For walking, bicycling, and driving, the majority (between 68-71%) responded that it was ‘Very Important’ or ‘Important’ to improve conditions for each mode. Unsurprisingly, all members of the stakeholder group felt that walkability and bikeability improvements along Halcyon Road were ‘Important’ or ‘Very Important.’ II. Community Charrettes Summary Omni-Trans, Alta Planning + Design, and Strategic Initiatives held two rounds of community charrettes (September 14th & 15th, 2016 and April 12th & 13th, 2017) at Harloe Elementary. At 41 people signed in on the September 14th charrette and 25 people signed in on the 15th. 23 people signed in on the April 12th charrette and 22 people signed in on the 13th. At the beginning of all four meetings attendees reviewed and provided insightful comments on aerial maps and cross sections along the corridor. At the first round of meetings, they were given three stickers and asked to place them next to their preferred examples of typical Complete Streets engineering treatments on a “What is a Complete Street” board. The stickers were used to show their support for one or more treatments they would like to see along Halcyon Road. Consultants then led a Powerpoint presentation to explain the challenges and opportunities along Halcyon Road and gathered feedback on each of the four “Context Zones” along the corridor. At the first round of meetings, the presentation and discussion was focused around community priorities and potential locations in need of improvement. At the second round of meetings, the presentation and discussion was focused around proposed designs and improvements that addressed the initial input. Strategic Initiatives provided “clickers” for attendees to anonymously answer questions about their interaction with Halcyon Road. After opinions were collected, Strategic Initiatives opened Page 244 of 354   Page 5 the floor up for discussion where attendees shared their specific concerns and brought attention to problem areas along the corridor. These concerns were written down by Alta Planning + Design. This section summarizes the feedback from the two charrettes and is organized by type of feedback received. Meeting Notes Throughout the community charrettes, note takers chronicled participants’ preferred areas of improvements and recommendations. Overall, participants recognized the need for more bicycle safety, enforcement and beautification on Halcyon Road. Halcyon Road was subdivided into 4 context zones for identification purposes during the activities. A summary of all comments received during the Charrettes is provided in the Appendix of this document. In Zone 1, attendees of the first round of meetings commented that poor traffic signal timing coupled with long waits for pedestrians to cross create unsafe roads for all users. People also shared their confusion on whether the 100 N. Halcyon Road block was a parking lane or a travel lane. At the second round, attendees expressed their approval of improved traffic flow, but some were skeptical of the need for any bike lanes along Halcyon. In Zone 2, multiple participants at the first round of meetings reported increased speeding, inconsistent speed limits, low driver visibility when entering shopping centers and hospitals, and road and sidewalk damage caused by tree roots. A road diet was encouraged for this stretch of the road. At the second round, there was mixed opinions on the roundabout, with some stating they liked the reduced speeds and smoother traffic flow, while others were concerned about the ability for students to cross a roundabout. The lane reduction (‘Road Diet’) was perceived as mostly positive, though concerns about increased traffic from future developments and hospital access were raised. In Zone 3, participants at the first round of meetings vocalized that low visibility and speeding has created dangerous crossings for pedestrians at the intersections of Virginia Drive and Farroll Avenue. Midblock crosswalk improvements need enhanced lighting and school zones could benefit from higher visibility crosswalks, crossing guards, lower speed limits and more traffic enforcement. At the second round, the parking near intersections Farroll were still a concern and additional crosswalks between The Pike and Fair Oaks were requested. In Zone 4, attendees of the first round of meetings commented that the intersection at Halcyon Road and The Pike is unsafe for all users due to high speeds and reduced visibility caused by the guardrail and terrain. People suggested a roundabout at Highway 1 and Halcyon Road, but prefer to not lose farmland for these improvements. Although bike lanes run through the area, they are substandard in quality and could use improvement. At the second meeting, there was boisterous applause for the proposed stop sign at the Pike and a desire for immediate improvements to that intersection, regardless of the rest of this project. There were requests for more sidewalks along the eastern side of Halcyon Road and concerns around the projects’ potential impact to the historic Post Office. Page 245 of 354   Page 6 Existing Conditions Map Attendees used aerial maps and cross sections of the corridor to identify specific intersections or stretches that could benefit most from improvements to enhance driver and pedestrian safety. A comment focused on the difficulty walking due to narrow sidewalks and large utility poles on Fair Oaks Avenue. Inadequate signal timings result in long wait times for drivers, and cause increased traffic congestion at the intersection of Grand Avenue. Lack of pedestrian facilities like crosswalks, warning lights and sidewalks at Dodson Way make the crossing difficult and dangerous. For drivers, inconsistent numbers of lanes are confusing and used by speeding drivers to unsafely pass slower cars. Poor visibility on Virginia Drive, Sycamore Drive, The Pike, Sandalwood Avenue, Farroll Avenue and Halcyon Drive put drivers and pedestrians at increased risk for collisions. Storyboard Dot Tallies Of all design elements, high visibility crosswalks had the most support over the two-day charrette period with 12 dots total. The next most popular was On-Street Separated Bikeways, which had 11 dots. Crossing beacons came in third with eight dots; planted medians and street trees had six dots, bike lanes had six dots, protected intersections had five dots, road diets had four dots, roundabouts had three dots, curb extensions and median refuges had one dot, and shared lane markings received no dots. The board, with the total votes from the two charrettes is  featured below.    Page 246 of 354   Page 7 Interactive Polling Using interactive polling, participants at both community charrettes shared their thoughts and experiences about Halcyon Road’s bikeability and walkability. Of those polled, male-identified individuals represented a marginal majority with 52% and over 60% identified being over 51 years of age. Only 14% completed the survey prior to polling. Sixty-nine percent reported living in Arroyo Grande and almost 90% live within 5 miles of Halcyon Road. Nearly all of those polled are long-term residents of the area with 22% living on the Central Coast for 10-20 years and 66% for more than 20 years. Residents reported high rates of walking a significant distance, with over half reporting they walk 4 or more times per week. However, few do so on Halcyon Road. 66% of respondents reported that they walk on Halcyon Road less than 3 times a month, and 80% never bike along Halcyon Road. Most respondents travel along Halcyon Road by car, with 69% stating they drive on the road at least 4 times per week. About 45% of those polled report living or working near Zone 3: Fair Oaks Avenue to the Pike, the zone with the highest amount of housing in the study area. In all context zones, safety was ranked the highest and most pressing concern. Traffic congestion was the second most important concern in zones 1, 2, and 4. Zone 3 differed in that respondents heavily weighed walkability as a concern. The stakeholder advisory group similarly cast their votes in an interactive polling activity separate from the community charrettes. Although SAG members shared similar demographics and relationships with the area, a majority reported living further away from Halcyon Road but showed an equal frequency of driving trips along Halcyon Road. About 64% of stakeholder group members used their bike for any purpose but 71% never biked along Halcyon Road. Unlike community charrette participants, members of the stakeholder group identified the hospital as their most popular destination. A significant majority of stakeholders reported not living within the context zones analyzed, but similarly chose safety as the priority concern for zones 2, 3, and 4. Details of the Interactive Polling results can be found in the Appendix. Comment Cards Participants used comment cards to voice their opinions on issues of bikeability and walkability in the community and suggest potential improvements. People favored increasing safety for pedestrians by installing more traffic calming devices like warning lights, traffic signals and stop signs. Participants specifically called for stop signs in all directions at The Pike, and a road diet along Halcyon Road. One comment emphasized the need for better sidewalks connecting Harloe Elementary School to housing in Zone 3. Comments around congestion relief on Halcyon Road focused on stacking lanes on Grand Avenue, eliminating parking between Sandalwood Avenue and Farroll Avenue, and installing an additional access points to AGHS to avoid Halcyon Road altogether. Participants were also concerned with aggressive drivers running red lights and not yielding at crosswalks. Page 247 of 354   Page 8 III. Online Feedback Summary As part of the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan project, Alta staff also created a website (HalcyonCompleteStreets.com) for posting project information and allowing the public to provide further input in addition to the pop-up outreach and community charrettes. User Survey With input from the City and Omni Means, Alta developed a 5-page, 59-question online survey to help create an understanding of key issues that are discouraging people from walking and bicycling, and improvements that would encourage greater use of existing or new facilities. The survey was provided in English and Spanish through third-party provider SurveyMonkey. As of March 13, 2017, 17 people have completed the survey. Of the 17 respondents, 15 responded that they live less than one mile from Halcyon Road, and the remaining two stated they lived less than 5 miles from the project. The majority of respondents use Halcyon Road by car more than 4 times per week and 2/3 of the respondents use a bicycle more than once a month. There clearly was an appetite for changes to Halcyon Road, however, with 56% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement "The transportation options available to me along Halcyon Road are suitable to my needs." Combined, 93% of respondents felt it is important or very important to improve walking conditions along Halcyon Road, and 73% feel the same way about bicycling conditions. Other questions showed strong favorability towards building more sidewalks (100%) and Traffic Calming (93%) and crosswalks (86%). There is clearly overwhelming support to improve the safety of bicycling and walking along Halcyon Road, though the exact design features were not as clear cut. Thought 44% of people stated that they never bike on Halcyon Road, when asked if specific designs would improve their travel experiences, the respondents clearly favored more physical separation from motor vehicles. When asked “Would the following changes to Halcyon Road improve your travel experience?” - 37% said ‘yes’ to Sharrows - 56% said ‘yes’ to bike lanes - 68% said ‘yes’ to buffered bike lanes - 81% said ‘yes’ to a wide bike lane separated from traffic by a curb or parked cars - 94% said ‘yes’ to a multi-use path completely separated from traffic When asked if roundabouts replaced four way stops and traffic lights, 44% agreed that it would improve their experience along Halcyon Road. 43% stated they would not like a travel lane removed, but 19% stated that they were not sure. Nearly all respondents (88%) favored the addition of sidewalks along the entire corridor. Page 248 of 354   Page 9 Interactive Map The interactive map (HalcyonCompleteStreets.com/Map/) is another method for the public to provide comments at specific locations, and view others’ comments. The map appears to have attracted a more technical crowd, who provided detailed design recommendations. There were 6 unique and relevant comments, which are detailed below: Zone 1: - Request for a Class II Bike Lane on El Camino Real - At Grand Avenue: remove parking in southbound direction of Halcyon, just north of East Grand Avenue. - At Grand Avenue: “Increase intersection efficiency. Purchase property on northwest side of intersection to increase intersection visibility. Overlap northbound/southbound phasing or provide roundabout.” Zone 2: - At Fair Oaks Avenue: “S. Halcyon Rd. is a very busy roadway with two lanes traveling south (with a third turn lane at the intersection). Reducing it to one lane for the "round about" will cause significant traffic congestion. Additionally, without the traffic signals, it reduces the control and safety of the elementary school children walking to/from school and crossing this busy roadway. For example, a vehicle entering the roundabout southbound, wanting to turn right onto Fair Oaks, will be traveling at speed making the right turn and exiting, with no time to react if a child is stepping in to the crosswalk from the north curb of Fair Oaks trying to get to school. The same is true on each corner.” - “Comment for both zone 2 and 3. Remove parking on both sides of roadway. Provide two-way left hand turn lane and one travel lane in each direction. Provide bike lanes. Increase intersection efficiency at Halcyon/Fair Oaks. Provide adequate pedestrian crossings for children.” Zone 3: - “Removing parking Fair Oaks would significantly increase traffic during school drop-off and pick-up” Zone 4: [No comments] General Website Comments The website also allowed for people to submit comments on the project in a generalized or specific form. The open format of the prompt allowed for a wide range of comments, detailed below.  NO all-way stop at Pike/S. Halcyon! Reduce speed/increase visibility! Page 249 of 354   Page 10  Plant more trees. Install ADA compliant sidewalk on S. Halcyon all the way to city limit. Increase buffer zone between S. Halcyon oncoming traffic and vehicles turning left onto Virginia Dr -or- prohibit traffic leaving Virginia Dr onto S. Halcyon altogether.  Reduce speed limit on County section of S. Halcyon to 40 mph. Reduce speed limit between Pike and Hwy 101 to 35 mph. Increase school zone size. Re-install crosswalk at Willow Ln. with flashing beacon.  I bike/commute along this corridor, south towards highway 1. Both of my children attend Harloe elementary school. Our entire family walks and bikes along Halcyon road in both directions. Any idea involving widening bike lanes, lighted cross walks (like in the village), sidewalks being extended where there are none, sidewalk improvements, road improvements, anything to make the area safer! I am definitely going to make an effort to attend one of the two meetings. Thanks for involving the community.  My wife and I own the house at [Removed for privacy] South Halcyon Road in Arroyo Grande. We were unable to attend the meetings this week at Harloe Elementary School concerning Halcyon Street improvements. However, we do have major issues with recent changes made on Halcyon Road. Since moving into this house in June of 2006 we have been disturbed by the increase in the amount of traffic in front of our house and the speed in which these vehicles pass down Halcyon Road. It is necessary for us to back out of our driveway onto Halcyon when leaving the house. Many time the vehicles are driving so fast we have little time to make the turn out of the driveway. If there is any way to decrease traffic and/so slow down the large amount of traffic taking that portion of Halcyon Road, we would be in favor. Decreasing the speed limit to 30 to 35 mpg would be helpful. When we moved in the speed limit was lower than it is now. I don't know the rationale for the higher speed limit on Halcyon Road given the location of Harloe Elementary School and the Hospital. A greater police enforcement of speeds along Halcyon would also be a deterrent to speeders.  i attended the thursday nite meeting at harloe. i didnt want to be tar and feathered so i kept a couple ideas private. obviously we are a growing community.that means more traffic inwhich means tough choices.one of the most obvious things to do to lesson traffic onhalcyon is to build a road across from the highschool to grand.that would be the route of choice from the mesa. also,the powers to be of halcyon were not truthful.there are 2 existing dirt roads still used and another overgrown.2 exit onto the pike near gaynfair. regarding the pike halcyon intersection ,i feel if the road was graded down to a visable level it would help,traffic light needed.also a center turn lane for the pike and also the post office  I frequently walk from my house on S. Alpine up Halcyon under the freeway and up the hill to Trader Joe's for small errands. Good for my body. Page 250 of 354   Page 11  Your website give no indication on the length of time tht this project is projected to take. how long will this be 'in progress'?  Came away from the meeting tonight at Harloe with the distinct feeling this whole project is geared around getting bike lanes on Halcyon. My feeling is we have a LONG way to go in correcting the traffic and safety problems before anymore devolpment OR bike lanes are added to the equation. Page 251 of 354   Page 12 Appendix Appendix A: Raw Meeting Notes from Charrettes 1 & 2 (September 14 & 15, 2016) Appendix B: Interactive Polling from Charrettes 1 & 2 (September 14 & 15, 2016). Appendix C: Interactive Polling from Stakeholder Advisory Committee (October 10, 2016) Appendix D: Raw Meeting Notes from Charrettes 3 & 4 (April 12 & 13, 2017) Appendix E: Interactive Polling from Charrettes 3 & 4 (April 12 & 13, 2017) Appendix F: Results from Online Survey (Up through March 13, 2017) Page 252 of 354 617 West 7th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 www.altaplanning.com Page 1 December 12, 2016 Meeting Notes Halcyon Road Complete Street Charrettes Round 1 Location Harloe Elementary, Halcyon Road, Arroyo Grande, CA Attendees 41 attendees on 9/14/2016; 25 attendees on 9/15/2016 Meeting facilitated by Nate Stong, Omni-Means Engineering ___________________ Overall Feedback  How many people use Halcyon daily? (ADT)  Not a safe road to bike  Add hospital as a destination  Where can we find the survey? Halcyoncompletestreets.com  Paper survey? Contact Info. in Sign-in  Told no stop lights or other improvements 2 years ago  Bulbouts possible? Possible  Traffic study completed?  Existing conditions analysis o Especially for medical facility on Fair Oaks o Forecast  Briscoe access to 101 Zone 1  Cigar shop with parking in front o Odd spot- one lane or two? Lane narrows  Signal timing bad for driving and walking and long wait to turn left to Halcyon from Grand o Long wait to turn left to Halcyon from Grand o 7/11 nothing to prevent drivers from crossing double yellow and blocking traffic o Left and straight lane not well marked  NB Halcyon at Grand- lane markings faded o Congestion at lane bottleneck (21) o Lane striping not well aligned.- head on collisions (continuity of traffic lanes)  El Camino failed intersection for bicycling o Taking life into one’s hand  By cemetery- crosswalk needed for walking  Opening of Briscoe Ave access to 101? o Studied- environmental doc later this year unknown at this time Page 253 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 2  Closing off SB Ramps from 101? No plans  Signals do not detect scooters by hospital increase sensitivity  Bennett St development traffic impacts? o No plans now, but good suggestion for this plan  Oak Tree across cemetery- hawks nest (do not disturb)  Separate ‘speed’ from ‘safety’ option  Make it inspirational to bike and walk  Roundabouts should be considered  Parking dangerous Bennett to Grand NB and SB by 7/11  Few places to park  Aggressive driving in AM peak  No bike lanes  Left-turns from SB 101 not safe- conflict points  El Camino Real has great paving and bike lanes  Halcyon missing connectivity and safety is always #1  Traffic conflicts from Briscoe closure confusion  Ride bike thru parking lots and paths instead of Halcyon  Drivers run red lights  18-wheelers turning to Grand- tough turn over median  Traffic shown on Google Street View at El Camino Real  Congestion and safety are related  Cemetery as Gateway/ Landmark  Beautification potential- two narrow road Zone 2  No access NB to residential driveway without double yellow  Consistent speed limit, instead of 35/40/25  Speeding issue: brought up 2 years ago- city said no studies to be done o Traffic calming?  Left-turn lane storage short at Fair Oaks  Low visibility from left-turns by liquor store/laundromat  More signs, instead of markings  Lane alignment issues by hospital  Higher traffic when school is in session o When were traffic counts done? When school was in  17,000 ADT high collisions? Rate less than state average except at the Pike  SB from Dodson challenging  Root damage to sidewalk by hospital  Center-turn lane cuts short by business  Speeding  Flashing lights by school zone? Advance warning  Bollards by school indicate danger zone  Not turn SB by Dodson Page 254 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 3  More markings on where people can cross safely by eye doctor o With push button to activate  Between 7:50-8, students crossings without guard  NB Left-turn lane does not have enough storage  Speed limit- 35-40- 25 school zone  Lot of driveways/curb cuts a safety issue for walking o Low visibility for drivers exiting hospital  Should be consistently 35mph  Road diet potential to 1 lane each way (11’ wide)  High-volume arterial  Sidewalks uneven  Drainage runoff issues by hospital- bulbouts and landscaping (infiltration)  Consider undergrounding utilities Zone 3  NB/SB splits? Comparable 11,000 ADT  Crosswalk moved- sandalwood  Parents ignore no parking signs to pick up students  Traffic has quadrupled in 15 years o Will county study alternative route to access 101  Speeding  Virginia Dr. difficult to turn left to Halcyon o Speeding and low visibility  Halcyon SB to Virginia- head on collision potential at counter-turn lane  3-way stop at the Pike?  2 accidents in recent was at Farroll o Drivers do not slow for school crosswalk- nothings been done o Police do not enforce  Vehicles larger then cars parked on-street block visibility  Trailers RVs and oversized vehicles speeding  One has to drive over yellow line if cars parked on-street in places  Speed limit one of highest in city  Lack of enforcement  Flashing light at crosswalk not effective  Crosswalk at multi-lane dangerous  Lack of sidewalks with ADA ramps (for strollers)  Crossing guard needed at Farroll  Expand school zone area  Continuation of road diet potential o Lack of lane consistency a safety concern  Make it safe for children- vs. bollards and k-rail at corner (bad design)  Parents do not let children walk/bike at the pike  High-visibility crosswalk with flashing lights at the Pike needed Page 255 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 4  High speeds during school hours  Mid-block crosswalk with multiple lanes a safety issue and uncontrolled intersection o False sense of security for children  Speed limit should not be 40 in a residential neighborhood  Known as acceleration/racing zone as drivers head to SR-1  Tons of close calls- especially with on-street parking  Why was crosswalk relocated away from school? o Instead of closer  Lack of enforcement – 15 mph/ $200 fine in Nevada  Push button crosswalk, like in the village?  Street design important- raised crosswalks for traffic calming  Ambulances can get to hospital quickly- prioritize access  Awful visibility at Farroll  Evolution of corridor as arterial- balance residents vs. commuters o “highway/arterial” in general plan  Merge area by school does not make sense Zone 4  Speed  Congestion on 1 when something happened on 101 o signal  3-way stop or signal at Pike  Overpass by Creek?  Lot of cyclists using sub-standard bike lanes o Tourists and children  99% of collisions rear-end someone waiting to turn left o Flashing lights? Stop ahead  I avoid Pike intersection when possible  Will speed be analyzed? o Speed surveys done 40mph not appropriate for residential  I drive to post office instead of walk- not safe  Outside of city limits- coordination w/county  Connectivity- improve bike lane condition  SW corner of the pike (w/guard rail) a blind corner o Tons of collisions by trailer park  Both intersections at Highway 1 part of study  Roundabout at the pike? Note elevation change  Congestion at highway 1- especially when 101 closes o Emergency access concern  Add right-turn lane from Mesa to Highway 1  $2 million + on studies at Highway 1- realign bridge?  NO loss of farmland roundabout? By Highway 1  The Pike has been discussed for over 40 years Page 256 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 5 o Signal potential solution  By general store: passing over double yellow line  Another entry/exit for Halcyon community? Mapping Exercise  Left turns coming out of 7-11 to go southbound- cross double yellow lines. Jams up southbound Halcyon.  Street parking (1 spot?) in front of Cigar shop. Needs to go. It’s awkward, unsafe, confusing. There’s not enough room for traffic, when southbound wanting to  Leaving this lot- going southbound is dangerous left. Have to cross 2+ lanes, poor visibility  Longer left hand turn lane  This turn lane is too short (E Grand Ave) Sometimes have to wait 2-3 light cycles to get into the lane and on the way…  Need advance warning lights. Need crosswalks on both sides of intersection missing sidewalk. (Dodson Way)  Very difficult to turn left out of Dodson way at 7:30-9am, 2-3:30 pm, 4:30-6pm  Need better crossing assistance for students before and after school (Fair Oaks Ave)  Sidewalk too narrow utility poles (Fair Oaks Ave)  High speeds in lane drop area  Farroll Ave and Halcyon Rd o Dip o Poor sight distance  Halcyon Rd- need lane delineation  Crosswalk (Sandalwood Ave across Halcyon)  Inaccurate extent of striping! (Halcyon Rd.)  Sight distance speed of thru traffic (Halcyon Rd.)  Sight distance problem, uneven pavement (Willow Lane)  Left turns into and out of Virginia Drive are dangerous. When Southbound going head on with a car turning left onto Sycamore. From Virginia to Halcyon more visibility  Visibility turning left at Pike and Halcyon is very poor. Maybe a good spot for a roundabout?  Cars parked near corners reduce already bad visibility. Case in point!  Many accidents (the Pike)  Speed transition (the Pike) Comment Cards  Great job- good turnout  City used to provide crossing guard. Now they’re provided by district. Less pay, less training.  I used my stickers for my idealistic idea of what Halcyon could/should look like. I think road diets are what would work best in reality for this project.  I think you needed to list the hospital people go for rehab, outpatient surgery visit patients etc. so it is a major destination and needs to be considered.  Need longer stacking lanes on Corand to turn left on Halcyon  Warning lights near Pike stating stop sign up ahead Page 257 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 6  3-way stop at the Pike. On the block between Farrell and Sandalwood on W. side that is no parking- Please print curb road. I live on Sandalwood. Cars park there to pick up kids and block visibility of the crosswalk and I have witnessed near misses of kids getting ready to cross (even with lights flashing at crosswalk). Also going N to S on Halcyon- indicate 35 mile zone ahead. Going S to N from Grand it starts at 35 miles per hour (painted on street) which is great then there are posted 40 “poles” just before the hospital. Very confusing.  Going North on Halcyon Road from the Pike-only driveway is directly across from Virginia Street. The only options I have to turn left into my driveway is “pray” none come barreling from the South and hits me or illegally enter the solid yellow lines of the diamond <> to be out of traffic.  2 foot camera should be placed at Halcyon and El Camino because numerous people run the red lights- not just when it turns yellow but speeding through long after light has turned red!  17,000 daily trips at Halcyon and Grand intersection  Please keep the walkability/bikeability at the utmost importance especially in Zone 3 around the school. If we encourage safe walking/biking it will cut down on congestion! Harloe has the highest number of students in attendance and this needs to be extra safe! Sidewalks definitely need to be put in safe, and protected. Please force people to slow down.  The blinking light at Sycamore and Halcyon need to be take more serious by the drivers. Harloe has the highest number of children at an Elementary School in the 5 cities with 670 children. Making Halcyon a safer place would not be a waste of money. Thank you! Tori Perkins- 670 Woodland Ct.  Thank you for your efforts to help make Halcyon Road a safer place for everyone. – Karen M. White  Road from AGHS to Grand Ave across fields and creek would alleviate traffic on Halcyon  Pike and Halcyon on- Traffic Signal, crosswalks poor visibility due to hill. Shave hill down.  Halcyon traffic access to Pike, 2 existing dirt roads already.  Good presentation.  Worried about taking land Halcyon store, office.  Congestion go to and leaving Halcyon.  Halcyon is a major artery. I like that I can use it to get to 101 quickly.  Put a light at the Pike to solve the problem with visibility and to introduce traffic breaks for turning onto the street in zone 3. Page 258 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 7 Text Message “Strip the parking and add Two-Way Left Turn Lane within City reach. Add buffered bike lane through entire reach. Provide wide sidewalk on both sides of the street through city limits. Improve intersection efficiency at Halcyon/Fair Oaks Ave to discourage cut-through traffic on Todd and Olive Streets. Add enhanced ped crossings throughout reach. Buy property at Halcyon/Grand and fix the signal.” Dot Tallies Bike Lanes  6  Crossing Beacons  8  Curb Extensions and Median Refuge  1  High Visibility Crosswalks  12  On‐Street Separated Bikeways  5  Planted Medians and Street Trees  6  Protected Intersections  5  Road Diets  4  Roundabouts  3  Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”)  0  Grand Total 50  Page 259 of 354 Session NameHalcyon Rd Charrettes Merged Sessions 9-14-15-2016Date Created Active Participants Total Participants9/22/2016 1:10:56 PM 66 66Average Score Questions0.00% 22Results by Question1. What is your favorite football team? (Select One)Percent CountLos Angels Rams 8.00% 4San Diego Chargers 6.00% 3Oakland Raiders 14.00% 7San Francisco 49ers 30.00% 15Los Angeles Buccaneers 0.00% 0Who Cares! 42.00% 21Totals 100% 502. What is your gender? (Select One)Percent CountFemale 47.27% 26Male 52.73% 29Totals 100% 55ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%Los AngelsRamsSan DiegoChargersOaklandRaidersSanFrancisco49ersLos AngelesBuccaneersWho Cares!44.00%45.00%46.00%47.00%48.00%49.00%50.00%51.00%52.00%53.00%Female MalePage 260 of 354 3. What is your age? (Select One)Percent Count18 and under 1.85% 119-35 11.11% 636-50 14.81% 851-70 46.30% 25Over 70 25.93% 14Totals 100% 544. Where do you live? (Select One)Percent CountArroyo Grande 68.85% 42Grover Beach 0.00% 0Pismo Beach/Shell Beach 3.28% 2Oceano 0.00% 0Halcyon* 22.95% 14Nipomo Mesa 0.00% 0Other 4.92% 3Totals 100% 61ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%50.00%18 and under 19‐35 36‐50 51‐70 Over 700.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%*NOTE: Based on comments at the 9/14/16 charrette, the polling choice "Nipomo" was changed to "Halcyon" for the 9/15/16 charrette.  The number of participants who chose "Nipomo" on 9/14/16 was "0" while 11 participants chose "Other," including those whose choice would have been "Halcyon."  On 9/15/16, 5 participants chose "Halcyon" while 1 chose "Other." Therefore, in order to estimate the number of participants who would have chosen "Halcyon" and "Other" on 9/14/16, the results from the 9/14/16 charrette were adjusted based on the results from 9/15/16. The percent of participants choosing "Halcyon" in the "Halcyon" plus "Other" categories on 9/15/16 was 5/(5+1) = 83.33%. Assuming the number of participants who would have chosen “Halcyon” was in the same ratio on 9/14/16 as9/15/16, the number of participants who would have chosen “Halcyon” on 9/14/16 can be estimated by multiplying the number of participants who selected "Other" by 83.33%, which is 11 x 83.33% = 9.16.  Therefore, the total number of participants who would have chosen "Halcyon" is estimated to be 9+5=14 and the total number of participants who would have chosen "Other" is estimated to be2+1 = 3.Page 261 of 354 5. How close do you live to Halcyon Rd? (Select One)Percent Count<1 mi. 71.70% 381 – 5 mi. 16.98% 96 – 10 mi. 1.89% 1> 10 mi. 9.43% 5Totals 100% 536. How long have you lived on the Central Coast? (Select One)Percent CountLess than 1 year 1.69% 11 - 4 years 3.39% 25 - 10 years 5.08% 311 - 20 years 22.03% 13More than 20 years 66.10% 39Not Applicable 1.69% 1Totals 100% 59ResponsesResponses0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%<1 mi. 1 – 5 mi. 6 – 10 mi. > 10 mi.0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%Less than 1year1 ‐ 4 years 5 ‐ 10 years 11 ‐ 20yearsMore than20 yearsNotApplicablePage 262 of 354 7. How often do you walk for a significant distance, i.e., more than 5 minutes for a single trip? (Select One)Percent CountNever 16.36% 91-3 times per month 14.55% 81-3 times per week 18.18% 104+ times per week 50.91% 28Totals 100% 558. How often do you bike for any purpose? (Select One)Percent CountNever 68.33% 411-3 times per month 18.33% 111-3 times per week 5.00% 34+ times per week 8.33% 5Totals 100% 60ResponsesResponses0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%Never 1‐3 times permonth1‐3 times perweek4+ times per week0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%Never 1‐3 times permonth1‐3 times perweek4+ times per weekPage 263 of 354 9. How often do you drive along Halcyon Road? (Select One)Percent CountNever 3.51% 21-3 times per month 19.30% 111-3 times per week 8.77% 54+ times per week 68.42% 39Totals 100% 5710. How often do you walk along Halcyon Road? (Select One)Percent CountNever 39.66% 231-3 times per month 25.86% 151-3 times per week 8.62% 54+ times per week 25.86% 15Totals 100% 58ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%Never 1‐3 times permonth1‐3 times perweek4+ times per week0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%Never 1‐3 times permonth1‐3 times perweek4+ times per weekPage 264 of 354 11. How often do you bike along Halcyon Road? (Select One)Percent CountNever 82.46% 471-3 times per month 8.77% 51-3 times per week 5.26% 34+ times per week 3.51% 2Totals 100% 5712. What are your key destinations along Halcyon Road? (Select all that apply)Percent CountWork 16.27% 27Hospital* 6.02% 10Church 3.01% 5Friend’s house 13.86% 23School 8.43% 14Recreation area 11.45% 19Shopping 16.87% 28destination: walking for fitness or leisure 13.86% 23I never walk along Halcyon Road 4.82% 8Other 5.42% 9Totals 100% 166ResponsesResponses0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%Never 1‐3 times permonth1‐3 times perweek4+ times per week0.00%2.00%4.00%6.00%8.00%10.00%12.00%14.00%16.00%18.00%*NOTE: Based on comments at the 9/14/16 charrette, the polling choice "Bus Stop" was changed to "Hospital" for the 9/15/16 charrette.  The number of participants who chose "Bus Stop" on 9/14/16 was "0" while 13 participants chose "Other," including those whose choice would have been "Hospital."  On 9/15/16, 3 participants chose "Hospital" while 3 chose "Other." Therefore, in order to estimate the number of participants who would have chosen "Hospital" and "Other" on 9/14/16, the results from the 9/14/16 charrette were adjusted based on the results from 9/15/16. The percent of participants choosing "Hospital" in the "Hospital" plus "Other" categories on 9/15/16 was 3/(3+3) = 50%. Assuming the number of participants who would have chosen “Hospital” was in the same ratio on 9/14/16 as 9/15/16, the number of participants who would have chosen “Hospital” on 9/14/16 can be estimated by multiplying the number of participants who selected "Other" by 50%, which is 13 x 50% = 6.5.  Therefore, the total number of participants who would have chosen "Hospital" is estimated to be 7+3=10 and the total number of participants who would have chosen "Other" is estimated to be 6+3 = 9.Page 265 of 354 13. Did you complete a survey? (Select One)Percent CountPaper 7.14% 4Online 7.14% 4Both 0.00% 0None 85.71% 48Totals 100% 5614. Do you live or work in or near a Context Zone? (Select One)Percent Counte 1 El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue 9.09% 5one 2E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Ave 10.91% 6Zone 3Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike 45.45% 25Zone 4The Pike to SR 1 14.55% 8Do not live or work near a Context Zone 20.00% 11Totals 100% 55ResponsesResponses0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%Paper Online Both None0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%50.00%Zone 1 ElCamino Realto E. GrandAvenueZone 2E.Grand Avenueto Fair OaksAveZone 3FairOaks Avenueto The PikeZone 4ThePike to SR 1Do not live orwork near aContext ZonePage 266 of 354 15. Context Zone 1 - El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue (Select top three)Percent CountSafety 30.50% 43Traffic Congestion 23.40% 33Bikeability 12.06% 17Walkability 13.48% 19Access to Transit 2.13% 3Parking 4.26% 6of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 12.06% 17Other 2.13% 3Totals 100% 14116. Context Zone 1 - El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue (Select most important)*Percent CountSafety 45.83% 11Traffic Congestion 33.33% 8Bikeability 8.33% 2Walkability 0.00% 0Access to Transit 4.17% 1Parking 4.17% 1of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 4.17% 1Other 0.00% 0Totals 100% 24ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%50.00%*NOTE: Includes data from 9/15/16 only.  No polling data was collected on this question at the   9/14/16 charrette.Page 267 of 354 17. Context Zone 2 - E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue (Select top three)Percent CountSafety 30.43% 42Traffic Congestion 19.57% 27Bikeability 14.49% 20Walkability 14.49% 20Access to Transit 2.17% 3Parking 4.35% 6of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 11.59% 16Other 2.90% 4Totals 100% 13818. Context Zone 2 - E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue (Select most important)Percent CountSafety 58.49% 31Traffic Congestion 11.32% 6Bikeability 11.32% 6Walkability 7.55% 4Access to Transit 0.00% 0Parking 0.00% 0of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 9.43% 5Other 1.89% 1Totals 100% 53ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%Page 268 of 354 19. Context Zone 3 - Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike (Select top three)Percent CountSafety 31.69% 45Traffic Congestion 18.31% 26Bikeability 11.97% 17Walkability 18.31% 26Access to Transit 0.70% 1Parking 4.23% 6of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 14.08% 20Other 0.70% 1Totals 100% 14220. Context Zone 3Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike (Select most important)Percent CountSafety 65.96% 31Traffic Congestion 4.26% 2Bikeability 6.38% 3Walkability 19.15% 9Access to Transit 0.00% 0Parking 0.00% 0of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 4.26% 2Other 0.00% 0Totals 100% 47ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%Page 269 of 354 21. Context Zone 4The Pike to SR 1 (Select top three)Percent CountSafety 29.79% 42Traffic Congestion 21.28% 30Bikeability 14.89% 21Walkability 19.15% 27Access to Transit 1.42% 2Parking 0.71% 1of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 12.06% 17Other 0.71% 1Totals 100% 14122. Context Zone 4The Pike to SR 1 (Select most important)Percent CountSafety 50.00% 26Traffic Congestion 17.31% 9Bikeability 11.54% 6Walkability 17.31% 9Access to Transit 0.00% 0Parking 0.00% 0of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise) 3.85% 2Other 0.00% 0Totals 100% 52ResponsesResponses0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%0.00%5.00%10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%50.00%Page 270 of 354 Session Name: SAG Meeting Results 10‐10‐2016 5‐42 PMDate Created: 10/10/2016 3:46:17 PMActive Participants: 15 of 15Average Score: 0.00%Questions: 24___________________________________________________________________________________Percent CountYes – Wed. (9/14) 15% 2Yes – Thurs. (9/15) 31% 4Did not participate 54% 7Totals 100% 13 Results By Question1.) Did you attend a charrette?ResponsesPage 271 of 354 Percent CountLos Angels Rams 18% 2San Diego Chargers 9% 1Oakland Raiders 9% 1San Francisco 49ers 18% 2Los Angeles Buccaneers 0% 0Who Cares! 45% 5Totals 100% 11Percent CountFemale 42% 5Male 58% 7Totals 100% 122.) What is your favorite football team?Responses3.) What is your gender?Responses012345123456211205012345671257Page 272 of 354 Percent Count18 and under  0% 019‐35  15% 236‐50  8% 151‐70  69% 9Over 70 8% 1Totals 100% 134.) What is your age?Responses01234567891234502191Page 273 of 354 Percent CountArroyo Grande 36% 5Grover Beach 0% 0Pismo Beach/Shell Beach 14% 2Oceano 0% 0Halcyon  7% 1Nipomo / Nipomo Mesa 14% 2Other 29% 4Totals 100% 145.) Where do you live?Responses01234512345675020124Page 274 of 354 Percent Count<1 mi. 8% 11 – 5 mi. 33% 46 – 10 mi. 17% 2> 10 mi. 42% 5Totals 100% 126.) How close do you live to Halcyon Rd?Responses01234512341425Page 275 of 354 Percent CountLess than 1 year 0% 01 ‐ 4 years 8% 15 ‐ 10 years 17% 211 ‐ 20 years 17% 2More than 20 years  58% 7Not Applicable  0% 0Totals 100% 12Percent CountNever 8% 11‐3 times per month 23% 31‐3 times per week 31% 44+ times per week 38% 5Totals 100% 137.) How long have you lived on the Central Coast?Responses8.) How often do you walk for a significant distance, i.e., more than 5 minutes for a single trip?Responses0123456712345601227001234512341345Page 276 of 354 Percent CountNever 36% 51‐3 times per month 43% 61‐3 times per week 0% 04+ times per week 21% 3Totals 100% 14Percent CountNever 8% 11‐3 times per month 31% 41‐3 times per week 31% 44+ times per week 31% 4Totals 100% 139.) How often do you bike for any purpose?Responses10.) How often do you drive along Halcyon Road?Responses0123456123456030123412341444Page 277 of 354 Percent CountNever 71% 101‐3 times per month 29% 41‐3 times per week 0% 04+ times per week 0% 0Totals 100% 14Percent CountNever 71% 101‐3 times per month 21% 31‐3 times per week 7% 14+ times per week 0% 0Totals 100% 1411.) How often do you walk along Halcyon Road?Responses12.) How often do you bike along Halcyon Road?Responses012345678910123410400012345678910123410310Page 278 of 354 Percent CountWork  13% 4Hospital 23% 7Church 0% 0Friend’s house  16% 5School  6% 2Recreation area  16% 5Shopping
3% 1No particular destination: (e.g., walking/biking for fitness or leisure)13% 4None 3% 1Other  6% 2Totals 100% 3113.) What are your key destinations along Halcyon Road? (Select all that apply)Responses01234567123456789104705251412Page 279 of 354 Percent CountPaper 45% 5Online 9% 1Both 9% 1None 36% 4Totals 100% 11Percent CountZone 1 El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue18% 2Zone 2E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Ave 9% 1Zone 3Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike 9% 1Zone 4The Pike to SR 1 9% 1Do not live or work near a Context Zone 55% 6Totals 100% 1114.) Did you complete a survey?Responses15.) Do you live or work in or near a Context Zone?Responses0123451234511401234561234521116Page 280 of 354 Percent CountSafety 18% 6Traffic Congestion 18% 6Bikeability 21% 7Walkability 15% 5Access to Transit 9% 3Parking 3% 1Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)15% 5Other 0% 0Totals 100% 3316.) Context Zone 1 - El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue (Top Three)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%1234567818%18%21%15%9%3%15%0%Page 281 of 354 Percent CountSafety 20% 2Traffic Congestion 10% 1Bikeability 30% 3Walkability 10% 1Access to Transit 10% 1Parking 0% 0Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)20% 2Other 0% 0Totals 100% 1017.) Context Zone 1 - El Camino Real to E. Grand Avenue (Single Most Important)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%1234567820%10%30%10% 10%0%20%0%Page 282 of 354 Percent CountSafety 26% 10Traffic Congestion 8% 3Bikeability 21% 8Walkability 24% 9Access to Transit 11% 4Parking 0% 0Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)11% 4Other 0% 0Totals 100% 3818.) Context Zone 2 - E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue (Top Three)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%1234567826%8%21%24%11%0%11%0%Page 283 of 354 Percent CountSafety 42% 5Traffic Congestion 0% 0Bikeability 25% 3Walkability 8% 1Access to Transit 17% 2Parking 0% 0Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)8% 1Other 0% 0Totals 100% 1219.) Context Zone 2 - E. Grand Avenue to Fair Oaks Avenue (Single Most Important)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%1234567842%0%25%8%17%0%8%0%Page 284 of 354 Percent CountSafety 36% 8Traffic Congestion 5% 1Bikeability 18% 4Walkability 23% 5Access to Transit 5% 1Parking 5% 1Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)9% 2Other 0% 0Totals 100% 2220.) Context Zone 3 - Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike (Top Three)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%1234567836%5%18%23%5% 5%9%0%Page 285 of 354 Percent CountSafety 50% 5Traffic Congestion 0% 0Bikeability 20% 2Walkability 10% 1Access to Transit 0% 0Parking 10% 1Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)10% 1Other 0% 0Totals 100% 1021.) Context Zone 3 - Fair Oaks Avenue to The Pike (Single Most Important)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%1234567850%0%20%10%0%10% 10%0%Page 286 of 354 Percent CountSafety 33% 10Traffic Congestion 17% 5Bikeability 17% 5Walkability 13% 4Access to Transit 3% 1Parking 0% 0Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)17% 5Other 0% 0Totals 100% 30Responses22.) Context Zone 4 - The Pike to SR 1 (Top Three)0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%1234567833%17%17%13%3%0%17%0%Page 287 of 354 Percent CountSafety 45% 5Traffic Congestion 18% 2Bikeability 18% 2Walkability 9% 1Access to Transit 0% 0Parking 0% 0Sense of Place(streetscape, landscape, noise)9% 1Other 0% 0Totals 100% 1123.) Context Zone 4 - The Pike to SR 1 (Single Most Important)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%1234567845%18%18%9%0% 0%9%0%Page 288 of 354 617 West 7th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 www.altaplanning.com Page 1 July 6, 2017 Meeting Notes Halcyon Road Complete Street Charrettes Round 2 Location Harloe Elementary, Halcyon Road, Arroyo Grande, CA Attendees 23 attendees 4/12/2017; 22 attendees 4/13/2017 Meeting facilitated by Nate Stong, Omni-Means Engineering ___________________ Written Notes (April 12, 2017) Zone 1  Like the more controlled traffic flow  Eliminating parking: positive  Need to cut the volume of traffic  Bike lanes unnecessary and/or dangerous  Precedence of bikes over cars is a bad idea. There aren’t many bikes.  Traffic flow more important than bike lanes  Traffic too heavy for this plan  Why not keep Halcyon for cars and put bikes on other roads?  Like that it clears up El Camino Real intersection  Need to improve turn lane signage at Camino Real  Bike Box is confusing  Lane shift at Grand should be fixed  Northwest Corner building at Grand needs to be removed  Can the Halcyon exit be extended?  Bikes are there, so build lanes  Bikes are on sidewalk – bike lanes give people place to ride  Training for bikes  Bikes need safe streets; they are not surrounded by armor like cars  Protected bike lanes -- at least buffer  Bike ridership is increasing - this is a good investment for the future  Inadequate access for bikes currently  Need to address uses in area o Schools, hospital, houses = bike lanes o Rural = no biking needed  Don’t want to take property o Protect Cemetery Wall o Longer left pockets at El Camino Real Page 289 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 2 Zone 2  Jockeying Northbound at north of Fair Oaks  Roundabout: Have ambulances been considered & hospital consulted?  Roundabout: Will roundabout be an issue for large vehicles and buses?  Likes that it slows, but doesn’t stop. o Flows nicely. Gives neighborhood feel and safety for bike/ pedestrian  Like reduction of speed, smoother flow o Worry about students walking cross  Light provides stop in traffic, making it easier to get through as child pedestrian  High school release same as Elementary – High School kids tend to drive poorly  SE corner at Grand: future development impacts?  Road Diet Support o Does the Road Diet work without roundabout? o Has proposed development at NW corner of Fair Oaks driveways been considered?  Road diets: Yes. o Roundabout: Pedestrian safety  Request for Crossing guards to stay  How to handle so many kids to/from school. Was Traffic Count during school year?  All four crossings at Dodson is great (reiterated by two other people)  Likes improvements, but worry at Grand – specifically turns onto Grand  Also concerned about turns into/out of hospital  Is projected 23% increase in traffic enough? Does it take into account future development?  Like the roundabout  Try one ride on Halcyon as is, and everyone will like bike lanes  Kids bike on sidewalk – will this keep them safe?  Signage for pedestrians Digital Voting System had Error at April 13 meeting. Vote by Hand for prefer Roundabout or Signal:  Prefer Roundabout: 12  Prefer Signal: 1  Neutral: 1 Zone 3  Parking just South of Farroll, limits visibility for southbound traffic. Lots of crashes.  Need another Crosswalk closer to school. Olive Street?  Crosswalk at Virginia would be good for Students  Add stop signs at Sandalwood or between Pike and Fair Oaks  Will this design improve backing out of driveways? Zone 4  All-Way Stop at Pike: Woohoo! Yes!  The Pike stop sign is essential (reiterated by at least three people)  Need crosswalks at Pike on all three legs  What happens to Barricade at Pike?  Been hit twice at Pike. Needs safer.  Mobile Home Residents should have stop too, so call it Four Way Stop at Pike  Regrade Pike to make flat to increase visibility Page 290 of 354 MEETING NOTES Page 3  How about adding a roundabout to the Pike?  Need improvements to the Pike now! Not later.  How will Stop at Pike affect circular driveway just south?  Left turns to/from Temple Street onto Halcyon are difficult/dangerous  Speed limits should be decreased  Mobile home walks to High School, need sidewalks northbound  Mobile home walk to Post Office, need sidewalks south to Post Office  Sidewalk on West side to access Post office by foot  Road widening could compromise historic Post Office  Archeological area near mobile homes may make widening difficult  Property taking for widening?  Need space to decelerate/join road for left turns on/off La Due  Bike lane narrow due to mud – needs to be widened Page 291 of 354 Session Name: Halcyon Charrette Results 4‐12‐2017 8‐33 PMDate Created: 4/12/2017 5:28:07 PMActive Participants: 33 of 33Questions: 21________________________________________________________________________________________Percent CountWalk 32% 7Bike 5% 1Skateboard 0% 0Car 59% 13Bus 5% 1Horse 0% 0Motorcycle 0% 0Airplane 0% 0Other 0% 0Totals 100% 22Note: Due to a technical issues, data was not saved for the 4/13/17 meeting. Results generally mirrored those of the previous night, found here. Results By Question1.) How did you get here tonight? (Multiple Choice)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%60%12345678932%5%0%59%5%0%0%0%0%Page 292 of 354 Percent CountFemale 54% 13Male 46% 11Totals 100% 24Percent Count18 and under  0% 019‐35  13% 336‐50  9% 251‐70  43% 10Over 70 35% 8Totals 100% 233.) What is your age? (Demographic Assignment)Responses2.) What is your gender? (Demographic Assignment)Responses40%45%50%55%1254%46%0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%123450%13%9%43%35%Page 293 of 354 Percent CountArroyo Grande 63% 15Grover Beach 0% 0Pismo Beach/Shell Beach 8% 2Oceano 0% 0Nipomo  0% 0Nipomo Mesa 0% 0Other 29% 7Totals 100% 24NOTE: Other includes HalcyonPercent Count<1 mi. 90% 191 – 5 mi. 5% 16 – 10 mi. 0% 0> 10 mi. 5% 1Totals 100% 214.) Where do you live? (Demographic Assignment)Responses5.) How close do you live to Halcyon Rd? (Demographic Assignment)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%123456763%0%8%0%0%0%29%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%123490%5%0%5%Page 294 of 354 Percent CountLess than 1 year 4% 11 ‐ 4 years 4% 15 ‐ 10 years 8% 211 ‐ 20 years 8% 2More than 20 years  75% 18Not Applicable  0% 0Totals 100% 24Percent CountNever 13% 31‐3 times per month 22% 51‐3 times per week 22% 54+ times per week 43% 10Totals 100% 236.) How long have you lived on the Central Coast? (Demographic Assignment)Responses7.) How often do you walk for a significant distance, i.e., more than 5 minutes for a single trip? (Demographic Assignment)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%1234564%4%8%8%75%0%0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%123413%22%22%43%Page 295 of 354 Percent CountNever 64% 141‐3 times per month 23% 51‐3 times per week 5% 14+ times per week 9% 2Totals 100% 22Percent CountNever 0% 01‐3 times per month 14% 31‐3 times per week 0% 04+ times per week 86% 18Totals 100% 219.) How often do you drive along Halcyon Road? (Demographic Assignment)Responses8.) How often do you bike for any purpose? (Demographic Assignment)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%123464%23%5%9%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%12340%14%0%86%Page 296 of 354 Percent CountNever 43% 101‐3 times per month 13% 31‐3 times per week 13% 34+ times per week 30% 7Totals 100% 23Percent CountNever 80% 201‐3 times per month 16% 41‐3 times per week 4% 14+ times per week 0% 0Totals 100% 2510.) How often do you walk along Halcyon Road? (Demographic Assignment)Responses11.) How often do you bike along Halcyon Road? (Demographic Assignment)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%123443%13%13%30%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%123480%16%4%0%Page 297 of 354 Percent CountWork  16% 12Bus stop  3% 2Church 10% 8Friend’s house  12% 9School  8% 6Recreation area  6% 5Shopping
16% 12No particular destination: walking for fitness or leisure6% 5I never walk along Halcyon Road 3% 2Other  21% 16Totals 100% 77NOTE: Other includes Hospital12.) What are your key destinations along Halcyon Road? (check all that apply) (Multiple Choice - Multiple Response)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%1234567891016%3%10%12%8%6%16%6%3%21%Page 298 of 354 Percent CountPaper 8% 2Online 21% 5Both 8% 2None 63% 15Totals 100% 24Percent CountYes 56% 14No 44% 11Totals 100% 2513.) Did you complete a survey? (Demographic Assignment)Responses14.) Did you attend a workshop in September 2016? (Demographic Assignment)Responses0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%12348%21%8%63%0%20%40%60%1256%44%Page 299 of 354 Percent CountStrongly Support 29% 6Support 38% 8Somewhat Support 0% 0Neutral 10% 2Somewhat Oppose 0% 0Oppose 10% 2Strongly Oppose 14% 3Totals 100% 2115.) Context Zone 1 - To what extent do you support the proposed concept? (Multiple Choice)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%123456729%38%0%10%0%10%14%Page 300 of 354 Percent CountStrongly Support 19% 3Support 13% 2Somewhat Support 25% 4Neutral 25% 4Somewhat Oppose 6% 1Oppose 6% 1Strongly Oppose 6% 1Totals 100% 1616.) Context Zone 2 - To what extent do you support the proposed concept? (Multiple Choice)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%123456719%13%25%25%6%6%6%Page 301 of 354 Percent CountStrongly Support 12% 2Support 6% 1Somewhat Support 6% 1Neutral 29% 5Somewhat Oppose 12% 2Oppose 18% 3Strongly Oppose 18% 3Totals 100% 17Percent CountAlt 1 – Road Diet / Roundabout 69% 11Alt 2 – Signalized Intersection 25% 4Other 6% 1Totals 100% 1618.) Which alternative do you prefer? (Multiple Choice)Responses17.) Context Zone 2 - To what extent do you support the signalized alternative? (Multiple Choice)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%123456712%6%6%29%12%18%18%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%12369%25%6%Page 302 of 354 Percent CountStrongly Support 50% 8Support 19% 3Somewhat Support 13% 2Neutral 13% 2Somewhat Oppose 6% 1Oppose 0% 0Strongly Oppose 0% 0Totals 100% 1619.) Context Zone 3 - To what extent do you support the proposed concept? (Multiple Choice)Responses0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%123456750%19%13%13%6%0%0%Page 303 of 354 Percent CountStrongly Support 31% 5Support 13% 2Somewhat Support 19% 3Neutral 19% 3Somewhat Oppose 6% 1Oppose 13% 2Strongly Oppose 0% 0Totals 100% 16Percent CountVery effective 71% 10Effective 14% 2Somewhat effective 7% 1Not very effective 0% 0Not at all effective 7% 1Totals 100% 14Responses20.) Context Zone 4 - To what extent do you support the proposed concept? (Multiple Choice)Responses21.) How effective was this meeting to understand and discuss alternatives for Halcyon Rd. (Multiple Choice)0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%123456731%13%19%19%6%13%0%0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%1234571%14%7%0%7%Page 304 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 1/27 Create a team to collaborate with others on surveys and share templates, logos, themes and more. Create a team now ] Arroyo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) Summary  ] Design Survey  ] Collect Responses  ] Analyze Results w RESPONDENTS: 17 of 17 Ü Question Summaries t Data Trends U Individual  Responses No shared data Sharing allows you to share your survey results  with others. You c an s hare all data, a saved view, or a single question summary. Learn more » Share AllExport AllCURRENT VIEW ? + FILTER + COMPARE + SHOW ?No rules applied Rules allow you to FILTER, COMPARE and SHOW results  to s ee trends and patterns. Learn more » SAVED VIEWS (1)? Original View  (No rules applied)E + Save as... EXPORTS ? SHARED DATA ? Share All Q1 Q2 PAGE 1: Demographics ExportCustomize 0.00%0 11.76%2 35.29%6 47.06%8 5.88%1 Which age group are you in? Answered: 17 Skipped: 0 Total 17 18 or under 19­35 36­50 51­70 Over 70 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Respons es – 18 or under– 19­35– 36­50– 51­70– O ver 70– Export How many children under the age of 13 are in your household? Answered: 15 Skipped: 2  C Text Analysis  z My Categories (0)w Responses (15) All Pages  My Surveys Library Examples Survey Services Plans & Pricing + Create Survey Create Team Altaplanning  Page 305 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 2/27 Q3 Q4 ?Search responses  Showing 15 responses sCategorize as...Filter by Category 2 3/2/2017 2:47 PM View respondent's  answers Categorize as... œ 2 2/17/2017 8:50 PM View respondent's answers Categorize as... œ 2 2/10/2017 4:15 PM View respondent's answers Categorize as... œ 0 12/1/2016 1:55 PM View respondent's answers Categorize as... œ 2 11/23/2016 2:44 PM View res pondent's answers Categorize as... œ 0 10/29/2016 8:21 AM View res pondent's answers Categoriz e as ... œ 0 10/18/2016 8:28 PM View res pondent's answers Categoriz e as ... œ ExportCustomize 88.24%15 11.76%2 0.00%0 0.00%0 How close do you live to Halcyon Road? Answered: 17 Skipped: 0 Total 17 <1 mile 1­5 miles 6­10 miles >10 miles 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – <1 mile– 1­5 miles– 6­10 miles– >10 miles– ExportCustomize How often do you drive, walk, or bike along Halcyon Road? Answered: 17 Skipped: 0 Page 306 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 3/27 Q5 PAGE 2: General Travel Behavior 82.35%14 17.65%3 0.00%0 0.00%0 Total 17 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Never– ExportCustomize 62.50%10 12.50%2 6.25%1 18.75%3 How often do you walk for a significant distance, i.e., more than 5 minutes for a single trip? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Never– Page 307 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 4/27 Q6 Q7 ExportCustomize 18.75%3 12.50%2 31.25%5 37.50%6 How often do you bike for any purpose? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Never– ExportCustomize 37.50%6 37.50%6 What if bike markings ("sharrows" as pictured above) were added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– No– Page 308 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 5/27 Q8 Q9 25.00%4 Total 16 I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 56.25%9 25.00%4 18.75%3 What if a bike lane (as pictured above) was added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 68.75%11 12.50%2 What if a buffered bike lane (as pictured above) was added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– No– Page 309 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 6/27 Q10 Q11 18.75%3 Total 16 I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 81.25%13 0.00%0 18.75%3 What if a wide bike lane separated from traffic by a curb or parked cars (as pictured above) was added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 93.75%15 What if a multi­use path completely separated from traffic (as pictured above) was added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– Page 310 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 7/27 Q12 Q13 0.00%0 6.25%1 Total 16 No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 43.75%7 50.00%8 6.25%1 What if roundabouts replaced four­way stops and traffic lights (as pictured above)? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 37.50%6 What if a traffic lane were removed (as pictured above)? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– Page 311 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 8/27 Q14 Q15 43.75%7 18.75%3 Total 16 No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 87.50%14 12.50%2 0.00%0 What if sidewalks (as pictured above) were added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes– No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 31.25%5 What if benches and other street furniture (similar to what is pictured above) were added? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Yes No I'm not sure 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Yes–Page 312 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 9/27 Q16 Q17 PAGE 3: Halcyon Road Travel Behavior 50.00%8 18.75%3 Total 16 No– I'm not sure– ExportCustomize 93.75%15 87.50%14 56.25%9 75.00%12 0.00%0 6.25%1 18.75%3 0.00%0 Please indicate what modes of transportation you use to travel along Halcyon Road (select all that apply) Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total Respondents: 16   Drive alone Drive with others (Fami... Bike Walk Public transit Taxi/ridesharin g service Scooter, skateboard, ... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Drive alone– Drive with others (Family, Friends or Carpool)– Bike– Walk– Public transit– Taxi/ridesharing service– Scooter, skateboard, or low speed electric device– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize How Often do you walk along Halcyon Road for a significant distance, i.e., more than 5 minutes for a single trip? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Page 313 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 10/27 Q18 31.25%5 25.00%4 12.50%2 25.00%4 6.25%1 Total 16 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Rarely Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Rarely– Never– ExportCustomize What are your key walking destinations along Halcyon Road? (check all that apply) Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Page 314 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 11/27 Q19 6.25%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 31.25%5 62.50%10 31.25%5 18.75%3 56.25%9 12.50%2 12.50%2 0.00%0 Total Respondents: 16   Work Bus stop Church Friend's house School Recreation area Shopping or errands... No particular destination:... I never walk along Halcyo... I only use Halcyon Road... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Res ponses – Work– Bus stop– Church– Friend's house– School– Recreation area– Shopping or errands (including medical services)– No particular destination: walking for fitness or leisure– I never walk along Halcyon Road– I only use Halcyon Road to access other areas– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize How often do you bike along Halcyon Road? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Page 315 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 12/27 Q20 6.25%1 12.50%2 18.75%3 18.75%3 43.75%7 Total 16 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Rarely Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Rarely– Never– ExportCustomize What are your key biking destinations along Halcyon Road? (check all that apply) Answered: 14 Skipped: 3 Page 316 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 13/27 Q21 7.14%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 28.57%4 35.71%5 21.43%3 21.43%3 42.86%6 35.71%5 7.14%1 0.00%0 Total Respondents: 14   Work Bus stop Church Friend's house School Recreation area Shopping or errands... No particular destination:... I never bike along Halcyo... I only use Halcyon Road... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Work– Bus stop– Church– Friend's house– School– Recreation area– Shopping or errands (including medical services)– No particular destination: biking for fitness or leisure– I never bike along Halcyon Road– I only use Halcyon Road to access other areas– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize How often do you take transit to Halcyon Road for any purpose? Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Page 317 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 14/27 Q22 6.67%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 20.00%3 73.33%11 Total 15 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Rarely Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Rarely– Never– ExportCustomize 7.69%1 What are your key transit destinations along Halcyon Road? (check all that apply) Answered: 13 Skipped: 4 Work Church Friend's house School Recreation area Shopping or errands... I never take transit alon... I only use Halcyon Road... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Work– Page 318 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 15/27 Q23 Q24 7.69%1 15.38%2 23.08%3 15.38%2 15.38%2 46.15%6 23.08%3 7.69%1 Total Respondents: 13   Church– Friend's house– School– Recreation area– Shopping or errands (including medical services)– I never take transit along Halcyon Road– I only use Halcyon Road to access other areas– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize 50.00%7 7.14%1 0.00%0 14.29%2 28.57%4 How often do you take transit to/from Halcyon Road for any purpose? Answered: 14 Skipped: 3 Total 14 4+ times per week 1­3 times per week 1­3 times per month Rarely Never 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – 4+ times per week– 1­3 times per week– 1­3 times per month– Rarely– Never– ExportCustomize What are your key driving destinations along Halcyon Road? (check all that apply) Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Page 319 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 16/27 Q25 PAGE 4: Halcyon Road Key Issues 62.50%10 0.00%0 0.00%0 43.75%7 56.25%9 43.75%7 68.75%11 0.00%0 25.00%4 6.25%1 Total Respondents: 16   Work Bus stop Church Friend's house School Recreation area Shopping or errands... I never drive along Halcyo... I only use Halcyon Road... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Work– Bus stop– Church– Friend's house– School– Recreation area– Shopping or errands (including medical services)– I never drive along Halcyon Road– I only use Halcyon Road to access other areas– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize The transportation options available to me along Halcyon Road are suitable to my needs: Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Page 320 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 17/27 Q26 12.50%2 31.25%5 31.25%5 25.00%4 Total 16 Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Strongly agree– Agree– Disagree– Strongly disagree– ExportCustomize 0.00%0 0.00%0 62.50%10 37.50%6 How would you rate overall walking conditions along Halcyon Road? Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 Total 16 Excellent Good Fair Poor 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Excellent– G ood– Fair– Poor– Page 321 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 18/27 Q27 Q28 ExportCustomize 53.33%8 40.00%6 6.67%1 0.00%0 How important is it to you to improve walking conditions along Halcyon Road? Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Total 15 Very important Important Not important Very unimportant 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Res ponses – Very important– Important– Not important– Very unimportant – ExportCustomize What discourages you the most from walking along Halcyon Road? Please select up to five (5) factors. Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Page 322 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 19/27 Q29 66.67%10 93.33%14 60.00%9 80.00%12 0.00%0 26.67%4 6.67%1 0.00%0 6.67%1 6.67%1 Total Respondents: 15   Lack of or incomplete... Heavy/fast motor vehicl... Dangerous bevhavior by... Lack of safe crossings (e... Lack of time/distanc... Lack of amenities... I don't feel safe walking... I have too many things ... I am not physically a... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Lack of or incomplete sidewalks– Heavy/fast motor vehicle traffic– Dangerous bevhavior by people driving (e.g., speeding, not yielding, etc.)– Lack of safe crossings (e.g. marked crosswalks or traffic signals)– Lack of time/distance to walk is too far– Lack of amenities (benches, trees/shade, streetlights)– I don't feel safe walking (e.g. crime, personal safety)– I have too many things to carry– I am not physically able to walk– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize Tell us about walking along Halcyon Road Answered: 14 Skipped: 3 Page 323 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 20/27 Q30 0.00% 0 57.14% 8 21.43% 3 21.43% 3   14   2.64 0.00% 0 14.29% 2 28.57% 4 57.14% 8   14   3.43 0.00% 0 57.14% 8 28.57% 4 14.29% 2   14   2.57 14.29% 2 42.86% 6 21.43% 3 21.43% 3   14   2.50 0.00% 0 53.85% 7 38.46% 5 7.69% 1   13   2.54 I can conveniently... I feel safe from cars I have enough time to cros... I am not concerned ab... Pedestrian areas in ret... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  –Strongly agree –Agree –Disagree –Strongly disagree –Total –Weighted Average – I can conveniently w alk where I w ant – I feel safe from cars – I have enough time to cross roads at traffic signals – I am not concerned about my safety (i.e., I feel safe from other people) – Pedestrian areas in retail or commercial areas are w ell lit – ExportCustomize How would you rank overall biking conditions along Halcyon Road? Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Page 324 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 21/27 Q31 0.00%0 6.67%1 20.00%3 73.33%11 Total 15 Excellent Good Fair Poor 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Excellent– G ood– Fair– Poor– ExportCustomize 46.67%7 26.67%4 26.67%4 0.00%0 How important is it to you to improve biking conditions along Halcyon Road? Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Total 15 Very Important Important Not Important Very Unimportant 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Very Important– Important– Not Important– Very Unimportant– Page 325 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 22/27 Q32 Q33 ExportCustomize 73.33%11 86.67%13 80.00%12 66.67%10 0.00%0 20.00%3 20.00%3 0.00%0 6.67%1 6.67%1 0.00%0 0.00%0 What discourages you most from biking along Halcyon Road? Please select up to five (5) factors. Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Total Respondents: 15   Lack of or incomplete... Heavy/fast motor vehicl... Dangerous behavior by... Lack of safe crossings... Lack of time/distanc... No street lights (e.g.... I don’t feel safe biking... I have too many things ... No bicycle racks or... I am not physically a... I do not own a bicycle in... Other (please specify) 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Lack of or incomplete bicycle route– Heavy/fast motor vehicle traffic– Dangerous behavior by people driving (e.g., speeding, not yielding, etc.)– Lack of safe crossings (e.g., marked lanes or traffic signal detection)– Lack of time/distance to bike is too far– No street lights (e.g., too dark)–  I don’t feel safe biking (e.g., crime, personal safety)– I have too many things to carry– No bicycle racks or insufficient bicycle parking at my destination– I am not physically able to bike– I do not own a bicycle in working condition– ResponsesOther (please specify)– ExportCustomize Tell us about biking along Halcyon RoadPage 326 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 23/27 Q34 Answered: 13 Skipped: 4 7.69% 1 30.77% 4 30.77% 4 30.77% 4   13   2.85 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 38.46% 5 61.54% 8   13   3.62 0.00% 0 61.54% 8 15.38% 2 23.08% 3   13   2.62 7.69% 1 30.77% 4 23.08% 3 38.46% 5   13   2.92 I can conveniently... I feel safe from cars I have enough time to cros... I am not concerned ab... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10  –Strongly agree –Agree –Disagree –Strongly disagree –Total –Weighted Average – I can conveniently bike where I w ant – I feel safe from cars – I have enough time to cross roads at traffic signals – I am not concerned about my safety (i.e., I feel safe from other people) – ExportCustomize Tell us about driving along Halcyon Road Answered: 16 Skipped: 1 I can conveniently... I am never delayed by... I am not concerned ab... The road is in good condition I do not drive along Halcyo... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Page 327 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 24/27 Q35 Q36 PAGE 5: Halcyon Road Potential Improvements 18.75% 3 37.50% 6 43.75% 7 0.00% 0   16   2.25 18.75% 3 37.50% 6 31.25% 5 12.50% 2   16   2.38 12.50% 2 43.75% 7 31.25% 5 12.50% 2   16   2.44 0.00% 0 81.25% 13 12.50% 2 6.25% 1   16   2.25 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 8.33% 1 91.67% 11   12   3.92  –Strongly agree –Agree –Disagree –Strongly disagree –Total –Weighted Average – I can conveniently drive and park where I w ant along the corridor – I am never delayed by traffic or traffic signal timing along the corridor – I am not concerned about my safety (I feel safe) – The road is in good condition – I do not drive along Halcyon Road – ExportCustomize 60.00%9 20.00%3 13.33%2 6.67%1 Do you agree or disagree (strongly/somewhat) with the statement, “I would like to walk along Halcyon Road more than I do now.” Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Total 15 Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Strongly agree– Somewhat agree– Somewhat disagree– Strongly disagree– ExportCustomize Page 328 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 25/27 Q37 100.00%14 92.86%13 21.43%3 28.57%4 35.71%5 85.71%12 21.43%3 0.00%0 What physical improvements would encourage you to walk more along Halcyon Road? Please select your top three. Answered: 14 Skipped: 3 Total Respondents: 14   New or improved... Traffic calming (slo... Benches Lighting Landscaping (e.g., stree... Improved crosswalk... Access improvements... Other 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – New or improved sidewalks– Traffic calming (slower speeds)– Benches– Lighting– Landscaping (e.g., street trees, planted areas)– Improved crosswalk facilities– Access improvements for people with limited mobility (ADA compliance)– O ther– ExportCustomize Do you agree or disagree (strongly/somewhat) with the statement, “I would like to bike along Halcyon Road more than I do now.” Answered: 15 Skipped: 2 Page 329 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 26/27 Q38 60.00%9 20.00%3 6.67%1 13.33%2 Total 15 Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – Strongly agree– Somewhat agree– Somewhat disagree– Strongly disagree– ExportCustomize 64.29%9 92.86%13 7.14%1 21.43%3 What physical improvements would encourage you to bike more along Halcyon Road? Please select your top three. Answered: 14 Skipped: 3 New or improved... Traffic calming (slo... Benches Lighting Landscaping (e.g., stree... Improved crosswalk... Access improvements... 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – New or improved sidewalks– Traffic calming (slower speeds)– Benches– Lighting– Page 330 of 354 3/13/2017 SurveyMonkey Analyze ­ Ar royo Grande Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan (English) https://www.sur veymonkey.com /analyze/4gnzhln5_2B1y6qJuhm wrQovZp_2B_2B2ybqDPPgtoHAq6Ijo_3D 27/27 °                                          Copyright © 1999­2017 SurveyMonkey      Community:Developers •Facebook •Twitter •LinkedIn •Our Blog •Google+•YouTube About Us:Leadership Team •Board of Directors •Integrations •Newsroom •Office Locations •Jobs •Sitemap •Help Policies:Terms of Use •Privacy Policy •Anti­Spam Policy •Security Statement •Email Opt­In •Accessibility Language:English •Español •Português •Deutsch •Nederlands •Français •Русский •Italiano •Dansk •Svenska •日本語 •한국어 • 中文(繁體)•Türkçe •Norsk •Suomi Q39 21.43%3 57.14%8 7.14%1 Total Respondents: 14   Comments (3) Landscaping (e.g., street trees, planted areas)– Improved crosswalk facilities– Access improvements for people with limited mobility (ADA compliance)– ExportCustomize 66.67%6 33.33%3 77.78%7 44.44%4 66.67%6 What improvements would encourage you to take transit to/from Halcyon Road more often? Please select your top three. Answ ered: 9 Skipped: 8 Total Respondents: 9   Comments (0) More frequent service Better roadway crossing and... Better bus stop ameniti... More bus stops Easier access to bus route... 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Answer Choices –Responses – More frequent service– Better roadway crossing and sidewalk access– Better bus stop amenities (e.g., bus shelters, benches, lighting, landscaping)– More bus stops– Easier access to bus route information via website, cell phone, or LED reader board at bus stop – Page 331 of 354 Complete Streets Plan Appendix G Cost Estimates Page 332 of 354 Preliminary Opinion of Costs (Capital & Support) Halcyon Road - Context Zone 1 City of Arroyo Grande 10/12/2022 Construction Costs No.Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Traffic Control LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 2 Remove Tree EA 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 3 Remove Concrete (Curb & Gutter) LF 700 $33.00 $23,100.00 4 Remove Concrete Sidewalk SQFT 3450 $8.00 $27,600.00 5 Roadway Excavation CY 180 $235.00 $42,300.00 6 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 230 $136.00 $31,280.00 7 Micro-Surfacing SY 9644 $3.60 $34,720.00 8 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 120 $200.00 $24,000.00 9 Detectable Warning Surface SQFT 135 $50.00 $6,750.00 10 Minor Concrete (Curb)LF 65 $50.00 $3,250.00 11 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 500 $54.00 $27,000.00 12 Minor Concrete (Curb Ramp) SQFT 625 $18.00 $11,250.00 13 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SQFT 5080 $12.00 $60,960.00 14 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SQFT 250 $18.00 $4,500.00 15 Reconstruct Drainage Facility LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 16 Pavement Marker (Retroreflective) EA 65 $17.00 $1,106.77 17 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 6250 $2.00 $12,500.00 18 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SQFT 2434 $8.00 $19,472.00 19 Signs EA 13 $382.00 $4,966.00 20 Traffic Signal Replacement EA 2 $500,000.00 $1,000,000.00 21 Planting and Irrigation SQFT 0 $10.00 $0.00 22 Mobilization LS 10% $1,365,800.00 $142,830.00 23 Minor/ Supplemental Items LS 25% $1,365,800.00 $357,075.00 24 Adjust Utilities to Grade LS 1 $62,500.00 $62,500.00 Subtotal (Construction Costs)1,978,159.77$ Construction Contingency 25%357,063.69$ Total Construction Costs 2,335,223.46$ Total Construction Budget (Rounded)2,335,300.00$ Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs: 1 Right Of Way SQFT 2830 $20.00 $56,600.00 2 Utility Relocation (by Utility Owner) ALLOW 0 $0.00 $0.00 Total Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs 56,600.00$ Total Project Capital Cost 2,391,900.00$ Project Support Costs 1 Environmental Clearance (CEQA/NEPA) Capital Costs 5%119,600.00$ 2 PS&E Con. Costs 12%280,300.00$ 3 Right of Way Engineering & Acquisition 3-Parcels $15k/EA 45,000.00$ 4 Construction Support and Management Con. Costs 10%233,600.00$ Total Project Support Costs 678,500.00$ Total Estimated Project Costs 3,070,400.00$ Rounded 3,080,000.00$ Assumptions: 1. Existing power/utility poles located ouside the limits of the roundabout to remain in place. 10/12/2022 Copy of 12568619_Halcyon CS Estimate_Zone1_rev2022-10-12.xlsx Page 333 of 354 Preliminary Opinion of Costs (Capital & Support) Halcyon Road - Context Zone 2 (outside Roundabout Option) City of Arroyo Grande 6/22/2018 0-Jan-1900 Construction Costs (Outside Roundabout limits ) No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Traffic Control LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 2 Remove Tree EA 0 $2,000.00 $0.00 3 Remove Concrete (Curb & Gutter) LF 110 $33.00 $3,630.00 4 Remove Concrete Sidewalk SQFT 400 $8.00 $3,200.00 5 Roadway Excavation CY 220 $235.00 $51,700.00 6 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 200 $136.00 $27,200.00 7 Micro-Surfacing SY 15133 $3.60 $54,480.00 8 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 170 $200.00 $34,000.00 9 Retaiing Wall SQFT 0 $90.00 $0.00 10 Detectable Warning Surface SQFT 150 $50.00 $7,500.00 11 Minor Concrete (Curb) LF 595 $50.00 $29,750.00 12 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 340 $54.00 $18,360.00 13 Minor Concrete (Curb Ramp) SQFT 615 $18.00 $11,070.00 14 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SQFT 2080 $12.00 $24,960.00 15 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SQFT 0 $18.00 $0.00 16 Minor Concrete (Miscellaneous Construction) SQFT 630 $20.00 $12,600.00 17 Reconstruct Drainage Facility LS 1 $25,000.00 $25,000.00 18 Pavement Marker (Retroreflective) EA 124 $17.00 $2,108.40 19 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 11906 $2.00 $23,812.50 20 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SQFT 2098 $8.00 $16,784.00 21 Signs EA 10 $382.00 $3,820.00 22 Lighting System LS 0 $0.00 $0.00 23 Planting and Irrigation SQFT 1265 $10.00 $12,650.00 24 Mobilization LS 10% $425,200.00 $42,520.00 25 Minor/ Supplemental Items LS 25%$425,200.00 $106,300.00 26 Adjust Utilities to Grade LS 1 $62,500.00 $62,500.00 Subtotal (Construction Costs)623,944.90$ Construction Contingency 25% 106,281.22$ Total Construction Costs 730,226.12$ Total Construction Budget (Rounded) 730,300.00$ Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs (Outside Roundabout Limits) 1 Right Of Way SQFT 1050 $20.00 $21,000.00 2 Utility Relocation (by Utility Owner) ALLOW 0 $0.00 $0.00 Total Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs 21,000.00$ Total Project Capital Cost 751,300.00$ Project Support Costs (Outside Roundabout Limits ) 1 Environmental Clearance (CEQA/NEPA) Capital Costs 5%37,600.00$ 2 PS&E Con. Costs 12%87,700.00$ 3 Right of Way Engineering & Acquisition 2-Parcels $15k/EA 30,000.00$ 4 Construction Support and Management Con. Costs 10%73,100.00$ Total Project Support Costs 228,400.00$ Total Estimated Project Costs 979,700.00$ Rounded 980,000.00$ Assuptions: 1. Existing power/utility poles located outside the limits of the roundabout to remain in place. 12/22/2022 12568619_Halcyon CS Estimate_Zone2 Outside RAB_rev0610.xlsx Page 334 of 354 Preliminary Opinion of Costs (Capital & Support) Fair Oaks Avenue / Halcyon Road Intersection Alt with Road Diet - Context Zone 2 City of Arroyo Grande 10/12/2022 Construction Costs (Signal only ) No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Traffic Control LS 1 $100,000.00 $100,000.00 2 Remove Tree EA 3 $2,000.00 $6,000.00 3 Remove Concrete (Curb & Gutter) LF 291 $33.00 $9,592.77 4 Remove Concrete Sidewalk SQFT 2000 $8.00 $16,000.00 5 Roadway Excavation CY 120 $235.00 $28,200.00 6 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 100 $136.00 $13,600.00 7 Micro-Surfacing SY 6155 $3.60 $22,159.47 8 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 70 $200.00 $14,000.00 9 Retaining Wall SQFT 0 $120.00 $0.00 10 Detectable Warning Surface SQFT 113 $50.00 $5,646.50 11 Minor Concrete (Curb) LF 0 $50.00 $0.00 12 Minor Concrete (Curb - Ramp) SQFT 420 $18.00 $7,560.00 13 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 286 $54.00 $15,419.16 14 Minor Concrete (Stamped Concrete - Truck Apron) CY 0 $1,200.00 $0.00 15 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SQFT 1330 $12.00 $15,965.49 16 Minor Concrete (Cross Gutter) SQFT 0 $25.00 $0.00 17 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SQFT 0 $18.00 $0.00 18 Drainage Facilities LS 1 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 19 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 6634 $2.00 $13,267.28 20 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SQFT 5925 $8.00 $47,397.89 21 Signs EA 12 $382.00 $4,584.00 22 Traffic Signal replacement EA 1 $500,000.00 $500,000.00 23 Planting and Irrigation SQFT 0 $10.00 $0.00 24 Mobilization LS 10% $809,400.00 $80,940.00 25 Minor/ Supplemental Items % 25% $809,400.00 $202,350.00 26 Adjust Utilities LS 1 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 26 Relocate Backflow and Water Meter EA 0 $30,000.00 $0.00 Subtotal (Construction Costs)1,192,682.56$ Construction Contingency 25% 298,170.64$ Total Construction Costs 1,490,853.20$ Total Construction Budget (Rounded) 1,490,900.00$ Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs (Signal Only): 1 Right Of Way SQFT 100 $20.00 $2,000.00 2 Utility Relocation (by Utility Owner) ALLOW 0 $300,000.00 $0.00 Total Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs 2,000.00$ Total Project Capital Cost 1,492,900.00$ Project Support Costs (Roundabout Only ) 1 Environmental Clearance (CEQA/NEPA) Capital Costs 5%74,700.00$ 2 PS&E Con. Costs 7.5%111,900.00$ 3 Right of Way Engineering & Acquisition 1-parcel $15k/EA 15,000.00$ 4 Construction Support and Management Con. Costs 10%149,100.00$ Total Project Support Costs 350,700.00$ Total Estimated Project Costs 1,843,600.00$ Rounded 1,850,000.00$ 12/22/2022 12568619_Halcyon CS Estimate_Zone2 Signal Alternative_2.xlsx Page 335 of 354 Preliminary Opinion of Costs (Capital & Support) Fair Oaks Avenue / Halcyon Road ROUNDABOUT - Context Zone 2 City of Arroyo Grande 5/16/2022 0-Jan-1900 Construction Costs (Roundabout only )updated 6/22/18_DZ No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Traffic Control LS 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 2 Remove Tree EA 9 $2,000.00 $18,000.00 3 Remove Concrete (Curb & Gutter) LF 1410 $33.00 $46,530.00 4 Remove Concrete Sidewalk SQFT 7640 $8.00 $61,120.00 5 Roadway Excavation CY 1620 $235.00 $380,700.00 6 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 1130 $136.00 $153,680.00 7 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 930 $200.00 $186,000.00 9 Detectable Warning Surface SQFT 480 $50.00 $24,000.00 10 Minor Concrete (Curb) LF 1040 $50.00 $51,995.50 11 Minor Concrete (Curb - Truck Apron) CY 14 $700.00 $9,800.00 12 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 1344 $54.00 $72,570.06 13 Minor Concrete (Stamped Concrete - Truck Apron) CY 50 $1,200.00 $60,000.00 14 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SQFT 10986 $12.00 $131,836.44 15 Minor Concrete (Bus Pad) SQFT 1639 $25.00 $40,985.25 16 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SQFT 388 $18.00 $6,978.06 17 Reconstruct Drainage Facility LS 1 $75,000.00 $75,000.00 18 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 6300 $2.00 $12,600.00 19 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SQFT 244 $8.00 $1,952.00 20 Signs EA 50 $382.00 $19,100.00 21 Lighting System LS 1 $112,500.00 $112,500.00 22 Planting and Irrigation SQFT 10400 $10.00 $104,000.00 23 Mobilization LS 10% $1,631,900.00 $163,190.00 24 Minor/ Supplemental Items LS 25%$1,631,900.00 $407,975.00 25 Adjust Utilities to Grade LS 1 $62,500.00 $62,500.00 Subtotal (Construction Costs)2,403,012.31$ Construction Contingency 25% 407,961.83$ Total Construction Costs 2,810,974.14$ Total Construction Budget (Rounded) 2,811,000.00$ Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs (Roundabout Only): 1 Right Of Way SQFT 9260 $20.00 $185,200.00 2 Utility Relocation (by Utility Owner) ALLOW 1 $200,000.00 $200,000.00 Total Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs 385,200.00$ Total Project Capital Cost 3,196,200.00$ Project Support Costs (Roundabout Only ) 1 Environmental Clearance (CEQA/NEPA) Capital Costs 5%159,900.00$ 2 PS&E Con. Costs 7.5%210,900.00$ 3 Right of Way Engineering & Acquisition 4-Parcels $15k/EA 60,000.00$ 4 Construction Support and Management Con. Costs 10%281,100.00$ Total Project Support Costs 711,900.00$ Total Estimated Project Costs 3,908,100.00$ Rounded 3,910,000.00$ 12/22/2022 12568619_Halcyon CS Estimate_Zone2 RAB_rev0610.xlsx Page 336 of 354 Preliminary Opinion of Costs (Capital & Support) Halcyon Road - Context Zone 3 City of Arroyo Grande 5/16/2022 Construction Costs No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Traffic Control LS 1 $42,000.00 $42,000.00 2 Remove Tree EA 4 $2,000.00 $8,000.00 3 Remove Concrete (Curb & Gutter) LF 750 $33.00 $24,750.00 4 Remove Concrete Sidewalk SQFT 3270 $8.00 $26,160.00 5 Roadway Excavation CY 190 $235.00 $44,650.00 6 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 290 $136.00 $39,440.00 7 Micro-Surfacing SY 12134 $3.60 $43,681.96 8 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 140 $200.00 $28,000.00 9 Retaining Wall SQFT 1250 $120.00 $150,000.00 10 Detectable Warning Surface SQFT 276 $50.00 $13,800.00 11 Minor Concrete (Curb) LF 710 $50.00 $35,500.00 12 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 805 $54.00 $43,470.00 13 Minor Concrete (Curb Ramp) SQFT 5600 $18.00 $100,800.00 14 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SQFT 4583 $12.00 $54,996.00 15 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SQFT 347 $18.00 $6,246.00 16 Minor Concrete (Miscellaneous Construction) SQFT 1400 $20.00 $28,000.00 17 Reconstruct Drainage Facility LS 1 $45,000.00 $45,000.00 18 Pavement Marker (Retroreflective) EA 96 $17.00 $1,632.00 19 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 9203 $2.00 $18,406.00 20 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SQFT 3075 $8.00 $24,602.00 21 Signs EA 12 $382.00 $4,584.00 22 Signals/Lighting - Rapid Flashing Beacons LS 2 $7,500.00 $15,000.00 23 Planting and Irrigation SQFT 1940 $10.00 $19,400.00 24 Mobilization LS 10% $832,200.00 $83,220.00 25 Minor/ Supplemental Items LS 25% $832,200.00 $208,050.00 26 Adjust Utilities to Grade LS 1 $56,000.00 $56,000.00 Subtotal (Construction Costs)1,165,387.96$ Construction Contingency 25% 208,029.49$ Total Construction Costs 1,373,417.46$ Total Construction Budget (Rounded) 1,373,500.00$ Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs: 1 Right Of Way SQFT 1400 $20.00 $28,000.00 2 Utility Relocation (by Utility Owner) ALLOW 0 $0.00 $0.00 Total Right of Way (Capital) and Utility Relocation Costs 28,000.00$ Total Project Capital Cost 1,401,500.00$ Project Support Costs 1 Environmental Clearance (CEQA/NEPA) Capital Costs 5%70,100.00$ 2 PS&E Con. Costs 12%164,900.00$ 3 Right of Way Engineering & Acquisition 2-Parcels $15k/EA 30,000.00$ 4 Construction Support and Management Con. Costs 10%137,400.00$ Total Project Support Costs 402,400.00$ Total Estimated Project Costs 1,803,900.00$ Rounded 1,810,000.00$ Assuptions: 1. Existing power/utility poles located outside the limits of the Roundabout to remain in place. 12/22/2022 12568619_Halcyon CS Estimate_Zone3_rev0610.xlsx Page 337 of 354 Preliminary Opinion of Costs (Capital Only) Halcyon Road - Context Zone 3 - Fair Oaks to Virginia for SLOCOG CBG City of Arroyo Grande 5/5/2022 Construction Costs Only: No. Item Description Units Quantity Unit Cost Total 1 Traffic Control LS 1 42,000.00$ 42,000.00$ 2 Remove Tree EA 0 2,000.00$ -$ 3 Remove Concrete (Curb & Gutter) LF 750 33.00$ 24,750.00$ 4 Remove Concrete Sidewalk SQFT 3270 8.00$ 26,160.00$ 5 Roadway Excavation CY 130 235.00$ 30,550.00$ 6 Class 2 Aggregate Base CY 170 136.00$ 23,120.00$ 7 Micro-Surfacing SY 12134 3.60$ 43,682.40$ 8 Hot Mix Asphalt (Type A) TON 100 200.00$ 20,000.00$ 9 Retaining Wall SQFT 0 120.00$ -$ 10 Detectable Warning Surface SQFT 216 50.00$ 10,800.00$ 11 Minor Concrete (Curb) LF 710 50.00$ 35,500.00$ 12 Minor Concrete (Curb and Gutter) LF 148 54.00$ 7,992.00$ 13 Minor Concrete (Curb Ramp) SQFT 3850 18.00$ 69,300.00$ 14 Minor Concrete (Sidewalk) SQFT 105 12.00$ 1,260.00$ 15 Minor Concrete (Driveway) SQFT 0 18.00$ -$ 16 Minor Concrete (Cross Gutters) SQFT 1400 20.00$ 28,000.00$ 17 Storm Drain System LS 1 20,000.00$ 20,000.00$ 18 Pavement Marker (Retroreflective) EA 69 17.00$ 1,173.00$ 19 Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe LF 7000 2.00$ 14,000.00$ 20 Thermoplastic Pavement Marking SQFT 1750 8.00$ 14,000.00$ 21 Signs EA 10 382.00$ 3,820.00$ 22 Rapid Flashing Beacons LS 2 7,500.00$ 15,000.00$ 23 Median Zero Scape SQFT 1940 10.00$ 19,400.00$ 24 Mobilization LS 10% 408,500.00$ 40,850.00$ 25 Minor/ Supplemental Items LS 25% 408,500.00$ 102,125.00$ 26 Adjust Covers LS 1 6,000.00$ 6,000.00$ Subtotal (Construction Costs) 599,482.40$ Construction Contingency 25% 149,870.60$ Construction Support (CE) 0% -$ Total Construction & Support 749,353.00$ Total Construction Budget (Rounded)749,400.00$ Assuptions: 1. Construction Support Not Included Page 338 of 354 Complete Streets Plan Appendix H LOS and Queue Reports Page 339 of 354 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Halcyon Complete Street Plan 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - AM Peak Arroyo Grande 7:30 am 11/15/2019 Existing Conditions 2019 Synchro 10 Report GHD Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 58 179 28 164 170 212 19 523 185 151 236 38 Future Volume (veh/h) 58 179 28 164 170 212 19 523 185 151 236 38 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 76 236 30 216 224 51 25 688 209 199 311 39 Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222 Cap, veh/h 98 304 39 255 515 425 47 877 266 248 1400 174 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.14 0.28 0.28 0.03 0.33 0.33 0.14 0.44 0.44 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1623 206 1781 1870 1544 1781 2677 813 1781 3180 395 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 76 0 266 216 224 51 25 457 440 199 173 177 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1829 1781 1870 1544 1781 1777 1714 1781 1777 1798 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.5 0.0 11.5 9.8 8.2 2.1 1.1 19.3 19.3 9.0 5.0 5.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.5 0.0 11.5 9.8 8.2 2.1 1.1 19.3 19.3 9.0 5.0 5.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.22 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 98 0 343 255 515 425 47 582 561 248 782 792 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.78 0.85 0.44 0.12 0.53 0.78 0.78 0.80 0.22 0.22 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 355 0 574 355 587 485 678 646 623 678 782 792 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.6 0.0 32.0 34.6 24.7 22.5 39.8 25.2 25.2 34.5 14.4 14.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.8 0.0 1.4 9.7 0.2 0.0 10.8 7.5 7.7 7.1 0.3 0.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.6 0.0 5.1 4.8 3.5 0.7 0.6 9.1 8.8 4.3 2.0 2.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 43.4 0.0 33.4 44.3 24.9 22.5 50.6 32.7 32.9 41.7 14.7 14.7 LnGrp LOS D A CDCCDCCDBB Approach Vol, veh/h 342 491 922 549 Approach Delay, s/veh 35.6 33.2 33.3 24.5 Approach LOS DCCC Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 32.0 8.1 27.7 5.7 41.4 15.3 20.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 * 4.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.5 30.1 16.5 26.0 31.5 30.1 16.5 * 26 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 11.0 21.3 5.5 10.2 3.1 7.1 11.8 13.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 5.9 0.1 0.8 0.1 4.0 0.1 0.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 31.5 HCM 6th LOS C Notes User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Page 340 of 354 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Halcyon Complete Street Plan 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Existing Conditions 2019 - PM Peak Arroyo Grande 7:30 am 11/15/2019 Existing Conditions 2019 Synchro 10 Report GHD Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 28 124 17 205 181 98 18 286 172 117 487 45 Future Volume (veh/h) 28 124 17 205 181 98 18 286 172 117 487 45 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 29 128 14 211 187 32 19 295 103 121 502 41 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222 Cap, veh/h 60 226 25 269 475 391 42 676 231 166 1101 90 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.25 0.25 0.02 0.26 0.26 0.09 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1652 181 1781 1870 1540 1781 2590 884 1781 3327 271 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 29 0 142 211 187 32 19 200 198 121 267 276 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1833 1781 1870 1540 1781 1777 1697 1781 1777 1821 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.7 0.0 3.4 5.3 3.9 0.7 0.5 4.4 4.6 3.1 5.6 5.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.7 0.0 3.4 5.3 3.9 0.7 0.5 4.4 4.6 3.1 5.6 5.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.10 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.52 1.00 0.15 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 60 0 250 269 475 391 42 464 443 166 588 603 V/C Ratio(X) 0.49 0.00 0.57 0.79 0.39 0.08 0.46 0.43 0.45 0.73 0.45 0.46 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 627 0 1017 627 1037 854 1197 1141 1090 1197 1141 1169 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.3 0.0 18.9 19.2 14.5 13.3 22.6 14.4 14.5 20.7 12.4 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.3 0.0 0.8 1.9 0.2 0.0 9.1 1.5 1.7 7.2 1.3 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.3 0.0 1.3 2.1 1.4 0.2 0.3 1.8 1.8 1.5 2.0 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 24.5 0.0 19.7 21.1 14.7 13.4 31.7 15.9 16.1 27.9 13.6 13.6 LnGrp LOS C A B C B B C B B C B B Approach Vol, veh/h 171 430 417 664 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.5 17.7 16.7 16.2 Approach LOS C B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 7.9 17.1 5.1 16.8 4.6 20.4 10.6 11.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 * 4.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.5 30.1 16.5 26.0 31.5 30.1 16.5 * 26 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.1 6.6 2.7 5.9 2.5 7.6 7.3 5.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 4.9 0.0 0.7 0.0 6.5 0.2 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 17.2 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Page 341 of 354 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Halcyon Complete Street Plan 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave 2040 Conditions - No Build- AM Peak 10/12/2022 Synchro 10 Report GHD Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 60 185 30 180 175 225 20 575 200 165 255 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 60 185 30 180 175 225 20 575 200 165 255 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.98 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 79 243 32 237 230 68 26 757 229 217 336 42 Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222 Cap, veh/h 102 304 40 272 531 438 47 868 263 264 1417 176 Arrive On Green 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.15 0.28 0.28 0.03 0.32 0.32 0.15 0.45 0.45 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1615 213 1781 1870 1545 1781 2680 811 1781 3181 394 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 79 0 275 237 230 68 26 502 484 217 186 192 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1828 1781 1870 1545 1781 1777 1714 1781 1777 1798 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.9 0.0 12.9 11.7 9.0 3.0 1.3 23.9 23.9 10.6 5.8 5.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.9 0.0 12.9 11.7 9.0 3.0 1.3 23.9 23.9 10.6 5.8 5.9 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.12 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.47 1.00 0.22 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 102 0 344 272 531 438 47 576 555 264 791 801 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.80 0.87 0.43 0.16 0.55 0.87 0.87 0.82 0.24 0.24 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 327 0 529 327 541 447 624 595 574 624 791 801 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 41.8 0.0 34.9 37.2 26.3 24.1 43.2 28.6 28.6 37.2 15.4 15.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 4.6 0.0 2.4 16.9 0.2 0.1 11.5 14.4 14.8 7.6 0.4 0.4 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.8 0.0 5.9 6.3 4.0 1.1 0.7 12.2 11.9 5.1 2.4 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 46.4 0.0 37.3 54.1 26.5 24.2 54.7 43.0 43.5 44.7 15.8 15.8 LnGrp LOS D A DDCCDDDDBB Approach Vol, veh/h 354 535 1012 595 Approach Delay, s/veh 39.3 38.4 43.5 26.4 Approach LOS DDDC Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.8 34.0 8.7 30.4 5.9 45.0 17.3 21.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 * 4.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.5 30.1 16.5 26.0 31.5 30.1 16.5 * 26 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.6 25.9 5.9 11.0 3.3 7.9 13.7 14.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.7 3.2 0.1 0.8 0.1 4.3 0.1 0.8 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 37.8 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Page 342 of 354 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave 10/12/2022 Arroyo Grande 7:30 am 11/15/2019 Existing Conditions 2019 Synchro 10 Report GHD Page 1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 30 130 0 225 185 115 20 335 190 135 475 45 Future Volume (veh/h) 30 130 0 225 185 115 20 335 190 135 475 45 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 31 134 0 232 191 37 21 345 132 139 490 41 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222 Cap, veh/h 62 238 0 289 476 392 45 707 266 190 1203 100 Arrive On Green 0.03 0.13 0.00 0.16 0.25 0.25 0.03 0.28 0.28 0.11 0.36 0.36 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1870 0 1781 1870 1540 1781 2517 946 1781 3320 277 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 31 134 0 232 191 37 21 242 235 139 262 269 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1870 0 1781 1870 1540 1781 1777 1686 1781 1777 1820 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.9 3.5 0.0 6.5 4.4 1.0 0.6 5.9 6.1 3.9 5.7 5.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.9 3.5 0.0 6.5 4.4 1.0 0.6 5.9 6.1 3.9 5.7 5.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.56 1.00 0.15 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 62 238 0 289 476 392 45 499 474 190 644 659 V/C Ratio(X) 0.50 0.56 0.00 0.80 0.40 0.09 0.47 0.48 0.50 0.73 0.41 0.41 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 565 935 0 565 935 770 1079 1029 976 1079 1029 1053 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.7 21.3 0.0 21.0 16.1 14.8 25.0 15.6 15.6 22.5 12.4 12.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.3 0.8 0.0 2.0 0.2 0.0 8.9 1.7 1.9 6.4 1.0 1.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.4 1.5 0.0 2.6 1.7 0.3 0.4 2.4 2.4 1.8 2.1 2.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 27.0 22.1 0.0 23.0 16.3 14.8 33.9 17.3 17.5 28.9 13.4 13.4 LnGrp LOS C C A C B B C B B C B B Approach Vol, veh/h 165 460 498 670 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.0 19.5 18.1 16.6 Approach LOS C B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.0 19.5 5.3 18.1 4.8 23.7 11.9 11.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 * 4.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 31.5 30.1 16.5 26.0 31.5 30.1 16.5 * 26 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 5.9 8.1 2.9 6.4 2.6 7.8 8.5 5.5 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 5.8 0.0 0.7 0.0 6.3 0.2 0.4 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 18.4 HCM 6th LOS B Notes User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Page 343 of 354 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Halcyon Complete Street Plan 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave 2040 Conditions - Road Diet Alt 3 - AM Peak 10/12/2022 Synchro 11 Report GHD Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 150 220 30 180 175 225 20 485 165 165 255 40 Future Volume (veh/h) 150 220 30 180 175 225 20 485 165 165 255 40 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 197 289 34 237 230 38 26 638 125 217 336 17 Peak Hour Factor 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 0.76 Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222 Cap, veh/h 224 325 38 264 413 331 44 698 586 240 904 764 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.20 0.20 0.15 0.22 0.22 0.02 0.37 0.37 0.13 0.48 0.48 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1637 193 1781 1870 1499 1781 1870 1570 1781 1870 1582 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 197 0 323 237 230 38 26 638 125 217 336 17 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1830 1781 1870 1499 1781 1870 1570 1781 1870 1582 Q Serve(g_s), s 12.5 0.0 19.8 15.1 12.6 2.3 1.7 37.4 6.2 13.8 13.0 0.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 12.5 0.0 19.8 15.1 12.6 2.3 1.7 37.4 6.2 13.8 13.0 0.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.11 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 224 0 363 264 413 331 44 698 586 240 904 764 V/C Ratio(X) 0.88 0.00 0.89 0.90 0.56 0.11 0.60 0.91 0.21 0.91 0.37 0.02 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 227 0 413 271 463 371 85 732 615 240 904 764 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 49.5 0.0 44.9 48.2 39.9 35.9 55.6 34.4 24.6 49.1 18.8 15.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 28.7 0.0 17.7 28.5 0.4 0.1 14.6 16.8 0.4 34.2 0.6 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 7.3 0.0 10.7 8.8 5.8 0.9 0.9 20.1 2.4 8.4 5.7 0.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 78.2 0.0 62.6 76.7 40.3 35.9 70.3 51.1 25.0 83.4 19.4 15.6 LnGrp LOS EAEEDDEDCFBB Approach Vol, veh/h 520 505 789 570 Approach Delay, s/veh 68.5 57.1 47.6 43.6 Approach LOS E E D D Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 19.0 47.9 18.0 30.3 6.3 60.5 20.6 27.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 * 4.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 45.1 14.7 28.5 5.5 55.1 17.5 * 26 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.8 39.4 14.5 14.6 3.7 15.0 17.1 21.8 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.8 0.0 4.9 0.0 0.5 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 53.2 HCM 6th LOS D Notes User approved pedestrian interval to be less than phase max green. * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Page 344 of 354 HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Halcyon Complete Street Plan 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave 2040 Conditions with Road Diet Alt 3 - PM Peak 10/12/2022 Synchro 11 Report GHD Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h) 110 175 15 225 185 115 20 255 145 135 475 45 Future Volume (veh/h) 110 175 15 225 185 115 20 255 145 135 475 45 Initial Q (Qb), veh 000000000000 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.97 1.00 0.95 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 113 180 13 232 191 29 21 263 41 139 490 18 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %222222222222 Cap, veh/h 146 275 20 283 443 356 44 566 474 183 712 602 Arrive On Green 0.08 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.24 0.24 0.02 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.38 0.38 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 1719 124 1781 1870 1505 1781 1870 1567 1781 1870 1581 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 113 0 193 232 191 29 21 263 41 139 490 18 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1843 1781 1870 1505 1781 1870 1567 1781 1870 1581 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.8 0.0 6.0 7.7 5.3 0.9 0.7 6.9 1.1 4.6 13.4 0.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.8 0.0 6.0 7.7 5.3 0.9 0.7 6.9 1.1 4.6 13.4 0.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.07 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 146 0 295 283 443 356 44 566 474 183 712 602 V/C Ratio(X) 0.77 0.00 0.65 0.82 0.43 0.08 0.48 0.46 0.09 0.76 0.69 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 430 0 787 512 875 704 161 1385 1160 453 1693 1431 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.4 0.0 24.0 24.8 19.8 18.1 29.3 17.2 15.2 26.6 15.8 11.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.2 0.0 0.9 2.2 0.2 0.0 9.5 1.4 0.2 7.7 2.8 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.7 0.0 2.5 3.2 2.2 0.3 0.4 3.0 0.4 2.2 5.6 0.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 30.6 0.0 24.9 27.0 20.0 18.1 38.8 18.6 15.4 34.2 18.6 11.9 LnGrp LOS C A C C B B D B B C B B Approach Vol, veh/h 306 452 325 647 Approach Delay, s/veh 27.0 23.5 19.5 21.8 Approach LOS C C B C Timer - Assigned Phs 12345678 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.7 23.3 8.5 19.3 5.0 28.1 13.2 14.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 4.9 3.5 * 4.9 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 15.5 45.1 14.7 28.5 5.5 55.1 17.5 * 26 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.6 8.9 5.8 7.3 2.7 15.4 9.7 8.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 4.0 0.1 0.7 0.0 7.8 0.2 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 22.7 HCM 6th LOS C Notes * HCM 6th computational engine requires equal clearance times for the phases crossing the barrier. Page 345 of 354 Queuing and Blocking Report Halcyon Complete Street Plan 2040 Conditions - No Build 2040 Conditions - No Build - AM Peak 10/12/2022 SimTraffic Report GHD Intersection: 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB B66 B66 SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T TR T T L T Maximum Queue (ft) 94 238 125 972 125 117 213 204 170 207 164 275 Average Queue (ft) 49 121 104 274 84 29 154 165 33 44 98 100 95th Queue (ft) 99 213 146 738 147 91 222 219 124 153 165 217 Link Distance (ft) 1278 1650 118 118 509 509 1126 Upstream Blk Time (%) 0 25 31 Queuing Penalty (veh) 0 105 129 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 70 70 100 85 100 Storage Blk Time (%) 6 26 40 21 1 0 34 10 5 Queuing Penalty (veh) 14 16 165 89 5 0 7 14 9 Intersection: 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Movement SB Directions Served TR Maximum Queue (ft) 96 Average Queue (ft) 13 95th Queue (ft) 61 Link Distance (ft) 1126 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) Storage Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Page 346 of 354 Queuing and Blocking Report Halcyon Complete Street Plan 2040 Conditions - Road Diet Signal Alt - AM Peak 10/12/2022 SimTraffic Report GHD Intersection: 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T R L T R Maximum Queue (ft) 175 476 290 442 125 237 703 175 265 283 134 Average Queue (ft) 116 176 136 142 81 25 330 111 129 101 20 95th Queue (ft) 195 371 255 353 142 125 622 221 238 217 71 Link Distance (ft) 1279 1652 684 1598 Upstream Blk Time (%) 1 Queuing Penalty (veh) 9 Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 250 100 450 150 250 110 Storage Blk Time (%) 9 12 4 10 5 29 0360 Queuing Penalty (veh) 26 20 18 45 21 57 1 11 14 0 Page 347 of 354 Queuing and Blocking Report 2040 Conditions with Road Diet Alt 3 PM Peak 10/12/2022 SimTraffic Report GHD Intersection: 31: Halcyon Rd & Fair Oaks Ave Movement EB EB WB WB WB NB NB NB SB SB SB Directions Served L TR L T R L T R L T R Maximum Queue (ft) 149 225 252 262 125 56 269 175 203 294 135 Average Queue (ft) 74 96 140 96 52 19 117 57 81 170 34 95th Queue (ft) 135 178 228 186 118 48 211 128 154 279 120 Link Distance (ft) 1279 1652 684 1598 Upstream Blk Time (%) Queuing Penalty (veh) Storage Bay Dist (ft) 150 250 100 450 150 250 110 Storage Blk Time (%)02160 400190 Queuing Penalty (veh) 1 3 3 19 0 6 0 0 35 0 Page 348 of 354 LANE SUMMARY Site: 1 [Halcyon Rd at Fair Oaks Ave_2040 AM Peak (Site Folder: RNDBT)] Halcyon Rd at Fair Oaks Ave Site Category: (None) Roundabout Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ] veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % % South: Halcyon Road Lane 1d 728 2.0 841 0.866 100 19.4 LOS B 15.1 382.4 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 728 2.0 0.866 19.4 LOS B 15.1 382.4 East: Fair Oaks Avenue Lane 1d 444 2.0 936 0.474 100 11.1 LOS B 4.3 108.0 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 281 2.0 708 0.397 100 8.9 LOS A 2.9 73.4 Short 200 0.0 NA Approach 725 2.0 0.474 10.2 LOS B 4.3 108.0 North: Halcyon Road Lane 1d 575 2.0 986 0.583 100 9.6 LOS A 5.2 133.0 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 575 2.0 0.583 9.6 LOS A 5.2 133.0 West: Fair Oaks Avenue Lane 1d 500 2.0 770 0.650 100 15.2 LOS B 7.0 177.7 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 500 2.0 0.650 15.2 LOS B 7.0 177.7 Intersection 2528 2.0 0.866 13.7 LOS B 15.1 382.4 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. Delay Model: SIDRA Standard (Geometric Delay is included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Halcyon Road Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit: W N E Lane 1 22 527 179 728 2.0 841 0.866 100 NA NA Approach 22 527 179 728 2.0 0.866 East: Fair Oaks Avenue Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit: S W N Lane 1 225 219 - 444 2.0 936 0.474 100 NA NA Page 349 of 354 Lane 2 - - 281 281 2.0 708 0.397 100 0.0 1 Approach 225 219 281 725 2.0 0.474 North: Halcyon Road Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit: E S W Lane 1 206 319 50 575 2.0 986 0.583 100 NA NA Approach 206 319 50 575 2.0 0.583 West: Fair Oaks Avenue Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit: N E S Lane 1 188 275 38 500 2.0 770 0.650 100 NA NA Approach 188 275 38 500 2.0 0.650 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2528 2.0 0.866 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Halcyon Road Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Fair Oaks Avenue Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Halcyon Road Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Fair Oaks Avenue Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GHD INC. | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Saturday, December 3, 2022 11:41:22 AM Project: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Sacramento - 2200 21st\Projects\561\12568619\Tech\Sidra\2040 Redistribution_Halcyon Rd and Fair Oaks Ave_WBR_Ver03.sip9 Page 350 of 354 LANE SUMMARY Site: 1 [Halcyon Rd at Fair Oaks Ave_2040 PM Peak (Site Folder: RNDBT)] Halcyon Rd at Fair Oaks Ave Site Category: (None) Roundabout Lane Use and Performance DEMAND FLOWS 95% BACK OF QUEUECap.Deg. Satn Lane Util. Aver. Delay Level of Service Lane Config Lane Length Cap. Adj. Prob. Block. [ Total HV ] [ Veh Dist ] veh/h % veh/h v/c % sec ft ft % % South: Halcyon Road Lane 1d 457 2.0 969 0.471 100 7.1 LOS A 3.5 89.4 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 457 2.0 0.471 7.1 LOS A 3.5 89.4 East: Fair Oaks Avenue Lane 1d 446 2.0 1262 0.353 100 8.9 LOS A 2.5 63.3 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Lane 2 125 2.0 879 0.142 100 6.5 LOS A 0.8 19.7 Short 200 0.0 NA Approach 571 2.0 0.353 8.4 LOS A 2.5 63.3 North: Halcyon Road Lane 1d 712 2.0 978 0.728 100 12.0 LOS B 9.2 232.8 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 712 2.0 0.728 12.0 LOS B 9.2 232.8 West: Fair Oaks Avenue Lane 1d 326 2.0 589 0.553 100 16.7 LOS B 5.3 135.1 Full 1600 0.0 0.0 Approach 326 2.0 0.553 16.7 LOS B 5.3 135.1 Intersection 2065 2.0 0.728 10.7 LOS B 9.2 232.8 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & v/c (HCM 6). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Lane LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per lane. LOS F will result if v/c > 1 irrespective of lane delay value (does not apply for approaches and intersection). Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all lanes (v/c not used as specified in HCM 6). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. Delay Model: SIDRA Standard (Geometric Delay is included). Queue Model: HCM Queue Formula. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. d Dominant lane on roundabout approach Approach Lane Flows (veh/h) South: Halcyon Road Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From S To Exit: W N E Lane 1 22 277 158 457 2.0 969 0.471 100 NA NA Approach 22 277 158 457 2.0 0.471 East: Fair Oaks Avenue Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From E To Exit: S W N Lane 1 245 201 - 446 2.0 1262 0.353 100 NA NA Page 351 of 354 Lane 2 - - 125 125 2.0 879 0.142 100 0.0 1 Approach 245 201 125 571 2.0 0.353 North: Halcyon Road Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From N To Exit: E S W Lane 1 147 516 49 712 2.0 978 0.728 100 NA NA Approach 147 516 49 712 2.0 0.728 West: Fair Oaks Avenue Mov. L2 T1 R2 Total %HV Cap. veh/h Deg. Satn v/c Lane Util. % Prob. SL Ov. % Ov. Lane No.From W To Exit: N E S Lane 1 120 190 16 326 2.0 589 0.553 100 NA NA Approach 120 190 16 326 2.0 0.553 Total %HV Deg.Satn (v/c) Intersection 2065 2.0 0.728 Lane flow rates given in this report are based on the arrival flow rates subject to upstream capacity constraint where applicable. Merge Analysis Exit Lane Number Short Lane Length Percent Opng in Lane Opposing Flow Rate Critical Gap Follow-up Headway Lane Flow Rate Capacity Deg. Satn Min. Delay Merge Delay ft %veh/h pcu/h sec sec veh/h veh/h v/c sec sec South Exit: Halcyon Road Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. East Exit: Fair Oaks Avenue Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. North Exit: Halcyon Road Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. West Exit: Fair Oaks Avenue Merge Type: Not Applied Full Length Lane 1 Merge Analysis not applied. SIDRA INTERSECTION 9.0 | Copyright © 2000-2020 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GHD INC. | Licence: NETWORK / Enterprise | Processed: Saturday, December 3, 2022 11:41:37 AM Project: \\ghdnet\ghd\US\Sacramento - 2200 21st\Projects\561\12568619\Tech\Sidra\2040 Redistribution_Halcyon Rd and Fair Oaks Ave_WBR_Ver03.sip9 Page 352 of 354 Complete Streets Plan ghd.com The Power of Commitment Page 353 of 354 ATTACHMENT 2 Proposed Schedule/Plan - Halcyon Complete Streets City Council Update Study Session .......................... …………….March 14, 2023  Update only, show alternatives, proposed schedule and outreach plan Circulate IS/MND for public review and comment .. …………….April 3 – May 3, 2023 Re-engage stakeholders and neighborhood groups……………..April 6-10, 2023  Stakeholders Meeting*  Halcyon Neighbors Meeting* o Halcyon Neighborhood Group o Residences that front Halcyon Street Staff reviews and incorporates public comments ..... ……………Late April 2023 Planning Commission for recommendation to CC ... ……………May 2023 City Council consideration of Plan and adoption of MND……..May/June 2023 Public Outreach Plan *Stakeholders & Halcyon Neighborhood Group – Schedule meetings in April but reach out to participants beginning in March Page 354 of 354