2020-11-17_9a Circulation Element Study Session
MEMORANDUM
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: WHITNEY McDONALD, CITY MANAGER/ ACTING COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: ROBIN DICKERSON, PE, CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW AND RECEIVE COMMENT AND
PROVIDE DIRECTION REGARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT
UPDATE; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 20-001
DATE: NOVEMBER 17, 2020
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Receive feedback from the Planning Commission and the community on the Existing
Conditions and Background Report as part of the Circulation Element Update (CEU).
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
No new budget impacts have been identified. Funding for preparation of the CEU by the
City’s consultant, GHD, is included in the 2019/20 and 2020/21 fiscal year budgets.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission take public comment and provide
direction and input to staff regarding the Circulation Element Update.
BACKGROUND:
The City’s Circulation Element is one of eight (8) mandatory elements of the Arroyo
Grande General Plan and identifies the general location and extent of existing and
proposed major roads, transit routes, terminals, and public utilities and facilities and seeks
to make policies governing circulation consistent with the Land Use Element. The
Circulation Element sets standards for developing streets and highways, levels of service,
multi-modal circulation, and transportation systems. It also coordinates land use and
circulation and provides the basis for planning and prioritizing transportation improvement
projects and funding.
Significant work has been completed over the past several years, as time and resources
permitted, that inform the Circulation Element update, including preparation of existing
transportation conditions, corridor and operational studies, transportation model updates,
and initial draft policies.
Item 9.a - Page 1
PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW AND RECEIVE COMMENT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
REGARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
NOVEMBER 17, 2020
PAGE 2
On May 14, 2019, City Council authorized a consultant services agreement with GHD to
update the City’s Circulation Element. The process of updating the Circulation Element
began with obtaining updated traffic counts at various locations throughout the City in
September and October of 2019. This process also included review of existing Circulation
Element programs, an evaluation of existing conditions, and development of a report
reflecting current facilities that have been constructed since the element was last updated.
GHD, in conjunction with staff, then prepared the Final Existing Conditions and
Background Report (Attachment 1) that will be incorporated into the CEU. The Circulation
Element policies and maps are also being updated. The CEU effort will also include
updates to the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Report Guidelines.
Following receipt of feedback from the Planning Commission and the public during this
study session, the Draft CEU will be prepared for review and public comment, including
additional review by the Planning Commission. After comments are received, the CEU
will be finalized and the final document will return to the Planning Commission seeking a
recommendation for adoption by the City Council. The process will conclude with a City
Council meeting to consider adoption of the Circulation Element.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The last comprehensive update to the City’s General Plan occurred in 2001. Since then,
several updates have been approved to various elements. The last update to the City’s
Circulation Element was the Bicycle and Pedestrian plan in 2012. The Circulation Element
is not simply a transportation plan, but rather a strategy addressing multiple infrastructure
needs for the circulation of people, goods, and utilities. By statute, the Circulation
Element must correlate directly with the Land Use Element, but also has direct
relationships with other elements. The provisions of a Circulation Element affect a
community’s physical, social, and economic environment, as well as its health. Further,
recent legislation has driven change in the way local governments approach
transportation and the types of solutions available, including:
• The Complete Streets Act (AB 1358)
• Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32)/(SB 32)
• The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) and the completion
of Sustainable Communities Strategies
• CEQA Streamlining for infill projects (SB 226)
• A shift in CEQA transportation metric away from Level of Service (LOS) to Vehicle Miles
Traveled (VMT) (SB 743)
The primary body of work to update the Circulation Element includes utilizing recent and
new peak hour traffic counts along with the regional traffic model to update base
conditions and provide traffic forecasts in order to build the City’s long-term capital
improvement program. Draft policies and guidelines will also be updated in accordance
with state law and circulated for public review. Additionally, environmental review will
commence and include new significant state requirements of SB 743 for VMT thresholds.
Item 9.a - Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW AND RECEIVE COMMENT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
REGARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
NOVEMBER 17, 2020
PAGE 3
SWCA is the local firm subcontracted through GHD to complete the environmental
documents.
GHD has made significant progress completing the following documents and
administrative draft documents that are currently in internal review by City staff:
• Updated Draft Existing Conditions Background Report, with all new traffic counts;
• Policy Audit Matrix, comparing existing CE policies with proposed changes;
• A comparison of traffic volumes before and after closure of at-grade intersections
on US 101; and,
• Administrative Draft Transportation Impact Study Guidelines.
• Development of a VMT Policy
Additional work is in internal development and nearing administrative draft status,
including:
• Application of available Travel Demand Models for forecasting;
• Review of SLOCOG guidance for VMT and estimation of VMT using available
Travel Demand Models and LEHD data (Big Data); and,
• Development of new capital improvements project list, integrating the Local Road
Safety Program and SSAR Program.
Study Session Input
The Planning Commission is being asked to review and comment on the Existing
Conditions and Background Report (Attachment 1), draft CEU policies (Attachment B),
and draft Circulation Element Maps (Attachments D, E and F). These draft documents
will form the heart of the CEU, which will be prepared and circulated for further public
review and comment.
The Existing Conditions Background Report documents available background data,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), existing traffic operations, multimodal facilities, transit
services, and other pertinent transportation information describing the City’s current
transportation conditions. The Existing Conditions sets the transportation baseline and
will be utilized as the groundwork for forecasting transportation conditions, which will then
be utilized to assess future multimodal transportation needs. The City is soliciting
feedback from the Commission and from the community on concerns or suggestions for
driving/traffic operations, biking, walking, and transit.
Draft CEU policies are presented in Attachment B. These policies reflect changes
recommended by staff to ensure consistency with the legislation identified above, such
as the Complete Streets Act, SB 743, and the Sustainable Communities and Climate
Protection Act. Other modifications are proposed to clarify and update language
consistent with best practices for transportation planning. The City’s existing Circulation
Element policies are provided in Attachment C for comparison. Staff is requesting input
Item 9.a - Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW AND RECEIVE COMMENT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
REGARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
NOVEMBER 17, 2020
PAGE 4
from the public and the Commission regarding the draft CEU policies provided in
Attachment B, which will be incorporated into the draft CEU.
Finally, three draft maps are presented in Attachments D, E, and F depicting proposed
Intersection and Roadway Improvements, Bicycle Improvements, and Pedestrian and
Transit Facility Improvements, respectively. These maps will form the outline for planned
transportation improvements in the City for the life of the Circulation Element. Staff is
requesting input regarding the improvements identified in the draft maps.
With comments from the Commission and the community, GHD and City staff will prepare
the Draft CEU prior to returning to the Planning Commission. A complete list of tasks is
provided in Table 3.
Next Steps
Table 3: Schedule of Tasks
Task Target Date
Begin Circulation Element Update May 2019
Interim VMT Policy July 2020
City Review of Draft Policy Changes September 2020
Final Existing Conditions Background Report November 2020
City Review of Draft TIAR Guidelines November 2020
Study Session with Planning Commission November 17, 2020
Complete Traffic Impact Analysis Report Guidelines November 2020
Draft Circulation Element Update February 2021
Nexus Study/Draft Traffic Impact Fees Update February 2021
Draft Environmental Document* February 2021
Workshop with Planning Commission to Review Draft CEU March 2021
Final Circulation Element/Final Environmental Document* April 2021
Planning Commission/City Council Adoption Hearings May 2021
*These dates may change pending confirmation of needed technical reports for the
environmental document
Public Outreach
Input from the community is highly desirable and with community input at key critical
stages we will have a better understanding of the needs of the community. A second
public study session will be scheduled after the first of the year to allow the public to
review the draft document prior to finalization.
Because of the challenges of COVID, public participation will be through the use of
interactive online software. A Social Pinpoint website
(https://lrsp.mysocialpinpoint.com/arroyogrande/map) has been established which will
allow the community to interact with the map, identifying areas of concern, and add
Item 9.a - Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION
STUDY SESSION TO REVIEW AND RECEIVE COMMENT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION
REGARDING THE CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
NOVEMBER 17, 2020
PAGE 5
suggestions and comments. These comments will be reviewed and become part of the
CEU process.
ADVANTAGES:
This study session provides a forum for community input and participation in the process
of updating the City’s Circulation Element. Review by the public and the Commission
helps guide development of the CEU.
DISADVANTAGES:
None identified.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The CEU requires environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act. To meet CEQA compliance requirements, the City anticipates preparing a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND) for the CEU. The MND will be prepared by SWCA as a sub
consultant to GHD and is part of the current project budget. The MND will be available
for consideration with the Final Circulation Element Update. Specific projects identified
in the Circulation Element update may require additional CEQA review at the time of
project development.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENT:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
Attachments:
1. Attachment A Final Existing Conditions Background Report
2. Attachment B Draft Circulation Element Update Policies
3. Attachment C Existing Circulation Element Policies
4. Attachment D Intersection and Roadway Improvements
5. Attachment E Bicycle Improvements
6. Attachment F Pedestrian and Transit Facility Improvements
Item 9.a - Page 5
GHD | 669 Pacific Street, Suite A, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
11144936 | 2101 | R1584RPT007.docx | November 6 2020
Circulation Element
Update
Existing Conditions Background Report
Prepared for:
City of Arroyo Grande
Final Report
ATTACHMENT A
Item 9.a - Page 6
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page i
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 9.a - Page 7
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Existing Setting .................................................................................................................. 4
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends ................................................................................ 4
1.3 Roadway System ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1 State Freeways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.2 State Highways ................................................................................................. 7
1.3.3 Arterial Streets .................................................................................................. 9
1.3.4 Collectors ........................................................................................................ 10
1.3.5 Local Streets ................................................................................................... 10
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and Parameters .................................................................. 11
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) .......................................................................................... 11
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies ........................................................................................ 11
2.1.2 VMT Policies ................................................................................................... 12
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations .............................................................................. 13
2.2.1 Intersection Operations .................................................................................. 13
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ...................................................................... 14
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations ....................................................................... 16
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters ...................................................................... 16
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies ................................................................................. 16
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress .......................................................................................... 17
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria ........................................................................................ 18
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy .......................................................................................... 20
3. Existing Traffic Operations ......................................................................................................... 21
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies ............................................ 21
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ........................................................................ 25
3.3 Truck Routes .................................................................................................................... 28
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities ......................................................................................... 30
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions ............................................................ 33
Item 9.a - Page 8
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 2
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis ................................................ 36
3.6 Public Transportation ....................................................................................................... 38
3.7 Rail ................................................................................................................................... 39
3.8 Air ..................................................................................................................................... 39
Figure Index
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Figure 1.2 Roadway Functional Classifications .................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions ............................................................. 18
Figure 3.1 Existing Intersection Lane Geometrics & Control ............................................................ 22
Figure 3.2 Existing Intersection Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................ 23
Figure 3.3 Existing Daily Roadway Traffic Volumes ......................................................................... 26
Figure 3.4 Map of Truck Routes in the City of Arroyo Grande ......................................................... 29
Figure 3.5 2012 Bicycle & Trail Master Plan..................................................................................... 31
Figure 3.6 City of Arroyo Grande Sidewalk Inventory ...................................................................... 34
Figure 3.7 Existing Bikeways Map .................................................................................................... 35
Figure 3.8 City of Arroyo Grande Major Roads Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) ...................... 37
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande .......................................................... 38
Table Index
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics........................................................... 5
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work .......................................................................................................... 6
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections ............................................................. 15
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds ........................................................... 16
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters ....................................................................................... 16
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes .................................... 18
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic ........................................................................................... 19
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes ............................................................................................. 19
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations .................................................................... 24
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations ....................................................................... 27
Item 9.a - Page 9
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 3
Appendix Index
Appendix A Traffic Counts
Appendix B Synchro Reports
Appendix C Warrant Analysis Worksheets
Appendix D Bicycle LTS Analysis Worksheets
Item 9.a - Page 10
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 4
1. Introduction
The City of Arroyo Grande has retained GHD to complete updates to the City’s General Plan
Circulation Element (CE), associated Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) and nexus study, and
finalization of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) guidelines. As part of the CE update, this Existing
Conditions Background Report has been prepared in order to document available background data,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT), existing traffic operations, multimodal facilities, transit services, and
other pertinent transportation information describing the City’s transportation baseline. This report
summarizes the City’s existing roadway facilities in the context of a regional setting and existing
service levels on critical facilities. Daily and peak hour traffic volumes are presented and analyzed,
and facilities with deficit capacity are identified. The Existing Conditions sets the transportation
baseline and will be utilized as the groundwork for forecasting transportation conditions, which will
then be utilized to assess future transportation needs.
The City’s ultimate objective is to update their Circulation Element to include policies, goals, and
objectives that will create an optimal multi-modal transportation system for the City. Policies goals,
and objectives will be consistent with the requirements of AB 1358, "The California Complete Street
Act", and SB 743, the change from Level of Service to VMT as the measure of transportation
impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), to provide integrated smart growth
planning. The updated Circulation Element and TIF will also bring the City’s planning efforts in
compliance with the goals set forth in San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2019
Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) as required by SB
375, “The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008”, authorized by AB 32, “The
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006”.
1.1 Existing Setting
The City of Arroyo Grande is an incorporated community located within the “Five Cities” area of San
Luis Obispo County, California. The City lies about 200 miles south of the San Francisco Bay Area
and 150 miles north of Los Angeles. The City is 5.45 square miles in area and is at an elevation of
114 feet. The City of Arroyo Grande is located approximately 10 miles south of the City of San Luis
Obispo, along the US 101 coastal corridor. The City is located contiguous with the incorporated
areas of the City of Pismo Beach to the northwest and the City of Grover Beach to the west.
US 101 runs diagonally through the middle of the City in a northwest to southeast dire ction. US 101
is the primary State highway providing regional access, connecting the City with other parts of San
Luis Obispo County and the State. State Route 227 also provides more localized access to/from the
City, connecting Arroyo Grande with the City of San Luis Obispo and surrounding County
community.
1.2 Demographics and Commute Trends
Data from the United States Census Bureau’s 2009-2013 (2013) and 2013-2017 (2017) American
Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates, form the basis of the following demographic analysis.
Based on the ACS data, the population in the City has increased by roughly 560 from 17,411 in
2013 to 17,971 in 2017, approximately a 3.2% increase.
Item 9.a - Page 11
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 5
Prior to examining the various transportation modes in the City, the following sub-section will
examine some recent trends and current facts concerning commuter mode-choice and travel times
in the City. Table 1.1 presents the various means of transportation reported in the City of Arroyo
Grande between 2013 and 2017 ACS estimates.
Table 1.1 Means of Transportation and Carpooling Statistics
As presented in Table 1.1, the number of workers in the City did not increase significantly between
the two five year estimates. This increase in workers is approximately 2.2%. Overall, these statistics
indicate a consistent trend of a large percentage of commuters driving alone. Carpooling ,
motorcycle use, and walking decreased between 2013 and 2017, while biking and working at home
increased. Public transit use remained consistent.
Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1 present the reported travel times from the 2013 and 2017 ACS. As
presented in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, the average travel time to work for all workers increased by
1.6 minutes, a 7% increase from the 2013 ACS.
Number Percent Number Percent
Workers 16 and over 35,401 -36,196 -
Car, Truck or Van 31,188 88.1%32,070 88.6%
Drove Alone 27,082 76.5%28,124 77.7%
Carpooled 4,107 11.6%3,945 10.9%
Public Transportation (excludes taxi)389 1.1%398 1.1%
Motocycle, taxi, or other 354 1.0%290 0.8%
Bicycle 389 1.1%434 1.2%
Walked 991 2.8%688 1.9%
Worked at Home 2,089 5.9%2,317 6.4%
Means of Transportation
2013-2017 ACS2009-2013 ACS
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
Item 9.a - Page 12
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 6
Table 1.2 Travel Time to Work
Figure 1.1 Travel Time to Work
Number Percent Number Percent
Did not work at home 33,312 -33,879 -
Less than 10 minutes 5,397 16.2%3,930 11.6%
10 to 14 minutes 5,463 16.4%4,946 14.6%
15 to 19 minutes 5,996 18.0%6,742 19.9%
20 to 24 minutes 6,363 19.1%6,606 19.5%
25 to 29 minutes 2,065 6.2%2,914 8.6%
30 to 34 minutes 4,430 13.3%4,709 13.9%
35 to 44 minutes 1,299 3.9%1,660 4.9%
45 to 59 minutes 1,099 3.3%949 2.8%
60+ minutes 1,166 3.5%1,457 4.3%
Mean Travel Time (minutes)
Travel Time
Sources: U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates
23.221.6
2009-2013 ACS 2013-2017 ACS
Item 9.a - Page 13
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 7
As summarized in Table 1.2 and Figure 1.1, more commuters are experiencing longer travel times
to work (15+ minutes) in 2017 than in 2013. A large majority of commuters, about 70%, spent less
than 25 minutes commuting. Approximately 40% of commuters had a commute time of 20-25
minutes, indicating a presumably high amount of non-localized employment.
1.3 Roadway System
A hierarchy of streets provides access to and from residential, commercial, and industrial uses
throughout the City and beyond. A route’s design, including number of lanes needed, is determined
by its functional classification and its projected traffic levels to achieve “safe and convenient
movement at the development intensity anticipated in the Land Use Element.” The study area and
existing roadway functional classifications are presented in Figure 1.2.
1.3.1 State Freeways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions are free of at-grade crossing with other road, railways
or pedestrian pathway, and instead are served by interchange are classified as highways. Highways
can either be toll or non-toll roads, with speed limits usually ranging from 60 to 70 mph. The
following freeways service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
US 101 is a major north-south freeway facility that traverses along coastal California. US 101
serves as the principal inter-regional auto and truck travel route that connects San Luis Obispo
County (and other portions of the Central Coast) with the San Francisco Bay Area to the north and
the Los Angeles urban basin to the south. Within San Luis Obispo County, US 101 provides major
connection between and through several cities. Through the “Five Cities” area of San Luis Obispo
County, US 101 represents a major recreational as well as commuter travel route and has a general
four-lane divided freeway cross-section with 65 mph posted speed limits. Within the City of Arroyo
Grande, US 101 forms full-access interchanges with Oak Park Boulevard, Brisco Road/Halcyon
Road and Grand Avenue/Branch Street as well as directional interchange access at Traffic Way
and Fair Oaks Avenue.
1.3.2 State Highways
Controlled access facilities whose junctions with cross streets are characterized by at grade
intersections rather than interchanges are classified as highways. Highways can either be divided or
undivided roadways, with speed limits usually ranging from 40 to 55 mph. The following highways
service the surrounding Arroyo Grande community.
State Route 227 (SR 227) is a state highway route that runs predominantly in a north-south
direction connecting the City of San Luis Obispo and the City of Arroyo Grande. SR 227 has a
general two-lane highway type cross-section through most segments. SR 227 represents a
significant parallel commuter route to US 101, as well as a recreational travel route serving the City
of Arroyo Grande.
Item 9.a - Page 14
Fair Oaks AvenueJames WayOak Park BoulevardElm StreetThe PikeHalcyon RoadEl Camino RealValley RoadFair Oaks AvenueEast Grand AvenueWestBranchStreetHuasna RdRodeoDriveFarroll AvenueTallyHoRoadAsh StreetRanchoParkwayTrafficW ayCorbettCanyonRoadEast Branch StreetBranchMillRoadBrisco RoadCourtland StreetCaminoMercadoEast Cherry AvenueCarpenter Canyon Road£¤101£¤10112272271227FIGURE 1.20 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5MilesProject No.Revision No.411144936Date11/02/2020CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORTMap Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 FeetPaper Size ANSI AoData source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.Created by: rsouthernN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG1.2_RoadClassification.mxdPrint date: 02 Nov 2020 - 15:04LegendCity LimitsUS 101Sphere of Influence4-Lane (Primary)Arterial2-Lane Arterial Collector Residential Collector RoadsState Routes andHighwaysROADWAY FUNCTIONALCLASSIFICATIONItem 9.a - Page 15
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 9
1.3.3 Arterial Streets
Arterial facilities serve to connect areas of major activity within the urban area and function primarily
to distribute cross-town traffic from freeways / highways to collector streets. The City’s Standard
Specifications and Engineering Standards define two categories: Primary Arterials and Arterials.
Primary Arterials feature four lanes with a turn lane, and Arterials feature two lanes with a turn lane.
Within the City, arterial streets are mostly two-lane facilities with maximum operating speeds
ranging from 30 to 45 mph. In addition, arterial facilities generally have limited access to adjacent
land uses. The following arterials are identified in the City’s General Plan circulation system.
East Branch Street extends Grand Avenue to the east and serves as the City’s main downtown
commercial thoroughfare as well as a commuter connection between US 101 and SR 227. The
duality of purpose of this three-lane arterial road with on-street parking does create safety and
capacity concerns. The high volume of traffic (18,500 ADT) at times conflicts with the community’s
desire to have a pedestrian-friendly downtown.
Elm Street is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that runs north-south between State Route 1 (SR 1) in
the south, and Brighton Avenue in the north. The four-lane portion of Elm Street is located between
Ash Street and Grand Avenue.
Fair Oaks Avenue is a two-to-four-lane arterial road that provides important east-west connectivity
across US 101 in the southern portion of the City. It extends from Traffic Way in the east to Elm
Street in the west. East of Valley Road, Fair Oaks Avenue is not built to full arterial facility design
standards.
Grand Avenue is a four-to-five-lane east-west Primary arterial through and within the City (two
travel lanes per direction with a two-way left-turn median lane along several segments within the
City). West of the City of Arroyo Grande, Grand Avenue extends into the City of Grover Beach and
extends further west to the coastline. East of the full-access interchange with US 101, Grand
Avenue becomes East Branch Street, which extends further east to Corbett Canyon Road and SR
227. Grand Avenue represents one of the “gateway” routes for recreational travelers headed
westwards from US 101 to the Pacific coastline.
Halcyon Road is a two-to-four-lane north-south arterial road that connects between US 101 in the
City of Arroyo Grande and State Route 1 (SR 1) in the Halcyon area located to the south of the City,
with the southernmost terminus at Zenon Way. Between Grand Avenue and Fair Oaks Avenue,
Halcyon Road is a four-lane primary arterial road. Halcyon Road, in conjunction with Brisco Road
and El Camino Real, forms a full-access interchange with US 101, just north of the US 101/Grand
Avenue interchange.
Oak Park Boulevard is two-to-five-lane north-south arterial road that runs along the northwestern
City limit line, defining Arroyo Grande’s boundary with the adjacent Cities of Grover Beach and
Pismo Beach. Oak Park Boulevard forms a full-access interchange with US 101, and extends south
of US 101 as a four-lane primary arterial into the City of Grover Beach, continuing south beyond
The Pike as 22nd Street. North of the City of Arroyo Grande, Oak Park Boulevard forks into Old Oak
Park Road, which extends north into County lands, and Noyes Road, which extends in a
northeasterly direction to connect with SR 227.
Item 9.a - Page 16
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 10
Traffic Way is a two-to-four-lane arterial road serving local commercial developments. It extends
from East Branch Street (SR 227) in the north and terminates into ramp junctions with US 101 to
the south.
Valley Road is a two-lane arterial road that extends south from Fair Oaks Avenue, connecting to
State Route 1 (SR 1) south of the City limits.
West Branch Street is a two-lane arterial road, and also a frontage road east of US 101 with both
commercial and residential frontage. It extends from Oak Park Boulevard to West Branch Street,
and provides important circulation and commercial accessibility east of the freeway.
1.3.4 Collectors
Collectors function as connector routes between local and arterial streets and provide access to
residential, commercial, and industrial property. The City’s Standard Specifications and Engineering
Standards define two categories: Collectors and Residential Collectors. Collectors feature turn
lanes at intersections and may feature a two-way left turn lane (TWLTL), while residential collectors
do not have turn lanes.
James Way is a predominantly-east-west two-lane road serving as a residential collector between
Oak Park Boulevard and Tally Ho Road.
Printz Road is a predominantly-east-west two-lane collector that runs just north of the City’s
northern limits. Printz Road connects between SR 227 and Noyes Road, and provides access for
several small local roads.
The Pike is a two-lane east-west collector. It runs between 13th Street and Halcyon Road. A portion
of The Pike runs adjacent to part of the southern City limits.
Rancho Parkway is a two-lane north-south collector that runs between West Branch Street and
James Way. Rancho Parkway provides access to the large shopping centers along W Branch
Street, including the Walmart, and residential areas north.
Ash Street, Branch Mill Road, Brisco Road, Courtland Street, East Cherry Avenue, El Camino
Mercado, Farroll Avenue, Huasna Road, Mason Street, North Corbett Canyon Road, Rodeo
Drive, and Tally Ho Road are other important roadways serving Residential Collector functions
within the City.
1.3.5 Local Streets
Local streets provide direct access to abutting properties and allow for localized movement of traffic.
Local streets are characterized by low daily traffic volumes and low travel speeds. All roadways not
identified in the Roadway Functional Classifications map (Figure 1.2) as freeways, highways,
arterials, or collectors are designated as local streets.
Item 9.a - Page 17
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 11
2. Technical Analysis Methodologies and
Parameters
The following section outlines the analysis parameters and methodologies that will be used to
quantify the measures of circulation system effectiveness.
2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
SB 743 was signed into law in 2013, with the intent to better align CEQA practices with statewide
sustainability goals related to infill development, active transportation, and greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions. SB 743 required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to identify new
metrics for identifying and mitigating transportation impacts within CEQA. Among the changes to
the State CEQA Guidelines was removal of vehicle delay and Level of Service (LOS) from
consideration as environmental impacts under CEQA. For land use projects, OPR identified Vehicle
Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita (for residential), VMT per employee (for office), and net VMT (for
retail) as new metrics for transportation analysis. For transportation projects, lead agencies for
roadway capacity projects have discretion, consistent with CEQA and planning requ irements, to
choose which methodology to use to evaluate transportation impacts.
2.1.1 VMT Methodologies
Various methodologies are currently available to calculate VMT. Travel demand models, sketch
models or planning tools, spreadsheet models, research, and data can all be used to calculate and
estimate VMT. GHD is investigating local VMT further and will update this section based on the
results of additional analysis and validation.
Boundary-Based and Project-Based VMT
Not all VMT is measured equally, and not all models are equally equipped to assess VMT.
Boundary-based VMT is calculated by multiplying traffic volumes on all roadway segments in a
study area by each segment’s length. This type of VMT is easily calculated, but is not adequate for
CEQA analysis under SB 743. Project-based (or tour-based) VMT is more challenging to calculate,
as it requires estimating or measuring the length of individual trips by purpose, where trips cross
study area and jurisdictional boundaries.
SB 743 generally requires project-based VMT to be estimated, since boundary-based VMT
approaches do not account for the full lengths of trips that leave a particular study area (whether
that be a City, County, or State). For this reason, regional travel demand models, “big data”, and
household travel surveys that are not limited by local jurisdictional boundaries are the preferred
tools to estimate VMT under SB 743.
Published Data
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments’ Staff Report dated October 2, 2019 states baseline
and recommended VMT for incorporated Cities and County communities, based on the regional
Travel Demand Model. This information is presented below.
Item 9.a - Page 18
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 12
The Baseline Regional VMT per capita (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 13.43
o Recommended threshold is 15% below baseline at 11.42
The Baseline Regional VMT per employee (SLOCOG 2018 results) is 8.59
o Recommended threshold is at 15% below baseline at 7.3
No baseline or threshold set for Retail.
The Staff Report shows an average daily VMT per capita for Arroyo Grande of approximately
9.5 for residents, and 7 for employees.
2.1.2 VMT Policies
With the adopted CEQA Guidelines (revised, January 20, 2016), transportation impacts are to be
evaluated based on a project’s effect on vehicle miles travelled (VMT). The new guidelines became
effective statewide on July 1, 2020. GHD has assisted the City in establishing a VMT Policy, which
the City has adopted on September 8, 2020, and establishes the thresholds of significance and
screening criteria for VMT. Per the City’s Policy, and consistent with OPR’s Technical Advisory on
Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, the target for VMT reduction is 15% below baseline for
residential and office projects, and no net increase in total regional VMT for retail, industrial, and
other projects. The City’s baseline VMT and significance thresholds are listed below.
Baseline Residential VMT per capita: 20.2
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per capita: 17.2
Baseline Office VMT per employee: 14.0
o 15% reduction in baseline VMT per employee: 11.9
Retail, Industrial, & Other: No Net increase in total regional VMT
Mixed-Use: Evaluate components independently considering internal capture, and compare to
the corresponding threshold. Alternatively, analyze only the project’s the dominant use.
Redevelopment: If a project leads to a net overall increase in VMT, then the thresholds above
apply.
A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if
proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective
thresholds recommended above.
Screening Criteria
The City has also identified screening thresholds for projects that are presumed to be less than
significant impact. The following are examples (not inclusive) of land use and transportation projects
that are identified exempt by OPR, therefore should not require VMT analysis:
A) Small Projects – less than 110 vehicle trips per day
B) Projects that are within ½ mile of a transit stop at the intersection of two transit routes with 15
minute headways or less, unless the project:
Item 9.a - Page 19
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 13
i) Has floor-area-ratio of less than 0.75;
ii) Includes more parking than required by the City’s zoning code;
iii) Is inconsistent with the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, City Zoning Code, or
City Land Use Policies, including the City’s General Plan or any applicable Specific Plan ;
or
iv) Replaces affordable housing with a smaller number of moderate- or high-income
residential units.
C) Local-serving retail projects, which are generally defined as projects within the City that are
less than 50,000 square feet in size. The determination of whether a retail project is local-
serving or regional-serving shall be made by City staff on a case by case basis to determine
whether they are likely to attract regional trips. For instance, auto dealerships and specialty
retailers may propose less than 50,000 square feet of retail space but be de emed regionally
serving.
D) Transportation projects that are expected to reduce or have no impact on VMT will not
require a quantitative analysis. These projects include, but are not limited to, road diets,
roundabouts, roadway rehabilitation and maintenance, safety improvements that do not
substantially increase auto capacity, installation or reconfiguration of lanes not for through
traffic, timing of traffic signals, removal of on-street parking, addition or enhancement of
pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities and services.
2.2 Level of Service & Traffic Operations
Although VMT will be used to determine CEQA transportation impacts, the City intends, by policy, to
continue to use Level of Service as a metric to evaluate traffic operations to assess need, type, and
timing of transportation improvements.
Traffic operations were quantified through the determination of "Level of Service" (LOS). Level of
Service is a qualitative measure of traffic operating conditions, whereby a letter grade "A" through
"F" is assigned to an intersection, or roadway segment, representing progressively worsening traffic
conditions. LOS "A" represents free-flow operating conditions and LOS "F" represents over-capacity
conditions. Levels of Service was calculated for all intersection control types, and freeway ramp
merge and diverge sections using the methods documented in the Transportation Research Board
Publication Highway Capacity Manual, Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016
(HCM 6).
2.2.1 Intersection Operations
The Synchro 10 (Trafficware) software program was used to implement the HCM 6 analysis
methodologies for signalized and stop-controlled intersections. Intersection Level of Service (LOS)
was calculated for all control types using the methods documented in HCM 6, excluding the
clustered intersections and locations with non-NEMA-standard phasing, due to limitations within
HCM 6 methodology. The specific locations include the Brisco Road / US 101 partial interchange
and Brisco / El Camino Real, which used Synchro Timing methodology to determine intersection
Item 9.a - Page 20
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 14
delay. For signalized or all-way stop-controlled (AWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is
based on the calculated averaged delay for all approaches and movements. For two-way or side-
street stop controlled (TWSC) intersections, an LOS determination is based upon the calculated
average delay for all movements of the worst performing approach. The vehicular -based LOS
criteria for different types of intersection controls are presented in Table 2.1.
2.2.2 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
A supplemental traffic signal “warrant” analysis was completed. The term “signal warrants” refers to
the list of established criteria used by Caltrans and other public agencies to quantitatively justify or
ascertain the need for installation of a traffic signal at an otherwise unsignalized intersection. This
study employed the signal warrant criteria presented in the latest edition of the 2014 California
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (2014 CA MUTCD, Revision 5). The signal warrant
criteria are based upon several factors including volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic,
frequency of accidents, location of school areas etc. The CA MUTCD indicates that the installation
of a traffic signal should be considered if one or more of the signal warrants are met. The ultimate
decision to signalize an intersection should be determined after careful analysis of all intersection
and area characteristics.
This traffic operations analysis specifically utilized the Peak -Hour-Volume based Warrant 3 as one
representative type of traffic signal warrant analysis. Signal warrant analyses were only conducted
for non-signalized intersections which are projected to operate beyond the LOS thresholds. Section
3.1 of this Report further discusses which intersections are evaluated for the peak hour signal
warrant. The Signal Warrant analysis worksheets are provided in Appendix C.
Item 9.a - Page 21
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 15
Table 2.1 Level of Service (LOS) Criteria for Intersections
Level of
Service
Type
of
Flow Delay Maneuverability
Stopped Delay/Vehicle
(sec)
Signalized
Un-
signalized
A Stable Flow Very slight delay. Progression is very
favorable, with most vehicles arriving
during the green phase not stopping at
all.
Turning movements are
easily made, and nearly
all drivers find freedom
of operation.
≤10.0 ≤10.0
B Stable Flow Good progression and/or short cycle
lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS
A, causing higher levels of average
delay.
Vehicle platoons are
formed. Many drivers
begin to feel somewhat
restricted within groups
of vehicles.
>10.0 >10.0
and and
≤20.0 ≤15.0
C Stable Flow Higher delays resulting from fair
progression and/or longer cycle lengths.
Individual cycle failures may begin to
appear at this level. The number of
vehicles stopping is significant, although
many still pass through the intersection
without stopping.
Back-ups may develop
behind turning vehicles.
Most drivers feel
somewhat restricted
>20.0 >15.0
and and
≤35.0 ≤25.0
D Approaching Unstable Flow The influence of congestion becomes
more noticeable. Longer delays may
result from some combination of
unfavorable progression, long cycle
lengths, or high volume-to-capacity
ratios. Many vehicles stop, and the
proportion of vehicles not stopping
declines. Individual cycle failures are
noticeable.
Maneuverability is
severely limited during
short periods due to
temporary back-ups.
>35.0 >25.0
and and
≤55.0 ≤35.0
E Unstable Flow Generally considered to be the limit of
acceptable delay. Indicative of poor
progression, long cycle lengths, and high
volume-to-capacity ratios. Individual
cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
There are typically long
queues of vehicles
waiting upstream of the
intersection.
>55.0 >35.0
and and
≤80.0 ≤50.0
F Forced Flow Generally considered to be
unacceptable to most drivers. Often
occurs with over saturation. May also
occur at high volume-to-capacity ratios.
There are many individual cycle failures.
Poor progression and long cycle lengths
may also be major contributing factors.
Jammed conditions.
Back-ups from other
locations restrict or
prevent movement.
Volumes may vary
widely, depending
principally on the
downstream back-up
conditions.
>80.0 >50.0
Source: Highway Capacity Manual Sixth Edition, A Guide for Multimodal Mobility Analysis, 2016 (HCM 6)
Item 9.a - Page 22
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 16
2.2.3 Roadway Segment Operations
Existing roadway LOS was determined on a daily basis with counts collected on weekdays in
November, 2019. The LOS for 37 roadway segments throughout Arroyo Grande were established
using the capacities in Table 2.2
Table 2.2 Roadway Segment ADT Operational Thresholds
Note: All volumes are approximate and assume ideal roadway characteristics. Actual thres hold volumes for
each Level of Service listed above may vary depending on a variety of factors including (but not limited to)
roadway curvature and grade, intersection or interchange spacing, driveway spacing, percentage of trucks and
other heavy vehicles, travel lane widths, signal timing characteristics, on-street parking, volume of cross traffic
and pedestrians, etc.
2.2.4 Technical Analysis Parameters
This evaluation of Existing conditions incorporates appropriate heavy vehicle adjustment factors,
peak hour factors, and signal lost time factors and reports the resulting operational analysis as
estimated using the HCM 6 based analysis methodologies.
Table 2.3 presents the technical parameters that were utilized for the evaluation of the study
intersections and ramp segments for the analysis scenarios. All parameters not listed should be
assumed as default values or calculated based on parameters listed.
Table 2.3 Technical Analysis Parameters
Technical Parameter Assumption
1 Intersection Peak Hour Factor Based on counts, intersection overall
2 Intersection Heavy Vehicle % Based on counts, intersection overall, minimum 2%
3 Pedestrian & Bicycle Volumes Based on counts
4 Grades 2% or less, level terrain
5 Signal Timings Based on Caltrans and City signal timing plans
2.2.5 Level of Service Policies
City of Arroyo Grande
The City of Arroyo Grande’s current LOS policy is identified in the General Plan Circulation Element
(October 2001), and specifies the following minimum LOS standards for all streets and intersections
within the City’s jurisdiction:
CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)’C’ or better on all streets and controlled
intersections.
A B C D E
Four Lane Freeway 28,000 43,200 61,600 74,400 80,000
Two Lane Highway 2,400 4,800 7,900 13,500 22,900
Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 22,000 25,000 29,000 33,000 36,000
Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000
Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,500 18,000
Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
Two Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000
Roadway Type
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) – Total of Both Directions
Item 9.a - Page 23
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 17
CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS ‘D’ at a minimum and plan improvement to
achieve LOS ‘C’ (Los ‘E’ or ‘F’ unacceptable = significant adverse impact unless
Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings approved). The design and
funding for such planned improvements shall be sufficiently definite to enable
construction within a reasonable period of time.
Based on the current City policy, LOS C will be utilized as the acceptable threshold for the
evaluation of intersection and roadway operations in this report .
It should be noted however, as part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to
change the LOS policy to the following:
CT3. Strive to attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS ‘D’ or better on all street
segments and controlled intersections.
CT3-1. New development that is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS E or below or further
exacerbate conditions already below LOS D should be conditioned to make
transportation improvements that offset the level degradation. Improvements to non-
automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or intersection may also be
considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
If the City decides to adopt this change in LOS policy to LOS D as the threshold, this will change
the findings of deficient locations identified within this report.
2.3 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress
Bicycle operations are quantified through a determination of “Level of Traffic Stress” (LTS). LTS
must be calculated for roadway segments and intersections using the methods documented in the
paper, Low Stress Bicycling and Network Connectivity, Mineta Transportation Institute, Report 11-
19, May 2012. Bicycle LTS quantifies the stress level of a given roadway segment by considering a
variety of criteria, including street width (number of lanes), speed limit or prevailing speed, presence
and width of bike lanes, and the presence and width of parking lanes. Bicycle LTS is a suitability
rating system of the safety, comfort, and convenience of transportation faci lities from the
perspective of the user. Moreover, the methodology allows planning practitioners to assess gaps in
connectivity that may discourage active users from traversing roadways.
Bicycle LTS scores roadway facilities into one of four classification s or ratings for measuring the
effects of traffic-based stress on bicycle riders, with 1 being the lowest stress or most comfortable,
and 4 being the highest stress or least comfortable. Generally, LTS score of 1 indicates the facility
provides a traffic stress tolerable by most children and less experienced riders, such as multi-use
paths that are separated from motorized traffic. An LTS score of 4 indicates a stress level tolerable
by only the most experienced cyclists who are comfortable with high-volume and high-speed, mixed
traffic environments. The figure below presents the four scoring classifications, subsequent tables
show the criteria associated with determining the LTS score.
Item 9.a - Page 24
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 18
Figure 2.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Definitions
2.3.1 Bicycle LTS Criteria
The Bicycle LTS methodology is comprised of three scoring categories: roadway segments,
intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, and unsignalized intersection crossings. The
Bicycle LTS scoring criteria for intersection approaches where right turn lanes exist, for roadway
segments with mixed traffic, and for roadway segments where bike lanes exist are provided in the
Tables below.
Table 2.4 LTS Criteria for Intersection Approaches with Right Turn Lanes
Right-turn Lane Configuration
Right-turn
lane length
(ft)
Bike Lane
Approach
Alignment2
Vehicle Turning
Speed (mph)3 LTS Score
With Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 150 Straight ≤ 15 LTS 2
Single >150 Straight ≤ 20 LTS 3
Single Any Left ≤ 15 LTS 3
Single1 or Dual Exclusive/
Shared Any Any Any LTS 4
Without a Pocket Bike Lane
Single ≤ 75 ≤ 15
(no effect
on LTS)
Single 75-150 ≤ 15 LTS 3
Otherwise LTS 4
1 Any other single right turn lane configuration not shown above.
2 The right turn criteria are based on whether the bike lane stays straight or shifts to the left.
3 This is vehicle speed at the corner, not the speed crossing the bike lane. Corner radius can also be used
as a proxy for turning speeds.
4 There is no effect on LTS if the bikeway is physically separated from traffic, as on a shared -use path.
Item 9.a - Page 25
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 19
Table 2.5 LTS Criteria for Mixed Traffic
Street Width
Speed Limit 2-3 lanes 4-5 lanes 6+ lanes
Up to 25 mph LTS 1 or 21 LTS 3 LTS 4
30 mph LTS 2 or 31 LTS 4 LTS 4
35+ mph LTS 4 LTS 4 LTS 4
1Use lower value for streets without marked centerlines or classified as residential and
with fewer than 3 lanes; use higher value otherwise.
Table 2.6 LTS Criteria for Bike Lanes
Lane Factor
LTS Score
LTS 1 LTS 2 LTS 3 LTS 4
Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction) 1 (no effect) 2 or more (no effect)
Sum of bike lane and parking
lane width (includes marked
buffer and paved gutter)
15 ft. or
more 14 or 14.5 ft.2 13.5 ft. or less (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed
25 mph or
less 30 mph 35 mph
40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas) rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Not Alongside a Parking Lane
Street width
(through lanes per direction) 1
2, if directions
are separated
by a raised
median
more than 2,
or 2 without a
separating
median (no effect)
Bike Lane Width (includes
marked buffer and paved
gutter) 6 ft. or more 5.5 ft. or less (no effect) (no effect)
Speed limit or prevailing speed
30 mph or
less (no effect) 35 mph
40 mph or
more
Bike lane blockage (typically
applies in commercial areas) rare (no effect) frequent (no effect)
Note: 1 (no effect) = factor does not trigger an increase to this level of traffic stress.
2 If speed limit < 25 mph or Class = residential, then any width is acceptable for LTS 2.
Item 9.a - Page 26
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 20
2.3.2 Bicycle LTS Policy
As part of the update to the Circulation Element, the City is proposing to adopt the following Policy
related to thresholds for Bicycle LTS:
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
approaches or crossings that already exceed LTS 3 at intersections with Class II or Class III
facilities.
Inconsistency Criteria: Project causes bicycle level of traffic stress to exceed or exacerbates
segments that already exceed LTS 3 on Class II or Class III routes.
This Report contains the analysis of Bicycle LTS of arterial and collector roadways, and approaches
of major intersections to review current bicyc le connectivity throughout the City.
Item 9.a - Page 27
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 21
3. Existing Traffic Operations
Intersection facilities were evaluated on an AM and PM peak hour basis using peak hour tu rning
movement counts collected on Thursday, November 14, 2019 and Thursday, November 21, 2019.
These counts were collected while school was in session. The AM peak hour is defined as the one
continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM, and the PM peak hour
is defined as the one continuous hour of peak traffic flow counted between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM
under typical weekday conditions.
3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations & Deficiencies
Existing weekday AM and PM peak hour intersection traffic operations were quantified using
existing traffic volumes, lane geometrics, and intersection controls. Figure 3.1 presents the existing
lane geometrics and intersection control types that are currently in place at the study intersections.
Figure 3.2 presents the existing weekday AM and PM peak hour volumes at the study intersections.
Item 9.a - Page 28
Item 9.a - Page 29
Item 9.a - Page 30
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 24
Table 3.1 presents a summary of the LOS and delay (in sec/veh) at each study intersection under
Existing conditions.
Table 3.1 Existing Conditions Intersection Operations
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 James Way & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 29.4 C 18.6 B -
2 James Way & Rodeo Dr AWSC C 8.3 A 9.1 A -
3 James Way & Tally Ho Rd AWSC C 8.6 A 8.8 A -
4 W Branch St / US 101 NB Ramp & Oak Park Ave Signal C 8.3 A 10.6 B -
5 El Camino Real & Oak Park Ave Signal C 12.1 B 13.4 B -
6 W Branch St & Camino Mercado / US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 15.1 B 17.4 B -
7 W Branch St & Rancho Parkway Signal C 6.4 A 8.3 A -
8 W Branch St & Brisco Rd Signal C 12.0 B 22.9 C -
9 US 101 NB Ramps & Brisco Rd Signal C 41.2 D 51.6 D -
10 El Camino Real & Brisco Rd Signal C 43.8 D 51.8 D -
11 W Branch St & Rodeo Dr TWSC C 11.8 B 10.8 B -
12 El Camino Real & US 101 SB Ramps / Halcyon Rd Signal C 19.9 B 23.1 C -
13 E Grand Ave & Oak Park Blvd Signal C 16.2 B 22.9 C -
14 E Grand Ave & Courtland St Signal C 9.7 A 11.2 B -
15 E Grand Ave & Elm St Signal C 9.6 A 12.2 B -
16 E Grand Ave & Brisco Rd TWSC C 12.8 B 18.8 C -
17 E Grand Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 23.2 C 23.6 C -
18 E Grand Ave & El Camino Real TWSC C 50.6 F 41.1 E No
19 E Grand Ave & US 101 SB Ramps Signal C 9.7 A 13.2 B -
20 E Grand Ave & US 101 NB Ramps Signal C 11.3 B 28.0 C -
21 E Grand Ave / E Branch St & W Branch St TWSC C 104.0 F 111.5 F Yes
22 E Branch St & Wesley St / Traffic Way Signal C 17.7 B 17.1 B -
23 E Branch St & Nevada St / Bridge St TWSC C 42.8 E 23.0 C Yes
24 E Branch St & Short St none C -----
25 E Branch St & Mason St Signal C 11.3 B 11.1 B -
26 E Branch St / Huasna Rd & Corbett Canton Rd / Stanley
Ave
AWSC C 21.2 C 20.3 C -
27 S Traffic Way & Traffic Way / US 101 Ramps TWSC C 11.2 B 12.8 B -
28 Fair Oaks Ave & Traffic Way Signal C 13.5 B 12.7 B -
29 Fair Oaks Ave & US 101 SB Ramp / Orchard Ave AWSC C 39.8 E 16.9 C Yes
30 Fair Oaks Ave & Valley Rd Signal C 12.2 B 8.1 A -
31 Fair Oaks Ave & Halcyon Rd Signal C 54.2 D 17.0 B -
32 Farroll Ave & Halcyon Rd TWSC C 109.0 F 37.9 E No
33 The Pike & Halcyon Rd AWSC C 22.3 C 13.3 B -
#Intersection
Control
Type1,2
Target
LOS
AM Peak PM Peak
Notes:
1. AWSC = All Way Stop Control; TWSC = Two Way Stop Control; RNDBT = Roundabout
2. LOS = Delay based on worst minor street approach for TWSC intersections, average of all approaches for AWSC,
3. Warrant = Based on California MUTCD Warrant 3
4. Bold = Unacceptable Conditions
5. OVR = Delay over 300 seconds
Warrant
3 Met?
Item 9.a - Page 31
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 25
As presented in Table 3.1, the following study intersections operate at unacceptable LOS during the
AM or PM peak hours under Existing conditions:
9 – US 101 Northbound Ramps & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
10 – El Camino Real & Brisco Road (at LOS D)
18 – East Grand Avenue & El Camino Real
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
31 – Fair Oaks Avenue & Halcyon Road (at LOS D)
32 – Farroll Avenue & Halcyon Road
Of the locations listed above, several are unsignalized intersections that meet peak hour traffic
signal warrant criteria, as follows:
21 – East Grand Avenue / East Branch Street & West Branch Street
23 – East branch Street & Nevada Street / Bridge Street
29 – Fair Oaks Avenue & US 101 Southbound Ramp / Orchard Avenue
3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
New daily roadway traffic counts were taken in November 2019, two weekday counts at each
location, and compared to daily roadway counts taken in May 2012. Figure 3.3 presents the existing
daily roadway volumes at the study intersections.
Item 9.a - Page 32
Item 9.a - Page 33
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 27
Table 3.2 presents a summary of the prior 2012 average daily traffic (ADT) and current 2019
roadway volumes and LOS at each roadway segment.
Table 3.2 Existing Conditions Roadway Operations
As presented in Table 3.2, all study roadway segments operate at acceptable LOS under Existing
Conditions. There are no roadway segment deficiencies at 2019 count locations.
2012
#Street Segment Facility Type Past ADT Average ADT LOS
1 E. Grand Avenue west of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 21,630 19,770 A
2 E. Grand Avenue east of Courtland Street Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,600 19,220 A
3 E. Grand Avenue west of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,630 15,710 A
4 E. Grand Avenue east of Halcyon Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 19,610 17,400 A
5 E. Grand Avenue east of US 101 NB Ramps Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 24,090 19,650 A
6 East Branch Street east of Traffic Way Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 18,490 13,700 C
7 East Branch Street east of Crown Hill Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 11,410 10,980 C
8 Huasna Road east of SR 227 Two Lane Collector 6,600 8,190 C
9 Huasna Road east of City Limits Two Lane Collector - 5,080 A
10 SR 227 south of Tally Ho Road Two Lane Highway 3,300 3,860 B
11 SR 227 south of Royal Oak Place Two Lane Highway 1,880 1,950 A
12 Corbert Canyon Road north of SR 227 Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 1,500 3,610 A
13 North Halcyon Road north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,900 9,740 B
14 Elm Street south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 10,250 A
15 El Camino Real north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 2,310 A
16 S. Halcyon Road south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 17,280 14,360 A
17 S. Halcyon Road north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial - 12,920 A
18 S. Halcyon Road south of The Pike Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 6,700 8,530 A
19 Fair Oaks Avenue east of S. Halcyon Road Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 11,220 8,800 A
20 Fair Oaks Avenue east of Valley Road Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 8,800 11,350 A
21 Valley Road south of Fair Oaks Avenue Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 5,900 7,620 A
22 Traffic Way south of Branch Street Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 13,180 10,770 A
23 West Branch Street north of E. Grand Avenue Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 3,900 3,180 A
24 West Branch Street west of Brisco Road Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 13,900 12,810 A
25 West Branch Street east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,000 13,540 C
26 Rancho Pkwy. north of W. Branch Street Two Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,400 8,390 A
27 Old Oak Park north of Noyes Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,090 1,470 A
28 Noyes Road north of Old Oak Park Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,960 6,210 A
29 Oak Park Boulevard south of El Camino Real Four Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 20,400 16,060 A
30 Oak Park Boulevard south of E. Grand Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 12,490 11,030 A
31 Oak Park Boulevard north of Farroll Avenue Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 8,850 9,350 A
32 James Way west of Oak Park Boulevard Four Lane (With Turning Lane) Arterial 7,710 6,160 A
33 James Way east of Oak Park Boulevard Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 6,340 6,110 A
34 James Way west of Talley Ho Road Two Lane Collector 3,470 3,570 A
35 El Camino Real west of Brisco Road Two Lane (No Turning Lane) Arterial 4,630 4,610 A
36 Farroll Avenue east of Oak Park Street Two Lane Collector 4,820 4,850 A
37 Branch Mill Road east of E. Cherry Avenue Two Lane Collector 1,710 1,690 A
2019
Item 9.a - Page 34
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 28
3.3 Truck Routes
Truck routes are intended to carry heavyweight commercial, industrial, and agricultural vehicles
through and around the community with minimum disruption to local auto traffic and minimum
annoyance to residential areas. The 1982 Surface Transportation Assistance Act set standards for
large trucks, known as STAA trucks, and set minimum truck sizes that states must allow on the
National Network including the Interstate System and other defined routes. The US 101 highway
through the City of Arroyo Grande and statewide is a National Truck Network. California State
Route 1 is a California Legal Truck Network, north of City of Arroyo Grande passing through the
San Luis Obispo County. The last truck route to access Arroyo Grande is SR 227. SR 227 north of
Arroyo Grande is a combination of California Legal Truck Network and the California Legal Advisory
Truck Route. The following list of streets is the approved Truck Routes in Arroyo Grande:
Barnett Street, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Branch Mill Road, from East Cherry Avenue to the Easterly City Limit
Brisco Road, from El Camino Real to East Grand Avenue
Corbett Canyon Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
East Branch Street, from Highway 101 Overpass to East Branch Street/Crown Hill
East Cherry Avenue, from Traffic Way to Branch Mill Road
East Grand Avenue, from Highway 101 Overpass to the Westerly City Limit
El Camino Real, from Oak Park Boulevard to Barnett Street
Fair Oaks Avenue, from Halcyon Road to Traffic Way
Halcyon Road, from El Camino Real to the Southerly City Limit
Huasna Road, from East Branch Street/Crown Hill to the Easterly City Limit
Nelson Street, from Traffic Way to South Mason Street
Oak Park Boulevard, from El Camino Real to City Limit
South Elm Street, from East Grand Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
South Mason Street, from Nelson Street to East Branch Street
The Pike, from the Westerly City Limit to Halcyon Road
Traffic Way, from East Branch Street to Highway 101
Valley Road, from Fair Oaks Avenue to the Southerly City Limit
Figure 3.4 presents a map of approved truck routes, provided by the City.
Item 9.a - Page 35
FIGURE 3.4
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.4_TruckRoutes.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 09:46
TRUCK ROUTESItem 9.a - Page 36
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 30
3.4 Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities
The City of Arroyo Grande adopted the 2012 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan, presented in Figure 3.5.
The plan includes proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails, as well as on-street bicycle facilities to
complete the partial network already in place in the City and County. The plan encourages the use
of walking and bicycling. The following functional classifications of bicycle facilities are utilized within
this document.
Class I Bike Path. Class I facilities are multi-use facilities that provide a completely separated right-
of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic
minimized. Class I bikeways must be compliant with provisions of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA). These bikeways are intended to provide superior safety, connectivity, and recreational
opportunities as compared to facilities that share right-of-way with motor vehicles.
Class II Bike Lane. Class II facilities provide a striped and signed lane for one-way bicycle travel on
each side of a street or highway within the paved area of a roadway. The minimum width for bike
lanes ranges between four and six feet depending upon the edge of roadway conditions (curb and
gutter). Bike lanes are demarcated by a six-inch white stripe, signage and pavement legends.
Class III Bike Route. Class III facilities provide signs for shared use with motor vehicles within the
same travel lane on a street or highway. Bike routes may be enhanced with warning or guide signs
and shared lane marking pavement stencils. While Class III routes do not provide measures of
separation, they have an important function in providing continuity to the bikeway network. By law,
bicycles are allowed on all roadways in California except on freeways when a suitable alternate
route exists. However, Class III bikeways serve to identify roads that are more suitable for bicycles.
Shared Roadway. (No Bikeway Designation). A roadway that permits bicycle use but is not
officially designated as a bikeway. This generally occurs in rural areas by touring bicyclists and
recreation. In some instances, entire street systems may be fully adequate for safe and efficient
bicycle travel, where signing and pavement marking for bicycle use may be unnecessary. In othe r
cases, prior to designation as a bikeway, routes may need improvements for bicycle travel.
Class IV Separated Bikeways. Known as separated bikeways or cycle tracks, Class IV bikeways
provide a separate travel way that is designated exclusively for bicycle travel adjacent to the
roadway and are protected from vehicular traffic by physical separation. The separation may
include, but is not limited to, grade separation, planters, flexible posts, inflexible posts, physical
barriers, or on-street parking.
The above five definitions are consistent with the California Highway Design Manual (HDM, July
2020). It is emphasized that the designation of bikeways as Class I, II,III, and IV should not be
construed as a hierarchy of bikeways; that one is better than the other. Each class of bikeway has
its appropriate application.
Item 9.a - Page 37
FIGURE 3.5
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.5_BikeMasterPlan.mxdPrint date: 30 Sep 2020 - 08:41
2012 BICYCLE & TRAILSMASTER PLAN
Item 9.a - Page 38
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 32
In addition, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials “Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities” (2012) and National Association of City Transportation Officials
“Urban Bikeway Design Guide” are used as resources to identify the following bicycle facilities.
Bicycle Boulevard. Bicycle Boulevards are streets where the following conditions are created in
order to prioritize bicycle safety and optimize through travel for bicycles rather than automobiles:
Slow traffic speed and low volume.
Use of diverters and roundabouts to discourage through and non-local motor vehicle traffic.
Improved travel for bicyclists by assigning the right-of-way priority to the bicycle boulevard at
intersections with other roads wherever possible.
Traffic controls that help bicyclists cross major arterial roads.
Signage and street design that encourages use by bicyclists and informs motorists that the
roadway is a priority route for bicyclists.
Bicycle boulevards use a variety of traffic calming elements to achieve a safe environment. For
instance, diverters with bicycle cut-outs allow cyclists to continue to the next block, but discourage
through traffic by motor vehicles. Typically, these modifications will also calm traffic and improve
pedestrian safety as well as encourage bicycling. Bicycle Boulevards are generally applicable to
local roadways.
Buffered Bike Lanes. Buffered bike lanes are conventional bicycle lanes (Class II) paired with a
designated buffer space separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent motor vehicle travel lane
and/or parking lane. A buffered bike lane is allowed as per MUTCD guidelines for buffered
preferential lanes (section 3D-01). Buffered bike lanes provide space between bicyclists and the
traveled way, allow room for bicyclists to pass without encroaching into the vehicle travel lane, and
can be used to provide a buffer between on-street parking and the bike lane. Buffered bike lanes
are ideal for streets with extra lanes or extra lane width, and along roadways with higher travel
speeds, higher traffic, and truck volume.
Green Colored Bike Facilities may be installed within bicycle lanes or the extension of the bicycle
lane through an intersection or transition trough a conflict area as a supplement to bike lane
markings. The Federal Highway Administration has issued an Interim Approval (IA-14) on April 15,
2011 for the optional use of green colored pavement for marked bicycle lanes.)
Bike Boxes designate an area for bicyclists to queue in front of automobiles, but behind the
crosswalk at signalized intersections. Bike boxes provide cyclists a safe way to be visible to
motorists by getting ahead of the queue during the red signal phase, and they reduce vehicle
incursion into crosswalks. Bike Boxes also improve safety for conflicts with right -turning vehicles
when the traffic signal turns green. Bike boxes can be utilized to facilitate left turn positioning and
gives priority to cyclists.
Shared Lane Markings (“Sharrows”) help remind motorists that bicyclists are allowed to use the
full lane and remind bicyclists to avoid riding too close to parked cars for safety. The shared lane
markings help bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehicle and
Item 9.a - Page 39
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 33
a bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane. These markings are primarily
recommended on low-speed streets.
3.5 Existing Bicycle & Pedestrian Facility Conditions
The current bicycle and trail network consists mainly of on-street facilities that are identified as
Class II and Class III bikeways. The city also has short segments of off-street trails typically
consisting of soft surface (decomposed granite) materials. The trails are typically situated in open
space along a creek tributary. The two exceptions are trails located along Equestrian Way and
Grace Lane which are decomposed granite paths located behind the curb. These do not meet Class
I Bike Path standards (10-foot paved path with 2-foot shoulders, or 12-foot paved path).
Figure 3.6 presents the existing sidewalk inventory, provided by the City. There are gaps in the
sidewalk network; a Pedestrian Safety Review conducted by ITS Berkeley in 2010 and the Draft
Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan identifies some areas where there are opportunities for
improvement. The ITS study focused on key intersections throughout the City and suggested
recommendations that could improve the pedestrian safety crossing large streets with many lanes
of traffic. The Draft Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan focused on multimodal improvements
along the Halcyon Road corridor, connecting Arroyo Grande Hospital, residences, and the
elementary school. Locations near and between residences, schools, parks, retail centers, and City
services should provide adequate sidewalks and marked crossings.
Figure 3.7 presents the existing bikeway by classification along arterial and collector roadways
throughout the City. There are gaps in the network of bicycle facilities. Arterials and collectors that
are north-south roadways which do not have bicycle facilities, include portions of Elm Street,
Halcyon Road, Corbett Canyon Road, Tally Ho Road, Ash Street, and Oak Park Boulevard.
Arterials and collectors that are east-west roadways which do not have bicycle facilities include
portions of Farroll Avenue, E. Grand Avenue, E. Branch Street, and E. Cherry Avenue. Subsequent
Bicycle LTS analysis is included.
Safe, convenient, and continuous access needs to be provided along major routes throughout the
City for active transportation modes. As part of this Circulation Element update, roadway facilities
will be identified where it is possible to modify the existing cross-section and increase the active
transportation components for pedestrians and bicyclists. Included in the proposed Draft Circulation
Element Policies are requirements to prepare a Pedestrian Master Plan and update the exis ting
Bicycle and Trails Master Plan. It is proposed for the bicycle portion of the plan that an assessment
of bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) will be required to specifically evaluate the performance of
the existing bicycle system and to help identif y bicycle facility improvements.
Item 9.a - Page 40
FIGURE 3.6
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/29/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Paper Size ANSI A
Data source: City of Arroyo Grande. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.6_SidewalkInventory.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 10:33
SIDEWALK INVENTORYItem 9.a - Page 41
Fair Oaks AvenueJames Way
R o deoDriveEl Ca
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike
V
alleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill Ro adFarroll AvenueBrisco RoadRancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h StreetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest Br
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Cherry AvenueTraf
f
i
c
W
a
y
Courtland Street£¤101
£¤101
FIGURE 3.7
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/28/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.7_AGExBikeways.mxdPrint date: 29 Sep 2020 - 11:47
Legend
US 101
City Limits
Roads
Bike Facility
Class I
Class II
Class III
Gap
Bike Lane Gap
Directional Gap
Directional Gap
Bike Lane Fading
Severe Bike LaneFading
EXISTING BIKEWAYSAND GAPS MAPItem 9.a - Page 42
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 36
3.5.1 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis
Mineta Transportation Institute criteria was applied to roadway segments with bike lanes (with and
without on-street parking) and roadway segments without bike lanes (mixed traffic segments) to
determine existing Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress, presented in Figure 3.8. As shown, the majority of
segments along major roads (arterials and collectors) within the City of Arroyo Grande can be
considered high stress (LTS 3 or 4). Even with the presence of bike lanes, the high stress nature of
roadway segments within the City are primarily due to roadway speed limits of 35 miles per hour or
greater, and roadways with three or more total travel lanes. For those roadways with speed limits
lower than 35 mph, lack of adequate bike lane striping or physical separation between cyclists and
vehicles (i.e., buffers) results in high stress conditions. In addition, lack of adequate bicycle
protection (i.e., bike pockets) at intersections with lengthy vehicle right turn pockets, or gaps in bike
lane striping at intersection approaches, result in high stress conditions at all intersections along
major roads within the City of Arroyo Grande.
Other factors were noted as contributing to high stress conditions, including quality and condition of
existing bike lane striping and gaps in striping along segments on either side of the roadway.
Segments with significant bike lane striping fading along existing Class II bicycle routes were noted
at the following locations:
West Branch Street between Oak Park Boulevard and Camino Mercado
El Camino Real between Hillcrest Drive and Brisco Road
Oak Park Boulevard Between Ash Street and The Pike
The Pick between Oak Park Boulevard and Elm Street
Valley Road between Fair Oaks Avenue and Castillo Del Mar
Major gaps along existing Class II bicycle routes (i.e., roadway segments with incomplete bike
lanes, or bike lanes only in one direction) occur at the following locations:
East Grand Avenue: eastbound approach at Halcyon Road
East Grand Avenue: between Elm Street and Grande Foods Market
Traffic Way: northbound segment between Nelson Street and Bridge Street
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound segment between Farroll Road and The Pike
Oak Park Boulevard: southbound between Manhattan Avenue and Ash Street
Fair Oaks Avenue: westbound segment between California Street and Traffic Way
Vehicle on-street parking is also a contributor to high stress conditions for cyclists, and is allowed
on the majority of the City’s arterials and collectors.
LTS inputs and scores are provided in Appendix D.
Item 9.a - Page 43
Fair Oaks AvenueJames Way
R o deoDriveEl Ca
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
lOak Park BoulevardAsh Street
The Pike
V
alleyRoadElm StreetBranch Mill Ro adFarroll AvenueBrisco RoadRancho ParkwayTallyHoRoadE a s t B r a n c h StreetEast Grand Avenue
Halcyon RoadWest Br
a
n
c
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Cherry AvenueTraf
f
i
c
W
a
y
Courtland Street£¤101
£¤101
FIGURE 3.8
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Miles
Project No.Revision No.-11144936
Date 09/28/2020
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEBACKGROUND REPORT
Map Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 Feet
Paper Size ANSI A o
Data source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community. Created by: mclarkN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_FIG3.8_AGBikeLTS_rev2.mxdPrint date: 30 Sep 2020 - 08:36
Legend
LTS
1 (Low Stress)
2 (Low-MediumStress)
3 (Medium-HighStress)
4 (High Stress)
US 101
City Limits
Roads
MAJOR ROADS BICYCLELEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS (LTS)Item 9.a - Page 44
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 38
3.6 Public Transportation
The City of Arroyo Grande public transportation is provided by South County Transit (SoCoTransit),
a branch of San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority's (SLORTA). SoCo Transit will merge with
SLORTA early 2021. Routes 21, 24, 27, and 28 serve major arterial roadways in the City as shown
in Figure 3.9. The Avila-Pismo Trolley (not shown on Figure) connects to SoCo Transit Routes at
the Pismo Premium Outlets. All SoCo Transit Routes make stops at the Town Center/Walmart, and
Ramona Gardens Park, and Routes 21 and 24 make stops at the Pismo Premium Outlets.
Figure 3.9 Transit Routes Serving the City of Arroyo Grande
The following Route descriptions, and the above Figure, are from the South County Transit Short-
Range Transit Plan (December 23, 2019).
Route 21 provides hourly service between 6:29 AM and 7:29 PM on Weekdays, 7:29 AM and 7:29
PM on Saturdays, and 7:29 AM and 6:29 PM on Sundays. The route consists of a large clockwise
loop traveling south on James Way and West Branch serving Arroyo Grande, west on Grand
Avenue serving Grover Beach, and north on Price Street and US 101 to complete a smaller
counter-clockwise loop serving Pismo and Shell Beach. This route connects with RTA Route 10 at
the top of the hour at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets (Pismo Beach Outlets), and with Routes
24, 27, and 28 at Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in Grover Beach at 29 minutes after the
hour.
Route 24 provides service hourly from 6:29 AM to 7:29 PM on weekdays, 7:29 AM to 7:29 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:29 AM to 6:29 PM on Sundays. This loop route serves the core of Pismo Beach,
Grover Beach, and Arroyo Grande primarily in a counter -clockwise direction. It is largely aligned
with Route 21, except that Route 24 adds service to downtown Arroyo Grande but does not serve
Item 9.a - Page 45
GHD | Arroyo Grande Circulation Element Update | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx | Page 39
the Shell Beach area of Pismo Beach. From the Pismo Beach Outlets, the route travels northwest
towards Pismo Beach circling south down Highway 1 to Ramona Garden Park Transit Center in
Grover Beach. The route then travels east on Grand Avenue, north towards Arroyo Grande, and
west looping back towards the Town Center/Walmart stop before returning to the Pismo Beach
Outlets.
Route 27 provides hourly service from 6:03 AM to 8:13 PM on weekdays only. This route travels in
clockwise direction serving Arroyo Grande, Oceano and the eastern portions of Grover Beach. This
route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Gardens at 29 minutes after the hour and with
Route 28 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Route 28 provides hourly service from 6:20 AM to 8:14 PM on weekdays, 7:32 AM to 8:14 PM on
Saturdays, and 7:32 AM to 7:14 PM on Sundays. This route travels in a counter-clockwise direction
serving the same route as Route 27 in reverse order (except for one block around Long Branch
Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard). This route connects with Routes 21 and 24 at Ramona Garden
Park at 29 minutes after the hour and with Route 27 at 32 minutes after the hour.
Avila-Pismo Trolley runs April through September during holidays, weekends, and Fridays. Hourly
service is generally provided between 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM with hours extending to 9:00 PM during
June, July, and August. The trolley connects with SoCo Transit Routes 21 and 24 and RTA 10 at
the Pismo Beach Outlets at the top of each hour. No fare is charged on this service.
RTA Route 10 provides hourly regional service between San Luis Obispo to Santa Maria. SoCo
Transit is connected to other cities by RTA Route 10. RTA Route 10 makes stops in Arroyo Grande
at E. Grand Avenue at El Camino Real and El Camino Real at Halcyon Park and Ride.
3.7 Rail
No commuter rail transportation (Amtrak) is currently located in the City of Arroyo Grande. The
nearest Amtrak station is located in City of Grover Beach, 2.2 miles west of the City of Arroyo
Grande. The primary access to the station is on W. Grand Avenue east of Highway 1. The SoCo
Transit Bus Route 21 provides service to the railway station for City of Arroyo Grande.
3.8 Air
Oceano County Airport is the closest airport to the City, located in the unincorporated community of
Oceano in San Luis Obispo County, southwest of Arroyo Grande. The SoCo Transit Bus route 21
provides service to this airport for City of Arroyo Grande. The airport is mainly used for recreational
activities and is accessible by Highway 1 via W. Grand Avenue.
The San Luis Obispo County Regional Airport, also known as McChesney Field, is located in the
City of San Luis Obispo about 9 miles north of Arroyo Grande. It is served by two commercial
airlines providing services to Dallas/Fort Worth, Denver, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Francisco, and
Seattle. It is also home to full service general aviation and corporate facilities. McChesney Field is
located on the west side of SR 227, about 2 miles east of US 101.
Item 9.a - Page 46
Arroyo Grande Circulation Element | Existing Conditions Background Report | R1584RPT007.docx
Martin Inouye
Martin.Inouye@ghd.com
Todd Tregenza
Todd.Tregenza@ghd.com
916.782.8688
Item 9.a - Page 47
Draft
Circulation
Element Policies
November 2020DRAFT
Item 9.a - Page 48
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 2
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: AUTOMOBILE TRAVEL .............................................................................. 3
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES ................................................................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2: MULTIMODAL TRAVEL ............................................................................ 11
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES ........................................................................................ 11
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES ............................................................................................................ 14
CHAPTER 3: TRUCK ROUTES & GOODS MOVEMENTS .................................................. 15
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES .......................................................................... 15
DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 49
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 3
Chapter 1:
Automobile Travel
AUTOMOBILE POLICIES
Streets & Highways Standards
CT1 Schedule and implement the Circulation system identified in the Circulation Map (Figure 1-
3) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program. Make efficient
use of existing transportation facilities, improve these facilities, and build new facilities as necessary
in accordance with the Circulation Map.
CT1-1 Standards: Streets shall be constructed in conformance with the City and State’s adopted
Engineering Standards, Plans, and Policies that apply to each classification. Variations and
modifications in Standards and planned alignments may be permitted with City Council approval
or City Engineer / Public Works Director approval where delegated.
CT1-1.1 Consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards appropriate to a
designated connected system of “Scenic Streets & Highways” for resident and visitor
enjoyment.
CT1-2 Roundabouts: should be considered when evaluating intersection controls.
CT1-3 State Freeways & Highways:
Hwy 101: 4 to 6 lanes with interchange access. Typically 120’ or more
Hwy 227: 2 to 4 lanes with or without median / turn lanes, access management, bicycle
and pedestrian facilities, transit turnouts, optional on-street parking where feasible,
Typically 50’ or more.
State facilities are to be designed and constructed per CalTrans design standards or as
mutually approved DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 50
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 4
CT1-4 Primary Arterial Streets: 4 lanes with or without median / two-way left turn lane, access
management, optional parkways, optional on-street parking, bike & pedestrian facilities per
adopted plan, transit turnouts and other design features: typically up to 110’ right of way.
CT1-5 Arterial Streets: 2 lanes with or without median/center turn lane, optional landscaped
parkways, optional on-street parking, bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some
transit and other design features; typically up to 86’ of right-of-way.
CT1-6 Collector & Local Collector Streets: 2 lanes with or without turn lane; access management,
bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan, some transit and other design features, optional
landscaped parkways & on-street parking where feasible; typically up to 78’ of right-of-way.
CT1-7 Local Streets: 2 lanes, on-street parking; bike and pedestrian facilities per adopted plan,
sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or other special
conditions; typically up to 52’ right-of-way.
CT1-8 Complete Streets: Complete streets are roadways designed and operated to enable safe
access for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and
abilities. All street standards should be periodically reviewed and revised for design, construction,
operation and maintenance to achieve a network of complete streets. Optional features include
landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and parkways and/or street trees and similar design
amenities when approved by the City.
When constructing or modifying transportation facilities, strive to provide for the movement of
vehicles, commercial trucks, alternative and low energy vehicles, transit, bicyclists, and
pedestrians in a manner that is appropriate for the road classification and adjacent land use.
CT1-8.1 Evaluate projects to ensure that the safety, comfort, and convenience of
pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users are given an equal level of consideration to
automobiles.
CT1-8.2 Consider ways to increase and improve travel choices when reviewing
development or transportation infrastructure projects.
CT1-8.3 Improve the existing street network to minimize travel times and improve
mobility for transit, bicycle, and walking trips between new projects and surrounding land
uses in an effort to reduce vehicle trips.
CT1-8.4 Recognize and meet the mobility needs of pedestrians and bicyclists all skill levels
and ages, persons using wheelchairs, and those with other mobility limitations.
CT1-9 Alternatives: Consider alternative improvements to traditional street, highway, and
intersection construction that may vary from City standards, which maximize access to alternative DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 51
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 5
transportation modes and/or provide equivalent mobility to all roadway users. Alternatives may
be permitted with City Council approval or City Engineer / Public Works Director Approval where
delegated.
CT1-10 Auto Circulation: Provide efficient citywide automobile circulation by maintaining and,
where necessary, improving local and regional roadway facilities.
CT1-11 Signal Operations: Provide and maintain coordinated traffic control systems that move
traffic within and through the City in an efficient and orderly manner. Upgrade systems as
technology evolves.
CT1-12 Safety: Maintain and periodically update a local roadway safety plan consistent with state
and federal Highway Safety Improvement Program requirements.
CT1-13 Access Management: Maintain and periodically update a local roadway safety plan
consistent with state and federal Highway Safety Improvement Program requirements.
Vehicle Miles Traveled
CT2 Maintain & Reduce average regional vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in accordance with
SB743.
Automobile Level of Service (LOS)
CT3 Attain and maintain automobile Level of Service LOS “D” or better on all street segments
and controlled intersections to the maximum extent feasible.
CT3-1 Degradation of LOS: New development, which is projected to degrade conditions to a LOS E
or below or further exacerbate conditions already below LOS D, shall be required to make
transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation to the maximum extent
feasible. Improvements to non-automobile modes of transportation at the same segment or
intersection may also be considered as an offset to degradation of automobile LOS.
CT3-2 Transportation Monitoring: The City should conduct periodic traffic counts, monitor
selected streets and model arterial and collector street network.
CT3-2.1 The City should periodically review actual system performance to consider
Capital Improvement Programs, operational improvements, and/or policy revision and
refinement.
CT3-3 Transportation Study Requirements: Require that General Plan Amendments, Specific Plans,
Rezoning Applications, and development projects that generate 100 or more peak hour trips are
studied in accordance with the City’s adopted Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 52
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 6
Transportation Studies may also be required at the discretion of the City’s Public Works and/or
Planning Departments.
Parking
CT4 Establish and manage on street parking to serve the primary purposes of the uses of each
street while balancing the interferences that on-street parking may have on the primarily purposes
of those streets.
CT4-1 On-Street Parking: The City shall manage curb parking in business & commercial districts
to provide for high turnover & short-term use to those visiting businesses and public facilities.
CT9-1.1Management of on-street parking shall not preclude consideration of converting
on-street parking spaces to parklets.
CT4-3 Village Core Parking Lots: Develop adequate public or shared off-street parking lots
conveniently located behind and beside buildings in the Village Core and East Grand Avenue
corridor, consistent with area design guidelines.
CT4-4 Parking in-lieu districts: Support parking district(s) to collect in-lieu fees from new
development to construct public parking where parking requirements cannot be met.
CT4-2 Parking in Industrial Areas: Encourage secure off-street parking for tractor-trailer rigs in
industrial land use areas where feasible.
CT4-2 Parking in Agricultural Areas: Discourage on-street parking in Agricultural areas to
enhance visibility and minimize trespassing.
Coordinated Land Use & Circulation
CT5 Ensure compatibility and complimentary relationships between the circulation system and
existing and planned land uses, promoting environmental objectives such as safe and uncongested
neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of greenhouse as, air, and noise pollution, and
access bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
CT5-1 Government Code Consistency: Provide and maintain a citywide circulation system that is
correlated with planned land uses in the City and surrounding areas in the region consistent with
Government Code §65302.
CT5-2 Transit Oriented Development: Promote “Transit-Oriented Developments” and
coordinated, compatible land use patterns by encouraging multiple family residential and special
needs housing in Mixed Use Corridors, the Village Core, and near Office, Regional Commercial,
Business Park, and major Community Facility areas. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 53
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 7
CT5-2.1 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit routes that serve
regional destinations within the City like the Regional Commercial areas and the Village
Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street missed use and commercial corridors.
CT5-2.2 Work with RTA to continue to support and expand transit loops to serve
Halcyon Road / Fair Oaks Boulevard, local office buildings, James Way and Rancho
Parkway residential areas, and the Village Core, E. Grand Avenue, and W. Branch Street
corridors.
CT5-3 High Density Development: Consider higher density allowance and reduced parking
requirements within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating Development Code.
CT5-3 Community Design: Utilize the circulation system as a positive element of community
design, including street trees and landscaped parkways and medians, special streetscape features
in Mixed Use corridors and Village Core, and undergrounding of utilities, particularly along major
streets.
CT5-4 Provision of Rights of Way: When new development occurs in the vicinity of adopted “Study
Areas” as shown in Circulation Map (Figure 1-3) or “Plan Lines”, and where legally and financially
feasible, require installation or funding of all or a portion of right-of-way and improvements
associated with new development.
CT5-5 Building Code Bicycle Facility Requirements: Update Building Code to include requirements
for enhanced bicycle facilities such as, showers, repair stations, ebike chargers, lockers, etc.…, for
buildings that support large employers
CT5-5.1 Update Development Code to include bicycle-parking requirements for new
development.
CT5-5 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Plan and prioritize Village Core and E. Grand Avenue corridor
improvements that reduce congestion and promote non-motorized travel between nearby
complimentary uses.
CT5-6 Travel Demand Management: Consider ways to shift travel demand away from the peak
period using Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies, especially in situations
where peak traffic problems result from a few major generators (e.g. large retail developments
on highway corridor). Strategies to consider include:
a) Requiring employer-sponsored incentives for transit, bike, or carpool use;
b) Requiring shuttle service to major events and destinations;
c) Requiring events to occur at off-peak hours;
d) Coordinating centralized TDM programs that serve multiple tenants at large shopping or
office centers; and DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 54
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 8
e) Performing periodic evaluations of the City’s (and Caltrans) traffic control system with
emphasis on traffic signal timing, phasing, and coordination to optimize flow along
arterial corridors.
Planning & Funding
CT6 Coordinate circulation and transportation planning and funding of collector and arterial street
and highway improvements with other local, County, SLOCOG, State and federal agencies. Request
contribution to major street improvement projects from other jurisdictions that generate traffic
within the City.
CT6-1 Priority Multimodal Corridors: Coordinate and support SLOCOG updates to the Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) to maintain consistency with the City of Arroyo Grande’s General Plan.
CT6-2 Interchange Priorities: Coordinate and support progress on the Brisco Road/Halcyon Road
and Traffic Way/Fair Oaks Avenue interchange improvements to US Route 101.
CT6-3 County Impact Fee Program Support: Encourage the County to establish a “Road Impact
Fee” within Arroyo Grande Fringe areas of the County to fund new development’s proportional
share of transportation improvements.
CT6-4 City Transportation Impact Fee Program: Maintain & periodically update a Multimodal city
circulation and transportation impact fee program for new or intensified development in Arroyo
Grande to ensure proportional share developer participation and implementation of the City’s
adopted multimodal infrastructure plans, programs, and policies.
CT6-5 Right of Way Acquisition: Pursue acquisition of public street right-of-way as opportunity for
dedication and/or purchase arises. Attempt to obtain ultimate right-of-way for street
improvements at the time of development, except when lesser right-of-way will avoid significant
social, neighborhood, or environmental impacts and will perform equivalent traffic movement
function.
CT6-5.1: Plan lines establish planned right-of-way acquisitions necessary to implement
future roadway improvements, plan lines are intended to prevent development from
obstructing or precluding planned infrastructure. Adopt plan lines, or planned right-of-
way acquisitions, as necessary to accommodate planned widening, extension, or
realignment improvements and include Right-of-Way acquisition costs into
Transportation Impact Fee Program.
CT6-6 Regional Travel Demand Model Consistency: Encourage Caltrans, SLOCOG, and the County
to refine and maintain a regional transportation demand model to be consistent with adopted DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 55
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 9
City plans and policies and to assist in regional and local circulation and transportation planning,
CIP funding, and new development project environmental and impact analysis.
CT6-7 County MOU for Development Review: Pursue MOU with the County for referral of
development projects and long range plans in the County’s Nipomo Mesa area.
CT6-8 Supplemental Private Funding: Utilize assessment and improvement districts and other
supplemental private funding to correct local area deficiencies such as inadequate parking, transit
and streetscape enhancement, or completion of local street or trail segments that benefit the
area.
CT6-9 Regional Coordination: As both City and regional travel increase transportation demand,
work cooperatively with regional partner agencies, including Caltrans, San Luis Obispo Council of
Governments, San Luis Obispo County, and others, to plan and fund improvement projects that
increase roadway capacity while maintaining or improving access to multi-modal facilities
following the City’s community & circulation priorities.
CT6-9.1: Coordinate local actions with State, regional, County, and neighboring agencies
to ensure consistency between local and regional actions.
CT6-9.2: Coordinate with partner agencies to implement regional transit solutions as part
of the SB 375 Sustainable Communities Strategy.
CT6-10 Debit Financing: Consider debt financing for projects identified in the Transportation
Impact Fee Program to advance high priority improvements such as but not limited to the Brisco
Interchange project.
Neighborhood Traffic Management
CT7 Provide safe and well-connected neighborhood streets that balance automotive circulation
needs with neighborhood context and bicycle and pedestrian users’ safety.
CT7-1 Residential Local Streets: On Residential, Local Streets strive to achieve an average daily
(ADT) automobile volume of 1,500 or less.
CT7-2 Residential Collector Streets: On Residential, Collector Streets strive to achieve an average
daily (ADT) automobile volume of 3,000 or less.
CT7-3 Degradation of Neighborhood Traffic Conditions: New development that causes local
residential streets to exceed 1,500 ADT, collector residential street to exceed 3,000 ADT, or
further exacerbates streets already exceeding these thresholds shall be required to implement
traffic calming measures on those affected neighborhood streets to the maximum extent
feasible. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 56
Chapter 1: Automobile Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 10
CT7-4 Neighborhood Traffic Management Guidelines: The City shall maintain and periodically
updates its Neighborhood Traffic Calming Guidelines in accordance with industry best practices.
CT7-5 Non-Automobile Connections: Design new street network and modify existing street
network where possible to enable direct physical connections within and between residential
areas, shopping destinations, employment centers, and neighborhood parks/open spaces,
including, where appropriate, connections accessible only by pedestrians and bicycles.
DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 57
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 11
Chapter 2:
Multimodal Travel
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN POLICIES
Bicycle Transportation
CT8 Schedule and implement the Bicycle network identified in the Bicycle Facility
Improvements Map (Figure 1-4) as development occurs and as part of the City’s Capital
Improvement Program. Make efficient use of existing transportation facilities, improve these
facilities, and build new facilities as necessary in accordance with the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan.
CT8-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve bicycle circulation facilities to serve all areas of the
City as a priority system. Link with regional systems and prioritize connections with schools,
parks, transit, and major public facilities.
CT8-1.1: The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT8-2 Bicycle Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the existing
bicycle network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing offsite gaps
per the City’s Bicycle and Trails Master plan to the maximum extent feasible. Improvements
maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT8-21 New development adjacent to planned bicycle infrastructure shall not obstruct or
otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT8-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement the City’s Bicycle Facility Improvements Map (Figure 1-
4) in accordance with the City’s Engineering Standards & Specifications, State Engineering
Standards & Specifications, and the National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO)
Urban Bikeway Design Guide. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 58
Chapter 2: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 12
CT8-4 Standards & Guidance: Implement the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan in accordance with the
City’s Engineering Standards & Specifications, State Engineering Standards & Specifications, and
the National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
CT8-4.1 Ensure that the Bicycle & Trails Master Plan maintains consistency with the
requirements of the Streets and Highway Code in order to be eligible for further funding
for improvements from the State, such as the Active Transportation Program (ATP).
CT8-5 Class I Trails: Off-street paths and trails designated for both pedestrian and bicycle use.
CT8-6 Class II Bike lanes: On-Street lanes designated for bicycle use and delineated from
automobile lanes by roadway markings. Where ROW permits, class II bike lanes shall be provided
to the maximum extent feasible with buffers between adjacent auto lanes.
When class II bike lanes exceed level of traffic stress 3, the facility shall be converted to p rotected
Class IV lanes or a parallel Class I to the maximum extent feasible.
CT8-7 Class III Shared Auto Lanes: On-street auto lanes shared by both bikes and automobiles. In
order to increase awareness of bicyclists sharing the roadway with motorized vehicles, Class III
bicycle facilities shall include respective signing and markings such as sharrows to the maximum
extent feasible.
When class III bike lanes exceed level of traffic stress 3, the facility shall be converted to
dedicated Class II lanes if determined feasible.
CT8-8 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes: On-street separated bikeways reserved for use by bicyclists
only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and sidewalks.
Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or two-way facilities on one
side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete curbs, landscaping, parking lanes,
bollards, or other vertical elements.
CT8-9 Class IV Protected Bike Lanes: On-street separated bikeways reserved for use by bicyclists
only, with physical separation between the bikeway, travel lanes, and sidewalks.
Class IV facilities can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or two-way facilities on one
side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete curbs, landscaping, parking lanes,
bollards, or other vertical elements.
CT8-10 Bicycle & Trails Master Plan Updates: Update and maintain the City’s Bicycle & Trails
Master Plan in accordance with State guidelines and industry best practices. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 59
Chapter 2: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 13
Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
CT9 Strive to attain and maintain a bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) of 3 or better on Class II
& Class III bicycle facilities.
CT9-1 Degradation of LTS: New development which is projected to degrade bicycle LTS conditions
to 3 or below or further exacerbate conditions already below LTS 3 should be required to make
transportation improvements that offset the level of degradation.
Pedestrian Transportation
CT10 Schedule and complete gaps City’s sidewalk network and new connections identified in the
Pedestrian and Transit Infrastructure Improvements Map (Figure 1-5) as development occurs and
as part of the City’s Capital Improvement Program.
CT10-1 Prioritization: Promote and improve pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas of
the City as a priority system, prioritize connections with schools, parks, transit, and major public
facilities.
CT10-1.1: The City should strive to include implementation of planned bicycle facilities as
part of its Capital Improvement Budget.
CT10-2 Pedestrian Network Connectivity: New development that lacks connectivity to the existing
pedestrian network beyond the project frontage shall be required to complete missing offsite
gaps. Improvements maybe facilitated through reimbursement agreements.
CT10-2.1 New development adjacent to planned pedestrian infrastructure shall not
obstruct or otherwise preclude future construction of bicycle infrastructure
CT10-3 Standards & Guidance: Implement pedestrian infrastructure in accordance with City and
State Engineering Standards & Specifications.
CT10-3.1 Provide pedestrian facilities that are accessible to persons with disabilities and
ensure that roadway improvement projects address accessibility by employing universal
design concepts consistent with ADA requirements.
CT10-3.2 Strive to attain an effective walkway width (continuous clear path of travel) of 8’
or more in high pedestrian traffic areas.
CT10-3.3 Pedestrian walkways on roadways with speed limits above 35 mph shall be
buffered (i.e. on-street parking, bike lanes, parkways, etc.) from the adjacent travel lane
to the maximum extent feasible. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 60
Chapter 2: Multimodal Travel
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 14
CT10-4 Active Transportation Plan: Expand the City’s Bicycle & Trails Master Plan into a Citywide
Active Transportation Plan including pedestrian mode specific plan and policy.
PUBLIC TRANSIT POLICIES
Transit Service
CT11 Maintain and improve transit services and facilities in cooperation with transit operators
and providers.
CT11-1 Transit Stops: Strive to establish transit stops within ¼ mi walking distance of all residential
and non-residential uses within the City.
CT11-1.1 New development outside ¼ mi walking distance of existing transit stops shall
be required to install transit stops and facilities to achieve a maximum ¼ mi walking
distance to transit for the proposed development to the maximum extent feasible.
CT11-2 Transit Providers/Operators: In cooperation with the Regional Transit Authority (RTA) or
other transit operators, provide for a safe and efficient transit system for local and regional
travel, particularly for youth, elderly, low-income or disabled persons.
CT11-2.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial and/or
collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts, park and ride, transfer
and other facilities or features to be provided in connection with new developments
CT11-3 Employers: The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public transit
and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip reduction (flex time, telecommuting,
bike) and transportation demand management measures.
CT11-4 School Districts: Collaborate with Lucia Mar Unified School District and other educational
institutions to plan improved school bus transportation system, including parking and loading
areas, bus stop amenities, links with other transit providers, public parks, and maintenance and
storage facilities, and coordination with safe bicycle and sidewalk facilities.
CT11-5 Marketing: Encourage ridership on public transit systems through marketing and
promotional efforts. Provide information to residents and employees on transit services available
for local and regional trips.
DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 61
City of Arroyo Grande | Draft Circulation Element | Page 15
Chapter 3:
Truck Routes & Goods
Movements
TRUCK AND GOODS MOVEMENT POLICIES
Truck & Emergency Services Transportation
CT12 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the arterial and
collector street network to minimize impact on local streets, particularly residential neighborhoods.
CT12-1 Truck Routes: Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining city’s designated
routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT12-1.1: Continue to sign truck routes and ensure that clear signage is provided from
regional gateways to truck routes in the City.
CT12-1 Deliveries: Promote off-peak truck deliveries within the village core.
CT12-2 Emergency Access Design: Emergency access design standards shall limit cul-de-sac
lengths to the maximum extent feasible, provide a logical grid or connected system of local
streets providing at least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize through traffic on
local streets, particularly traversing single-family residential neighborhoods. DRAFTItem 9.a - Page 62
Objectives and Policies
Streets and Highways, Standards
Level of Service
Alternative Circulation/Transportation Systems
Transit & School Buses
Bike & Pedestrian
Recreation Trails
Truck & Emergency Routes
Scenic Routes
Coordinated Land Use and Circulation
Planning and Funding
Implementation Measures
CIRCULATION/TRANSPORTATION
ELEMENT
Adopted by City Council, October 9, 2001
ATTACHMENT C
Item 9.a - Page 63
CE - 1
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
Streets and Highways Standards
CT1. Plan and develop a coordinated and efficient, functional classification system
of local streets and highways throughout the community that designates the
purpose and physical characteristics of the roadway, composed of the five
categories.
CT1-1 State Freeway 101, 4 to 6 lane with interchange access: Caltrans design
standards or as mutually approved. Typically 120’ or more.
CT1-2 Major Arterial Street – 4 lane with or without median; City controlled access, on-
street parking optional; include bike lanes, sidewalks, transit turnouts and other
design features: 80’ – 104’ r of w.
CT1-3 State Highway 227 or Minor Arterial Streets – 2 to 4 lanes with or without
median/turn lane: State or City controlled access, on-street parking optional;
includes bike lanes, sidewalks, some transit and other design features: 64’ – 104’
r of w.
CT1-4 Collector Streets – 2 lanes with or without turn lane, controlled access, on-street
parking optional; includes bike lanes, sidewalks, some transit and other design
features: 84’ r of w.
CT 1-5 Local Streets – 2 lanes, access and on-street parking; includes some bike lanes,
sidewalks on one or both sides, other design variables in hillside, cul-de-sac, or
other special conditions: 42’ – 60’ r of w.
CT1-6 All street standards shall be reviewed and revised as determined appropriate
including optional features such as landscaped medians, curb bulbouts and
parkways and/or street trees and similar design amenities when approved by the
City. Alternative local street standards for neo-traditional subdivisions or Planned
Developments/Specific Plans will also be considered.
Level of Service
CT2. Attain and maintain Level of Service (LOS)’C’ or better on all streets and
controlled intersections.
CT2-1 Where deficiencies exist, mitigate to an LOS ‘D’ at a minimum and plan
improvement to achieve LOS ‘C’ (Los ‘E’ or ‘F’ unacceptable = significant adverse
impact unless Statement of Overriding Considerations or CEQA Findings
approved). The design and funding for such planned improvements shall be
sufficiently definite to enable construction within a reasonable period of time.
CT2-2 The City should conduct periodic traffic counts, monitor selected streets and
model arterial and collector street network to determine where LOS ‘C’ is not
attained and provide a current baseline for development project impact analyses.
Item 9.a - Page 64
CE - 2
CT2-3 Require that General Plan Amendments, Rezoning Applications or development
projects involving 20 or more estimated peak hour trip additions provide traffic
studies according to City LOS policy, including subsequent amendments and
refinements.
CT2-3.1 Traffic studies shall include roadway capacity, safety and design analysis
using Highway Capacity Manual methodology.
CT2-3.2 Traffic studies shall describe possible mitigation measures available to
attain LOS ‘C’ or better and project-related methods of funding.
CT2-3.3 Public Works Director should meet with applicants prior to application to
discuss study scope, probable impacts and mitigation.
CT2-4 The City should periodically review LOS policy and actual system performance to
identify model deficiencies and consider Capital Improvement Programs,
mitigation measures and/or policy revision and refinement.
Item 9.a - Page 65
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
2001 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
CIRCULATION - MAP 3
= Revised October 9, 2001
Highway/Arterial
Collector
Circulation Study Area
Pedestrian Area
Proposed Signal/Alternative
Priority 1 Transit Stops
Priority 2 Transit Stops
Signal/Intersection Alternative
T
T
T
TTT
T
T
T
T
T
T
T T
T
T T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
Path/Trail
Item 9.a - Page 66
CE - 4
Circulation/Transportation Map-3
Scenic Routes
Bikeways and Pedestrian Facilities
Recreation Trails
(Refer to Parks and Recreation Element)
Item 9.a - Page 67
CE - 5
Alternative Circulation and transportation Systems
CT3. Maintain and improve existing “multi-modal” circulation and transportation
systems and facilities, to maximize alternatives to new street and highway
construction.
CT3-1 In cooperation with SCAT and CCAT or other operators, provide for safe and
efficient transit system for local and regional travel, particularly for youth,
elderly, low-income or disabled persons.
CT3-1.1 The City should encourage convenient routes and schedules on arterial
and/or collector streets including stops, shelters, bus benches, turnouts,
park and ride, transfer and other facilities or features to be provided in
connection with new developments.
CT3-1.2 The City should encourage major employers to promote use of public
transit and/or provide van/car pools, private shuttles or other trip
reduction (flex time, telecommuting, bike) and transportation demand
management.
CT3-2 Cooperate with Lucia Mar Unified School District to plan improved school bus
transportation system, including parking and loading, maintenance and storage,
bike ad sidewalk access facilities.
CT3-2.1 Consider shared corporation yard to relocate existing maintenance and
storage from residential neighborhoods.
CT3-2.2 Program a priority system of school bus routes, stops/shelter, sidewalks
and bike lanes to serve schools and parks and link with other transit and
alternative transportation.
CT3-3 Promote non-motorized bike and pedestrian circulation facilities to serve all areas
of the City and linking with regional systems, with priority coordination with
school, park, transit and major public facilities.
CT3-3.1 Improve bike lanes and sidewalks serving all school, parks, and selected
transit and community facilities as priority system, including
neighborhood connections in addition to conventional streets.
CT3-3.2 Plan and prioritize Village Core and E. Grand Avenue Mixed Use corridor
improvements.
CT3-3.3 Update City Bikeway Plan to meet State guidelines to seek increase
regional and state funding assistance.
CT3-4.4 Plan and prioritize greenway trail network along Arroyo Grande, Tally Ho
and Meadow Creeks and linking with other open space or recreational
trails within the City and region.
CT3-4 Design and designate efficient truck and emergency access routes utilizing the
arterial and collector street network to minimize impact on local streets,
particularly residential neighborhoods.
Item 9.a - Page 68
CE - 6
CT3-4.1 Truck routes should coordinate with County and adjoining Cities
designated routes and avoid traversing residential areas.
CT3-4.2 Emergency access design standards should limit cul-de-sac lengths,
provide a logical grid or connected system of local streets providing at
least two directions of neighborhood access, and minimize through traffic
on local streets, particularly traversing single family residential
neighborhoods.
CT3-5 The City should designate a connected system of “scenic streets and highways”
and consider specific design guidelines and landscaping standards appropriate to
this network for resident and visitor enjoyment.
CT3-5.1 The basic scenic route system should include these streets and highways
as shown on the Circulation Element Map.
CT3-5.2 Discourage on-street parking in Agriculture areas to enhance visibility
and minimize trespassing.
CT3-5.3 Develop adequate public or shared off-street parking lots conveniently
located behind and beside buildings in Village Core and Mixed Use
Corridors, according to area design guidelines.
Coordinated Land Use and Circulation
CT4. Ensure compatibility and complementary relationships between the
circulation/transportation system and existing and planned land uses,
promoting environmental objectives such as safe and un-congested
neighborhoods, energy conservation, reduction of air and noise pollution,
transit, bike and pedestrian friendly characteristics.
CT4-1 Promote “transit-oriented developments” and coordinated, compatible land use
pattern by encouraging multiple family residential and special needs housing in
Mixed Use Corridors, Village Core and near Office, Regional Commercial,
Business Park and major Community Facility areas.
CT4-1.1 Transit routes should serve E. Grand Avenue Mixed Use corridor, Village
Core, and West Branch street Regional Commercial areas.
CT4-1.2 Future transit loop to serve Halcyon/Fair Oaks, Offices, Village Core,
James Way and Rancho Parkway residential areas.
CT4-1.3 Consider higher density allowance and reduced parking requirements
within one-quarter mile of transit routes when updating Development
Code.
CT4-2 Utilize the circulation system as a positive element of community design,
including street trees and landscaped parkways and medians, special streetscape
features in Mixed Use corridors and Village Core, undergrounding of utilities,
particularly along major streets.
Item 9.a - Page 69
CE - 7
Planning and Funding
CT5. Coordinate circulation and transportation planning and funding of collector
and arterial street and highway improvements with other local, County,
SLOCOG, State and federal agencies. Request County contribution to major
street improvement projects.
CT5-1 Update the Regional Transportation Plan to include the Circulation and
Transportation Element of the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Update.
CT5-2 Request that Caltrans, SLOCOG and the County give high priority to
Brisco/Halcyon and Traffic Way/El campo interchange improvements to Freeway
101.
CT5-3 Ask the County to establish a “Road Impact Fee” within Arroyo Grande Fringe
and other non-Agriculture areas of the Arroyo Grande Area of Environmental
Concern, and add to the fees for South County/Nipomo Mesa area based on cost
studies for needed improvements (including portions of City street systems
impacted by regional traffic increases) to serve new development.
CT5-4 Review and revise City circulation and transportation impact fees associated with
new development in Arroyo Grande to assure either facility and system
improvements and/or in-lieu fee payments to maintain adequate facilities and
services at LOS ‘C’ to General Plan buildout, including regional traffic increase
and funding assistance.
CT5-5 Define and preserve “study area” corridors and alternatives for future freeway,
arterial and collector street connections, extensions, completions, reconstruction,
widening, frontage road alternatives or extensions, and/or other improvements
to Circulation and Transportation networks until cooperative resolution of
Element revisions and/or Capital Improvement Programs. (See PSR and other
study areas on Circulation Element).
CT5-5.1 Include Brisco/Halcyon Project Study Report (PSR), Traffic Way/El
Campo PSR and its western connection and other north, west and
eastside study areas.
CT5-5.2 Establish “plan lines” for widening, extension or realignment when
determined by design and environmental analysis, including proposed
funding and priority schedule estimates. (None adopted/Add to CE).
CT5-5.3 When new development occurs in vicinity of study areas or plan lines,
and where legally and financially feasible, require all or portion of rights-
of-way and improvements associated with new development.
CT5-6 Encourage Caltrans, SLOCOG and the County to refine and maintain a regional
traffic model to assist in regional and local circulation and transportation
planning, CIP funding and new development project environmental analysis.
CT5-6.1 Request that the Caltrans, County and SLOCOG evaluate Nipomo Mesa
cumulative growth and development impacts on Arroyo Grande area
circulation and transportation systems prior to Willow Road or other
interchange alternative construction.
Item 9.a - Page 70
CE - 8
CT5-6.2 Request that the County, Caltrans and SLOCOG consider proportional
participation in projects involving regional traffic impacts.
CT5-7 Utilize assessment and improvement districts and other supplemental private
funding to correct local area deficiencies such as inadequate parking, transit and
streetscape enhancement or completion of local street or trail segments that
benefit the area.
Item 9.a - Page 71
£¤101£¤101Cherry AvenuePrintz RoadEastCherryAvenueElm StreetBrisco RoadHalcyon RoadCorbettCanyonRoadTrafficW ayBranchMillRoadTallyHoRoadHuasna RdEastBranchStreetRanchoParkwayThe PikeFairOaksAvenueValley RoadEl Camino RealWestBranchStreetEastGrandAvenueJamesWay1227FIGURE 1-3Project No.Revision No.-11144936Date11/06/2020CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEMap Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 FeetPaper Size ANSI BoData source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.Created by: rsouthernN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_CE_FIG1-3_Intx&RoadImprovements_RevC.mxdPrint date: 09 Nov 2020 - 20:12INTERSECTIONS ANDROADWAY IMPROVEMENTSLegendStudy AreaMaster Plan Study Review AreaComplete Streets Area!!New Interchange/Modification#0Areas of ConcernIntersection Control![Existing Signal![Proposed Signal/RoundaboutNew FacilitiesNew 4-Lane ArterialNew 2-Lane ArterialNew CollectorNew Freeway RampExisting Classification4-Lane (Primary) Arterial2-Lane ArterialCollectorLocal CollectorUS 101State RoutesRoadsSphere of InfluenceCity LimitsNote: Includes removal of Fair Oaks Ave US 101 SB Off Ramp, and Traffic Way US 101 NB Off and On Ramps.Not comprehensive of all Capital Improvement Projeccts.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4MilesDRAFTItem 9.a - Page 72
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!
!
!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!
!
!!!!
!
!!
!!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"/"/"J"J"J"J"J"J"J"J"J"/"/"/!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H!H£¤101£¤1011227FIGURE 1-50 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4MilesProject No.Revision No.-11144936Date11/09/2020CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEMap Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 FeetPaper Size ANSI BoData source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.Created by: rsouthernN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_CE_FIG1-5_Ped&TransitImprovements_RevB.mxdPrint date: 09 Nov 2020 - 22:06LegendComplete StreetsAreaStudy AreaPedestrianCrossing"JMid-BlockCrosswalk"/Ped Bridge!HTransit StopTrailsExisting!ProposedUS 101State RoutesRoadsCity LimitsSphere ofInfluencePEDESTRIAN & TRANSIT FACILITY IMPROVEMENTSDRAFTItem 9.a - Page 73
£¤101£¤101Printz RoadFairOaksAvenueM a so n S tre e tCarpenterCanyonRoadHalcyon RoadElm StreetBrisco RoadCourtlandStreetCaminoMercadoCherry AvenueCorbettCanyonRoadAsh StreetTrafficW a yBranchMillRoadTallyHoRoadHuasna RoadEastBranchStreetOak Park BoulevardRanchoParkwayFarroll AvenueThe PikeValley RoadRodeo DriveEl Camino RealWestBranchStreetEast GrandAvenueJamesWay1227FIGURE 1-40 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4MilesProject No.Revision No.-11144936Date11/09/2020CITY OF ARROYO GRANDECIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATEMap Projection: Lambert Conformal ConicHorizontal Datum: North American 1983Grid: NAD 1983 StatePlane California V FIPS 0405 FeetPaper Size ANSI BoData source: Esri, HERE, Garmin, (c) OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS user community.Created by: rsouthernN:\US\Roseville\Projects\Legacy\PRJ\1584\G1584\2020\Maps\Deliverables\1584_CE_FIG1-4_BikeImprovements_RevB.mxdPrint date: 09 Nov 2020 - 22:15LegendStudy AreaComplete StreetsAreaBicycle FacilitiesExisting Class 1Existing Class 2Existing Class 3Proposed Class 1Proposed Class 2Proposed Class 3Proposed BikeBlvdUS 101State RoutesRoadsCity LimitsSphere ofInfluenceBICYCLE FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS*Class IV will assist with lowering bicyclelevel of trafic stress (LTS) on roadwaysDRAFTItem 9.a - Page 74