Loading...
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£¤10112272271227FIGURE 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 RealWestBranchStreetEastGrandAvenueJamesWay1227FIGURE 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£¤1011227FIGURE 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 GrandAvenueJamesWay1227FIGURE 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