Arroyo Grande City Council
January 28, 2025

APPENDIX 191
AB-2086 Transportation Accountability Act (2024)
AB-2086 brings transparency to Caltrans spending by requiring the California Transportation Plan to contain a financial element that summarizes the full cost of plan implementation. To further increase transparency and accountability, information on how annual project investments advance the California Transportation Plan must be added to the existing public online dashboard on or before January 1, 2027.

AB-2147 Pedestrians (2022)
AB-2147 prohibits a police officer from stopping a pedestrian for specified traffic infractions, such as jaywalking, unless the street crossing is truly dangerous. AB-2147 legalizes safe street crossings and eliminates an arbitrary traffic enforcement practice that disproportionately targeted people of color.

AB-2669 Banning Bridge Tolls for People Walking and Biking (2024)
AB-2669 allows pedestrians, bicyclists, or people using personal micromobility devices to cross existing toll bridges in California without paying a fee.

AB-2863 Green Building Standards: Bicycle Parking (2022) AB-2863 requires the Department of Housing and Community Development, upon the next triennial update of the California Green Building Standards Code that occurs on or after January 1, 2023, to research and develop mandatory building standards for short-term and long-term bicycle parking in multifamily residential buildings, hotels, and motels.

SB-1 Transportation Funding (2017)
SB-1 creates the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program to address deferred maintenance on the state highway system and the local street and road system. A total of $5.4 billion will be invested annually over the next decade, which will address a backlog of repairs and upgrades. Additionally, cleaner and more sustainable travel networks will be ensured for the future, including upgrades to local roads, and transit agencies, and an expansion of the state’s growing network of pedestrians and bicycle routes.

SB-375 Redesigning Communities to Reduce Greenhouse Gases (2008) SB-375 seeks to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through land use and planning incentives. Key provisions require the larger regional transportation planning agencies to develop more sophisticated transportation planning models and to use them to create “preferred growth scenarios” in their regional plans that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The bill also provides incentives for local governments to incorporate these preferred growth scenarios into the transportation elements of their general land use plans.

SB-400 Clean Cars 4 All Program (2019)
SB-400 expands the eligible modes of transportation for which the Clean Cars 4 All (CC4A) program “mobility option” may include bike sharing and electric bikes. CC4A aims to reduce car emissions by increasing the turnover of existing vehicles and replacing them with newer, cleaner, and more efficient vehicles. Reducing emissions from existing vehicles is a component of California’s State Implementation Plan for meeting air quality standards and also supports efforts to meet the state’s 2030 climate change goals.

SB-672 Traffic-Actuated Signals: Motorcycles and Bicycles (2017)
SB-672 indefinitely extends the requirement to install traffic-actuated signals to detect lawful bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway.

By indefinitely extending requirements regarding traffic-actuated signals applicable to local governments, SB-672 imposes a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state.

SB-689 Bike Lanes in Coastal Areas (2024)
When local governments want to add dedicated transit lanes, pedestrian walkways, or bicycle lanes to coastal areas, Local Coastal Programs are required documents that must be approved by the California Coastal Commission. SB-689 limits the ability of the Coastal Commission to block the development of new bikeways on existing roads in coastal areas by making it easier to amend Local Coastal Programs.

192 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
SB-743 CEQA Reform (2013)
SB-743 changed the method of traffic analysis required through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for publicly and privately initiated projects. Before SB-743, transportation impacts were analyzed by quantifying traffic congestion as measured by the level of service (LOS), which resulted in mitigation measures to reduce traffic, such as building new roads or travel lanes, widening existing roads, adding turn lanes, and installing traffic control devices. Now, under SB-743, transportation impacts are assessed by quantifying how much and how far people drive, using a measure called Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). By measuring transportation impacts by VMT, mitigation measures can include opportunities to improve non-vehicular travel options, such as installing bicycle and pedestrian facilities, improving public transit access, and more.

SB-922 California Environmental Quality Act Exemption: Transportation-related Projects (2022) SB-922 extends until 2030 statutory exemptions to the California Environmental Quality Act for sustainable transportation projects, including improvements for walking, biking, public transit efficiency and wayfinding; rail stations; zero-emission transit refueling facilities; and carpooling.

SB-932 General Plans: Circulation Element: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans and Traffic Calming Plans (2022) SB-932 requires cities and counties, upon any substantive revision of a general plan circulation element, to develop bicycle plans, pedestrian plans, and traffic calming plans based on the policies and goals in the circulation element. SB-932 also requires cities and counties to begin implementation of a plan within two years of adoption; regularly review implementation progress; and consider revising the circulation element if the goals of the bicycle, pedestrian, or traffic calming plans will not be met within 25 years of circulation element adoption.

SB-960 Complete Streets Bill (2024)
SB-960 requires Caltrans to set targets for active transportation and public transit improvements in State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) projects, such as building bikeways, sidewalks, bus boarding islands, and more. SB-960 mandates that Caltrans consider the needs of people walking, biking, and taking transit when repairing state roadways.

SB-1000 Planning for Healthy Communities Act (2016)
Under SB 1000, cities and counties are required to adopt an Environmental Justice Element or integrate environmental just-related policies, objectives, and goals throughout other elements of their General Plan. The bill also includes a process for communities to become meaningfully involved in the decision-making processes that govern land use planning in their neighborhoods.

SB-1216 Limits on Class III Bikeways (2024)
SB-1216 prohibits the creation of Class III Bikeways on roads with a posted speed limit greater than thirty miles per hour, except at or near an intersection for the purpose of connecting a Class I, Class II, or Class IV bikeway through the intersection. This new law will also limit the use of State funding to create Class III bikeways on high-speed corridors.

SB-1271 E-Bike Battery Safety Standards (2024)
Beginning on January 1, 2026, SB-1271 requires all electric bicycles sold in California to have their batteries tested and certified for safety standards. SB-1271 also clarifies rules for the advertisement and sale of electric bicycles.

California Active Transportation Program
The California Active Transportation Program, created in 2013, consolidates existing federal and state transportation programs, including the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP), Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA), and State Safe Routes to School (SRTS), into a single program with a focus to make California a national leader in active transportation. SB-1 stipulates that $100 million of revenues from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account will be available annually to the program. An additional $122.5 million in State and Federal funding is allocated to the program each year.

Program funding is distributed as follows: 50 percent to the State for a statewide competitive program; 40 percent to Metropolitan Planning

APPENDIX 193
Organizations in urban areas with populations greater than 200,000; and 10 percent to small urban and rural regions with populations of 200,000 or less. Additionally, State-designated Disadvtangaged Communities (DACs) are guaranteed a minimum of 25 percent of the entire program’s funding. Elibile projects include infrastructure projects (capital improvement projects), non-infrastructure projects (education, encouragement, and enforcement activities, combination projects (infrastructure and non-infrastructure), and communitywide planning projects in DACs.

California Transportation Plan 2050 (2021)
The California Transportation Plan 2050 (CTP) is a long-range plan completed in 2021 to provide a common framework for transportation decisions and investments throughout the state. It aims to meet the growing needs of California residents as it relates to travel accessibility, emissions, and economic impacts.

Caltrans’ Deputy Directive 64-R2 (2014)
Deputy Directive 64-R2 is a policy statement affecting Caltrans mobility planning and projects requiring the agency to:
“…provide for the needs of travelers of all ages and abilities in all planning, programming, design, construction, operations, and maintenance activities and products on the State highway system. Caltrans views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access. and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system.”
The directive goes on to mention the environmental, health, and economic benefits of more Complete Streets.

CEQA for Bicycle and Pedestrian Plans
Based on Public Resources Code Section 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies) guidance, planning documents such as this ATP are exempt from CEQA analysis since they are planning and conceptual recommendations:
“A project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the agency, board, or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded does not require the preparation of an EIR or Negative Declaration but does require consideration of environmental factors.” As individual recommendations move forward toward further design and implementation, the City will then need to determine if there are environmental impacts that may warrant an EIR.

Design Information Bulletin 89-02 (Updated in 2022)
The purpose of Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 89-02 is to provide design criteria and guidance on best practices related to separated bikeways to establish uniform guidance that will facilitate consistent user expectations. DIB 89-02 allows designers to exercise sound judgment when applying it while being consistent with the Caltrans Highway Design Manual and the CA MUTCD. DIB 89-02 is written to allow for flexibility in applying design criteria, taking into consideration the context of the project’s location, enabling designers to tailor the design and maximize safety and comfort.

Best practices from cities, states, and countries currently operating separated bikeways were used to formulate DIB 89-02. This DIB will be updated as necessary based on lessons learned from engineers and practitioners as they gain more experience with the use of separated bikeways. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) publication Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide (FHWA Guide) should be used to design separated bikeways. Where DIB 89-02 is inconsistent with the FHWA Guide, DIB 89-02 should govern.

Executive Order N-19-19 (2019)
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed Executive Order N-19-19 on September 20, 2019, to require the State to continue efforts to reduce GHG emissions and mitigate climate change impacts while building a sustainable economy. The California State Transportation Agency is directed to leverage strategies toward lowering vehicle miles traveled by supporting active modes of transportation such as biking and walking that also benefit public health.

194 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

APPENDIX B - COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT RESULTS
The community engagement results provided in Appendix B include public comments from community members as written. Public comments are provided for reference and do not represent the views of the City.

POP-UP EVENTS
POP-UP #1: HARVEST FESTIVAL 2023
Date: September 30, 2023 Location: Village of Arroyo Grande

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Ash Street and S. Elm Street Missing sidewalk and curb Missing Sidewalk Bennett Avenue and S. Halcyon Road High visibility crosswalk Pedestrian Concern Christmas Tree Island Park Crosswalk with lights; dangerous Traffic Calming East Branch Street Dangerous, people drive fast Traffic Calming East Branch Street - Crown Terrace Area Sidewalk improvements Pedestrian Concern East Branch Street - Huasana Rd Intersection
Middle school no sidewalk around Missing Sidewalk
Blindspot Driving Concern
Dedicated right turn? Driving Concern
Farroll Avenue HS traffic Driving Concern
Maple Street (S. Elm Street and Alder Street) Missing sidewalk and curb Missing Sidewalk S. Elm Street (near Poplar Street intersection) No curb, gutter, sidewalk Missing Curb Ramp South Mason Street and Poole Street 4-way stop? Dangerous Traffic Calming The Village Road narrows. Pedestrian danger Traffic Calming Unnamed Road - Leading to Arroyo High School
Build sidewalk Missing Sidewalk
Who owns this? Other
Turn around parking? Driving Concern
Valley Road - Leading to Arroyo High School
Build sidewalk Missing Sidewalk
High speed Traffic Calming
General Comments
» Keep downtown chicken [rooster] friendly
Citywide Map
Table A-1: Pop-Up Event #1: Citywide Map Activity Comments

APPENDIX 195
POP-UP #2: ARROYO GRANDE FARMERS MARKET
Date: April 20, 2024 Location: Village of Arroyo Grande General Comments
» Add charging stations for cars, scooters, e-bikes, etc.

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Ash Street & Soto Park General maintenance with sidewalk issues Pedestrian Concern Brisco Road Smarter/better traffic light coordination to move traffic Driving Concern Corbett Canyon Road gets torn up on Corbett Canyon Road due to poor drainage issues in wet years. Needs asphalt maintenance. Other
Crown Terrace Speeding and no sidewalks on Crown Terrace. Need traffic calming. Traffic Calming No lighting on Crown Terrace. Would be nice to have. Traffic Calming Fair Oaks Avenue
Fair Oaks bike lanes are tight and near barbed wire Bicyclist Concern Fair Oaks side streets near high school have missing sidewalks Missing Sidewalk Add safe walking/biking to Fair Oaks Avenue Pedestrian Concern Citywide Comment Add charging stations for cars, scooters, e-bikes, etc. Other Grand Avenue
Grand Avenue Bike Lane from Elm to the Village Bicyclist Concern Driveways and high speeds on Grand Avenue make biking uncomfortable Bicyclist Concern Goal: Ride all the way to the beach along Grand Avenue Bicyclist Concern People speed too much along Grand Avenue. Need traffic calming Traffic Calming Reduce two signals to one signal going onto the freeway on Grand Avenue to avoid confusion and reduce speeds Driving Concern
Huasna Road
Crossing bridge is awkward. Is there a way to go around school to make walking to Village Pedestrian Concern Missing curb ramp on Rosewood and Huasna Missing Curb Ramp Add RRFB to crossing on Rosewood and Huasna Pedestrian Concern Sunrise Terrace Sunrise Terrace - Verizon wants to put in a cell tower and disguise it as a water tower Other The Village Add safe walking/biking to the Village Pedestrian Concern Keep the Village lower traffic/pedestrian friendly Pedestrian Concern Valley Road Add safe walking/biking to Valley Road Pedestrian Concern Citywide Map
Table A-2: Pop-Up Event #2: Citywide Map Activity Comments

196 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
POP-UP #3: HARVEST FESTIVAL 2024
Date: September 28, 2028 Location: Village of Arroyo Grande

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Branch Mill Road Pave Branch Mill road! It is dangerous for bicyclists. Bicyclist Concern Brisco Road Add a 'Keep Clear' sign at Brisco underpass so cars don't block the intersection. Bicyclist Concern El Camino Real El Camino Real is very high stress from Brisco Road east. Can we divert bicyclists to another route? Bicyclist Concern Citywide Comment
Super! Bike Lanes! Bicyclist Concern
Clear fully painted, visible bike lanes would keep us all safe! Bicyclist Concern Paint maintenance for lanes on road with reflective paint. Driving Concern Materials imply Class IV is superior solution when it may not yet be determined. Buffered Class II could have more benefits. Bicyclist Concern
Grand Avenue Great ideas! We want the separated bikeway! Bicyclist Concern Yes, please to Class IV on Grand Avenue all the way from the Village to Oak Park would be amazing!!! Bicyclist Concern Oak Park Road Oak Park Road speeding is a concern. Bicyclist Concern Traffic Way Two-way bike lane from Traffic Way to Fair Oaks Bicyclist Concern Valley Road
We need safer routes to Arroyo Grande High School, especially from the Mesa. Many kids walk and bike to AGHS from outside of southern city limits, but have no safe way to get there. We have been asking the City to make AGHS safer for bicyclists and pedestrians for years, but haven't seen any action from the City.

Bicyclist Concern
W. Branch Street This Class IV [on W. Branch Street] would be so welcome!!! Bicyclist Concern Draft Priority Corridors
Table A-3: Pop-Up Event #3: Draft Priority Corridor Comments Draft Bicycle Recommendations
Table A-4: Pop-Up Event #3: Draft Bicycle Recommendations Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Grand Avenue City to consider maintenance for any Class 4s. Add language about pilot projects first. Bicyclist Concern Fair Oaks Avenue I support the proposed crossing at Fair Oaks Avenue and Woodland. Pedestrian Concern

APPENDIX 197
Draft Pedestrian Recommendations
Table A-5: Pop-Up Event #3: Draft Pedestrian Recommendations Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Brisco Road Wider under-crossing needed at Brisco Road. Pedestrian Concern Corbett Canyon Road Traffic calming is needed on Corbett Canyon Road. Traffic Calming Fair Oaks Avenue
Dangerous intersection [at Woodland and Fair Oaks] - needs STOP signs. Pedestrian Concern Stop sign on Fair Oaks Avenue and Orchard needs LED lights. Many students cross here and need better visibility! Pedestrian Concern
Citywide Comment
Sidewalks need to be constructed - top priority. Missing Sidewalk Signage blocking sidewalks - City policy should be enforced. Signage in front of City Hall Enforcement Would be great to have a citywide map of bike lanes, trails, and paths for the public to use. Other Steel/diamond clad plates where there are drainage channels - the edges are lifted and create trip hazards. Maintenance
South County Sanitation leaves trash bins randomly on sidewalks, blocking pedestrians. Enforcement Hausna Road
Retaining wall holding dirt - weep holes dump algae/moss and makes it slippery and unsafe. Maintenance Huasna Road at Ralph Beck - West side, handicap ramp - water and dirt collects and causes issues for curb ramps and truncated domes. People in neighborhood have wheelchairs. Maintenance Traffic calming is needed along Huasna Road Traffic Calming Trucks block sidewalks and force people and students into the street - needs enforcement. Enforcement James Way Missing sidewalks on James Way. Missing Sidewalk Traffic calming is needed on James Way. Traffic Calming Nelson Street Make higher visibility and enforcement stop at Nelson Street and Mason Street. Pedestrian Concern Paulding Middle
School
Paulding Middle School needs pedestrian improvements. Pedestrian Concern I support the recommendations along Paulding Middle School as a walk/bike to school initiative. Pedestrian Concern Printz Road Fix bike/ped bridge at Printz and Corbett Canyon Road. Maintenance Tally Ho Road Tally Ho - 6' wall needs to be enforced. Enforcement The Village
Trucks block pedestrian visibility. Enforcement
Sidewalks in the Village are often obstructed by outdoor dining. It is a safety/access issue. Enforcement The sidewalk in front of Gina's Restaurant is constantly blocked and used by loading/unloading. Enforcement Traffic Way Add crosswalk at 4th leg of Traffic Way and Branch intersection so pedestrians don't have to walk all around to cross the road. Pedestrian Concern
W. Branch Street Would like sidewalks and potholes fixed on W. Branch. Missing Sidewalk

198 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #1: EXISTING CONDITIONS & NEEDS
Date: December 13, 2023 Location: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers General Comments
» Work with the sanitation district to allow trash cans on the street instead of on the sidewalk » Traffic signal push button that cyclists can push from Are there specific intersections or streets that you are concerned with? » Huasna/227 is an ideal location for a roundabout
Voting Activity: Place a sticker next to the active transportation facilities you would like to see throughout Arroyo Grande Table A-6: Workshop #1: Voting Activity Results

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE NUMBER OF VOTES
Class 4 Separated Bikeways 2
Signage & Lighting 2
Traffic Calming Circle 1
Enhanced Crossings 1
Bus Shelters 1
Chicanes 0
Speed Cushions 0
Electronic Feedback Signs 0
Traffic Diverter 0
Truck Apron 0
Class 1 Multi-use Paths 0
Class 2 Bicycle Lanes 0
Class 3 Bicycle Routes 0
Colored Bicycle Striping 0
High-visibility Crosswalk 0
Paved Sidewalk 0
Curb Ramps 0
Curb Extension 0

APPENDIX 199
Citywide Map
Table A-7: Workshop #1: Citywide Map Activity Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Ash Street (near park) On-street parking along Ash St. can cause visibility issues for cycling Bicyclist Concern Corbett Canyon Road Why only bike lanes northbound and not southbound? Bicyclist Concern Corbett Canyon Road and Printz Road Bridge gets hit a lot Driving Concern E. Branch Street (near Paulding Middle
School) Safer pedestrian facilities are needed along E. Branch St. near Paulding Middle School Pedestrian Concern E. Branch Street and Huasna Road
Stop signs with solar lights Traffic Calming
Blinking beacon light? Traffic Calming
Roundabout opportunity? Traffic Calming
E. Branch Street and Short Street Branch St. versus Short St. side of the crosswalk. Pedestrian protection. Pedestrian Concern E. Cherry Avenue Look at new improvements along E. Cherry Avenue between Traffic Way and Leedham Place. Seem to be working Other Elm Street and Farroll Avenue Parking blocks sight distance Driving Concern Fair Oaks Avenue bridge Striping Fair Oaks Avenue bridge east Other Fair Oaks Avenue and Elm Street Stop sign compliance Driving Concern Fair Oaks and Tahiti Street Dangerous and clogged at beginning and ending of school day or when big events happen. Lots of bikes - protected bike lanes needed! Bicyclist Concern
James Way Varying speed signs on James Way Traffic Calming James Way and Oak Park Road Bike detector on James Way and Oak Park needs to detect bikes Bicyclist Concern Huasna Road (between Paulding Middle
School and city limits)
Traffic calming needed along Huasna Rd. between Paulding Middle School and city limits. People drive too fast here! How to slow them before middle school going west and by residential areas going east. Traffic Calming Speeding ongoing. Has the City considered speed reduction? Traffic Calming "No parking bike lane" but resident and parking are dangerous for cars driving fast by bikes. Bicyclist Concern Mobile home park with seniors. Any way to add ways to slow down drivers? Traffic Calming Bridge to connect Coach Rd. to Huasna Rd. Other
Curb is consistently dangerous at the corner of Strother Park Pedestrian Concern Unfinished sidewalk (Betterment Grant) near Strother Park Missing Sidewalk Traffic calming needed along Huasna Rd. Traffic Calming Trees to short for canopy (4 ft) and bushes constantly grow over sidewalk Pedestrian Concern Rancho Parkway (near shopping centers) Left turn hatch doesn’t Other Traffic Way and Station Way Right turn onto traffic yield instead of stop? Ded. lane exists. Tree obstruction. No view. Unsafe. Left turn looking right. Driving Concern
Traffic Way and Nelson Street Dangerous crosswalk! Pedestrian Concern

200 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2: DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS
Date: September 26, 2024 Location: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers General Comments
Table A-8: Workshop #2: General Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Citywide Comment Have P.D. enforce bikes and cars 4 sale without us calling it in Other Huasna Road
If you had a roundabout at Huasna how would the students cross? Traffic Calming Round about 227/Huasna Traffic Calming
No roundabout at Huasna/227 Traffic Calming
Paulding Middle
School I walk the track at Paulding. Other
Traffic Way Traffic Way boxes weird intersection Other
Draft Priority Corridors
Table A-9: Workshop #2: Draft Priority Corridor Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
PRIORITY CORRIDOR: ELM STREET
Ash Street Opportunity for a roundabout. Traffic Calming Between Linda Drive
and Grand Avenue Narrow road to 10 feet to slow traffic. Traffic Calming Fair Oaks Avenue Consider raised crosswalk. Pedestrian Concern General This [Class IV separated bike lanes] is great! Bicyclist Concern Off of corridor -
Brisco Road Need safe route to Ocean View Elementary from other side of freeway at Brisco Hardware and Cemetery. Other PRIORITY CORRIDOR: FAIR OAKS AVENUE
Alder Street Please consider intersection improvements at Alder and Fair Oaks Avenue. Pedestrian Concern Elm Street to
Woodland
This [Fair Oaks between Elm Street and Woodland] is in the door zone of the street parking here. Consider a parking protected bike lane configuration. Not safe for kids. Bicyclist Concern General This [Class IV separated bike lanes] is great! Consider extending to Halcyon. Bicyclist Concern Orchard Street Consider curb extensions to reduce crossing distance. Bicyclist Concern

APPENDIX 201
PRIORITY CORRIDOR: GRAND AVENUE
Alpine Street Wider sidewalks. See Fruitland on a Friday night. Most vibrant part of town next to 40 mph traffic. Pedestrian Concern Alpine Street - El
Camino Real More crosswalks here. Pedestrian Concern
General Road diet! Other
General Grand Avenue redesign should be #1 priority for the City. Potentially huge positive transformation for ATP and Grand Avenue businesses. The corridor is unusable right now. Traffic Calming General Prohibit new driveways Pedestrian Concern
Halcyon Road Please consider bike and ped improvements at this skewed intersection. Maybe curb extensions? Pedestrian islands? Painted intersections? Pedestrian Concern Hwy 101 Overpass Very dangerous for peds and bikes. Pedestrian Concern Mid-block crossing W. bound visibility of crosswalks Pedestrian Concern Rena Street Please remove turn lanes! Other
Draft Bicycle Recommendations
Table A-10: Workshop #2: Draft Bicycle Recommendations Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Brisco Road Class III is not bike infrastructure. This is high speed to a school. Bicyclist Concern Fair Oaks Avenue This [Fair Oaks between Elm Street and Woodland] is a door zone bike lane. Almost unusable. Needs more space between lane and parking. Or no parking. Or reconfiguration. Bicyclist Concern Oak Park Boulevard Hill! High Priority! [bike lane disappears when bicyclists are biking uphill at much slower speeds than vehicles] Bicyclist Concern
Traffic Way Potential bike safety detour to direct bicyclists to crossing at Fair Oaks and Traffic Way instead of at Nelson and Traffic Way. Bicyclist Concern
Valley Road S-curve on Valley should be straightened to avoid dangerous curve. Bicyclist Concern Water Tank Easement Can we have a trail through to the Camp AG? There is the water tank easement. Bicyclist Concern Bicycle Project Prioritization
Table A-11: Workshop #2: Bicycle Project Prioritization Comments

RANK CORRIDOR COMMENT
12 Arroyo Grande Creek Trail 12 should be lower than anything connecting to a school or Soto (13, 19, 27). 14 Nelson Street/Whitely Street/Ide Street/
Garden Street/Myrtle Street/Stillwell Drive Lower. Adding more stop signs in the neighborhood would help this. 15,16 Arroyo Grande High School Path These should be higher priority than the creek trail.

202 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Draft Pedestrian Recommendations
Table A-12: Workshop #2: Draft Pedestrian Recommendations Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Brisco Road
Safer route to school is needed for Ocean View kids along Brisco Road. No sidewalk for kids to walk on at Brisco Hardware. Missing Sidewalk
When they do student walk day [at Ocean View ES] they walk along here [Brisco Road] and there are no sidewalks and not safe at all. Missing Sidewalk
Safe route to school for Ocean View Elementary School. Other E. Branch Street E. Branch needs another crosswalk between Traffic and Bridge. People cross all along that section. Pedestrian Concern Fair Oaks Avenue Please consider improvements at this intersection [Halcyon and Fair Oaks] for peds and bikes. Pedestrian Concern Grand Avenue W. Grand Avenue [in Grover Beach] is trying to be pedestrian-friendly already. Other Huasna Road Light-up stop sign at Corbett Canyon and Huasna Pedestrian Concern Traffic calming efforts on Huasna Road Traffic Calming
Nelson Street Intersection of Mason & Nelson - enhanced pedestrian crossing Pedestrian Concern Strother Park Crosswalk Strother Park Pedestrian Concern Traffic Way Consider improvements at this intersection [Traffic Way and Fair Oaks] for bikes and ped. On the way to school. Pedestrian Concern
W. Branch Street
Pave sidewalk between B of A and AG Library to support the upcoming Library renovation. Missing Sidewalk Path from the Village to the Library is really needed. Pedestrian Concern Please pave the sidewalk along W. Branch between B of A and the AG Library to support the upcoming Library renovation. Missing Sidewalk

APPENDIX 203
Draft SRTS Recommendations
Table A-13: Workshop #2: Draft SRTS Recommendations Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY

ARROYO GRANDE HIGH SCHOOL
Fair Oaks Avenue Bus stops need improvements here. Bus Concern General This area needs to be expanded in order to provide a safe route for most students. Other

OCEAN VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Brisco Road Underpass is dangerous for bikes. Bicyclist Concern Brisco Road Need sidewalk to school. This would either be on cemetery side or Brisco. Missing Sidewalk Brisco Road Class III is not bike infrastructure. Bicyclist Concern Brisco Road This is high speed to a school. Bicyclist Concern

PAULDING MIDDLE SCHOOL
Huasna Road Speeding issues Traffic Calming
Huasna Road Huasna Road at Clarence - Portuguese Hall events block the street. Other General I don't think students will be riding their bike to Paulding. Bicyclist Concern General Students will and do ride their bikes to/from Paulding. The area needs to be expanded. Students cross the 101 overpass everyday. The Jr. High has more students coming from father away. Other General Roundabout Other

204 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

COMMUNITY SURVEY
Figure A-1: Survey Question 1: How would you best describe your relationship with Arroyo Grande? (Select all that apply) » I live in SLO and am in AG often.
» I grew up here and visit often
» I visit often
» Visitor
» Visit Central Coast 6-10 times a year
» My parents live there
Figure A-2: Survey Question 2: Which age group are you in? (Select one) 80%
7%
14%
5%
17%
I live here I am a
student here
I work here I own a
business here
Other
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other (Please specify):
» Own property
» I am in Arroyo Grande virtually every day
» I am looking for a business opportunity in town
» I volunteer here.
» Live in Grover Beach
» Live in Grover Beach
» Work in Grover Beach
» Live in Pismo but shop in AG
» County Public Works
» Transportation planning and funding (SLOCOG regional planner) » I live in a neighboring city and shop and dine in AG often 8%
4%
26% 29%
34%
17 & under 18-24 25-45 45-64 65+
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

APPENDIX 205
Figure A-3: Survey Question 3: What form(s) of active transportation do you mainly use? (Select all that apply)
Figure A-4: Survey Question 4: How often do you walk in Arroyo Grande?
93%
1%
51%
5% 2%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other (Please specify):
» Car
» Driving
» Drive/Car
» Electric Bike
» ebike
» Running
» Run
» Use a stroller for children
» Walk with service dog
32% 31% 28%
10%
0%
Daily 2-4 days per
week
A few times a
month
A few times a
year
Never
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

206 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Figure A-5: Survey Question 5: I walk in Arroyo Grande for (Check all that apply):
» In the village
» Walk to village shops and restaurants daily
» Meeting up with friends at restaurant or coffee shop
» Work
» Work/field visits
Figure A-6: Survey Question 6: How often do you bike in Arroyo Grande? Other (Please specify):
» Kids commute via bike
» Dog walk, starting to do beach soon with friend
» Dining at restaurants, going to Miners
» Dining, shopping.
» Dining out. Going to the library.
» Events
» Shopping and dining
» Shopping
» Shopping in Village
» Taking kids to school
» Dropping kids off to school
» My sons take the public bus and walk around the village after school » Village farmers market
56%
85%
15%
1%
18%
Errands Recreation or
Exercise
Commuting Not
applicable
Other
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
3%
15%
23% 20%
40%
Daily 2-4 days per
week
A few times a
month
A few times a
year
Never
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

APPENDIX 207
Figure A-7: Survey Question 7: I bike in Arroyo Grande for (Check all that apply):

Figure A-8: Survey Question 8: What are your reasons for using active transportation? (Select all that apply)
28%
65%
12%
33%
4%
Errands Recreation or
Exercise
Commuting Not
Applicable
Other
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other (Please specify):
» Fun
» To see friends or attend meetings
» Dining, shopping.
» Social
56%
12%
5%
82%
54%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other (Please specify):
» Easier at times to walk than drive, especially on the weekends. » Walk the dog
» I need to start
» Support Active Transportation
» It’s much better than being in a car.
» Trying to maintain mobility
» To avoid traffic congestion in the Village.
» To take less cars off the road.
» I would use it more if it were safer to ride down 227 from our house to AG - I also don’t let my kids ride to town either because 227 is not great for biking or walking and there are no other roads to town. » Usually for social events
» It’s safer for others on the road. It’s more enjoyable. It doesn’t require finding a parking space.

208 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Figure A-9: Survey Question 9: What time of day do you use active transportation? (Select all that apply)
Other (Please specify):
» Branch Ave. from Bank of America up to Rancho Parkway » Creeks or other natural resources
» Especially Grover Beach
» From BOA to the AG library
» From St. Patrick’s school to the A.G. library.
» Going to the AG Library
» Goldenwest Pl arroyo grande cul de sac
» Grand Ave/Branch st from Oak Park to the Village; from the Library to both directions (to the underpass and to Branch st.) » Grand Avenue and other roads with speed limit over 25 mph » Library
» Library
» To the library! No sidewalks either direction
» The Arroyo Grande Library!
» The Village to the AG Library
» More cross walks from oak park to east of 101 on grand ave there was a repaving project years ago and it seems like it wasn’t finished lack of crosswalks
» Neighborhoods without sidewalks.
» Right in my own older neighborhood
» The hill on Halcyon up to the Mesa (by Poco Locos and JJ’s Market » There needs to be a sidewalk on West Branch Street from the Bank of America to Rodeo drive. Walking to the library can be treacherous, especially by the Woman’s Club. » We would love to be able to bike more around town and to pismo and oceano
75% 76%
42%
3%
Morning Afternoon Evening/Night I don't use active
transportation
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Figure A-10: Survey Question 10: Where would you like to see better walking and bicycling routes to? (Select all that apply) 60% 57%
36%
67%
39%
48% 47%
20%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

APPENDIX 209
Figure A-11: Survey Question 11: What would make it easier for you to walk or roll more in your community? (Select all that apply) » Sidewalk to the AG Library
» Aprons on every corner
» Paved sidewalk on W. Branch Steet going to the library. » Good pavement, and wide, clean shoulders that cars do not use » Stop signs in village at short/nelson and short/poole » Need continuos sidewalk from neighborhood to school and library, these are basic needs
» Faster transit
» Making the bike lane easier to see and more posted
» Continuous sidewalk segments and undamaged sidewalks
» fewer obstructions like mail boxes or vehicles sticking out in the sidewalk.
43%
80%
47%
42%
23%
53%
20% 21%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other (Please specify):
» Flat sidewalks! The constant hills and valleys to create driveways makes the sidewalks extremely unfriendly for rolling.
» Stop signs
» Moving all obstacles: mailboxes, utility support lines, fire hydrants, etc. out of the middle of the sidewalks. Or build the sidewalks out around these pathway blockers.
» Sidewalk repair from tree root disruption
» Infilling sidewalks, sidewalk repair, removing unnecessary signposts which create an obstruction » Handicapped accessible corner sidewalks
» Protected bike lanes
» protected bike lanes so bikes aren’t in walking areas » Slower speeds of cars and more visible crosswalks

210 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Figure A-12: Survey Question 12: What would make it easier for you to bike more in your community? (Select all that apply)
hoods that stay on side streets without turns every 500 ft. » More safety infrastructure
» Protected bike lanes (striping should not be in the same category) » Consistency of bike lanes
» bike parking facilities at Regional public transit stops SURVEY QUESTION 13: Do you avoid certain streets to walk or bike on? If yes, please list locations and reasons why you avoid these locations (ex. “Main Street due to lack of sidewalks”). » 227 and branch - too much traffic and no protected walking/biking space
» 3243 Daisy Ln
» 4th Street in Grover Beach
» S. Oak Park Blvd & Farol Rd, Grover Beach
» 13th Street, Grover Beach
» S Oak Park & Mentone, Grover Beach
» All the canyon roads, Prinz, Noyes, hwy. 227 due to lack of delineated paths and the danger from traffic. It’s sad, because these are such beautiful walking areas.
» Any street with heavy traffic that doesn’t have a well-defined, obstacle-free bike lane, especially if there is poor lighting or signage. » Apart from the Village, Grand is mostly unpleasant to walk on. Also, some/most of the commercial areas are close to each other but walking between them feels unsafe.
» at night can only go where there is lights either walking or driving » avoid all streets with narrow lanes and larger exposure of bikes to moving vehicles
» Avoid biking on Grand Ave, Carpenter Canyon, Halcyon Road due to high speeds and lack of or frequently dropped bike lanes » Biking in the village is more scary than driving in LA » Branch St heading towards Huasna; road 227, Lopez Lake Dr., Prince Rd.
» Branch St. and Rodeo Dr.
» Branch Street through the village. Mason Street.
74%
83%
14%
29%
39%
19% 17%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other (Please specify):
» More and better bike lanes
» Continuous bike paths- especially over 101 freeway bridge and in the village
» Your bike facilites are poor at best!!
» Studies have found that more people will bike if they have separated or protected bike ways. » Protected bike lanes. Paint alone is not enough. Traffic calming road designs.
» Continuous bike paths over the freeway bridges
» N/A - I can’t bike
» roads can be really narrow and people suck are sharing the road » Info whether bus bike rack is full. Faster and more frequent bus routes. Paths that avoid hills. Connecting paths through neighborPage 390 of 475 APPENDIX 211
» Brisco to branch to library, sidewalk is not continuous. From Alder to Grand, missing continuos sidewalk on the northbound. » Bristol underpass and El Camino Real
» Crossing 101 to get to the Village on a bicycle is a harrowing experience. Grand ave. in general doesn’t have enough room for bikes on sidewalk or in a bike lane.
» Crossing grand due to lack of crosswalks please look at grand from oak park to east of 101 and count the amount of crosswalks » Crown terrace in village no side way very dangerous
» Crown hill sideways overgrown with scrubs
» Branch St instead of those park let’s make the sidewalks wider » Danger zone for walking: Ash Street between Elm and Walnut. You have to walk in the street because of all the sidewalk obstacles. Oh, but that’s too dangerous because the 25 mph speed limit is not enforced. Help, help, please help this wonderful older neighborhood. » I don’t ride bikes at all in AG. I’ve already been hit by a car once in my life, with permanent, life-changing injuries. So long as the speed limit is not enforced, it is not safe.
» East Branch street between Crown Hill Street and Huasna Road next to Paulding School due to lack of sidewalks.
» East Branch street from Garden Street to Huasna Road. Also, Corbett Canyon Road from Huasna to Tally Ho Road » East branch/grand over freeway; to the library
» East side of Elm, south of Sunset - infill sidewalk
» West side of Elm north of the Pike - infill sidewalk
» Multiple areas where sidewalk is damaged or lifted
» Fair oaks ave by the high school - bike lanes are abysmal. Police presence is disappointingly minimal for an area full of reckless drivers and speeding. » Fair oaks because of high school traffic, also Corbett canyon for active transportation due to danger of vehicles
» Going around crown hill from Huasna to the village due to lack of sidewalks. Also from Clarence Ave to Strother park because lack of a safe crosswalk. I would love to see a safe way to get from the bus barn to tally ho along Corbett canyon road, there is a stretch on street without sidewalks where cars go fast.
» Grand Ave because of lack of continuous bike lanes and speed of traffic
» Grand Ave from Oak Park to the Village. Too dangerous to bike. We have to go down to Fair Oaks, then take Traffic Way/Bridge St to get to and from the Village by bike.
» Grand ave, Halcyon, Oak park due to the excessive speed of cars and uncontrolled right and left turns. I have had a number of near misses crossing Grand ave on foot at night it is wide and well lit car’s turning left just don’t see you
» Grand Ave, too dangerous
» Grand ave. Traffic noise
» Grand Ave. is a mess. High speeds, no bike infrastructure. » Grand Ave. No protection. Traffic moves too fast.
» W. Branch. No protection. Traffic moves too fast
» E. Branch. No dedicated space. Traffic is impatient and makes dangerous passes. » Brisco to Ocean View Elemetary. No lane. Traffic is impatient and makes dangerous passes.
» Fair Oaks near Harloe. The bike lane is in the door zone for all parked cars.
» Fair Oaks near AGHS. Traffic moves too fast, is typically distracted. » Grand Ave. Traffic is too fast and close to the sidewalk and bike lanes
» Grand Avenue - too noisy and cars move too quickly.
» Grand Avenue. Valley Road.
» Grand Avenue and Halcyon Road because there are sections without a bike lane and parking is next to bike lane so risk of someone opening their car door into a cyclist’s path.
» Grand street has no to minimal bike lane from the village » Grande Avenue and Branch - Too Dangerous
» Grand-too busy, too many traffic lights, no protected bike lane.

Branch Mill-too rough

212 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
» Halcyon - high car traffic
» Halcyon and highway 1 up to the Mesa
» Halcyon due to heavy traffic
» Hwy 1 to get from the mesa to anything off the mesa, or even just to JJs. no sidewalk and no side stripe area to do anything safely. many of us live diretly off hwy1 and no choice but to drive everywhere ...even just a short distance to JJs market.
» Hwy. 1 from Oceano to A.G.
» I do not bike Grand Avenue because it is dangerous. no bike lanes » I’m typically a thru-rider and use Branch St. to travel to Pismo or Grover, but volumes are pretty high and there isn’t much separation from vehicles. I avoid Grand and El Camino Real for the same reasons, even though they’re more direct links to certain places I bike. » Most of the city south of 101. Village could be much better but the slower traffic there helps a little bit.
» Mostly avoid the streets where there is no sidewalks. » No
» No
» No
» No, but it can feel unsafe
» Oak Park between Grand & James Way. Through the Village. Grand crossing 101. East on Grand crossing Elm
» The Bisco underpass is horrible for bikes. The light to go left from the bottom of St Pats to under the freeway does not turn for bikes.

We use this route to bike to Ocean View school with our kids and it is a dangerous spot.
» The crosswalk on Huasna to Strother Park. Tally Ho to Corbett Canyon Bridge. It would be nice if walking paths were extended and connected throughout the east side of Arroyo Grande. For example, sidewalks or walking paths should continue further east on Huasna and along Corbett Canyon and Carpenter Canyon to at least Royal Oaks Place.
» The turn between fair oaks ave and valley road where MY FRIEND GOT HIT BY A CAR because the cars in that area at the end of a school day aren’t very safe
» Traffic Way due to heavy traffic volume.
» W Branch/E Grand due to dangerous intersections. Corbett Canyon due to high speeds and no bike lane
» Walking- Halcyon because it needs more protected crosswalks.

Biking- Grand because of the lack of protected bike lane » West Branch Street in front of the Woman’s Club is rocky and full of ruts. I use the bike path.
» West Branch, due to lack of sidewalks
» Where no sidewalks
» Yes - West Branch street has no sidewalks from the village to Briscoe Road. The bike paths disappear when you go over the 101.

Need more crosswalks on Grand.
» Yes, Fair Oaks Avenue near the high school because of how fast people drive and the lack of paint on the street to see the bike lanes. People are also not very good and seeing where they are going so there have been many close calls.
» Yes, numerous streets around Harloe Elementary because the sidewalks are incomplete. Also hard to cross Fairoaks and Halcyon without feeling like you will be killed by a car.
» Yes, right outside of AGHS I will walk my bike across streets due to traffic congestion and lack of protected bike lanes. Additionally, outside of Harloe, I’ll walk my bike across streets to avoid crossing into main traffic. This is all when school first gets out, thus why it’s so busy.
» Yes. Elm Street does not have continuous sidewalks. Riding a bike on Grand is risky.

SURVEY QUESTION 14: Is there anything else you would like to add? » 101 is a major barrier for active transporation. Separated mult-use paths are much needed across bridges and along frontage roads to permit safe movement and access for bikes and peds.
» A designated or protected path from Huasna to the path at Shell beach would be AMAZING.
» Active transportation infrastructure is most effective when combined with efforts to slow down vehicle traffic. Bicycle Lanes should

APPENDIX 213
be located adjacent to the sidewalk, rather then between parking spaces and vehicle lanes.
» AG could be the ultimate 15 minute city if there was better infrastructure. We have a lot of good retail along with many local businesses. Citizens should not have to use a car to get everywhere to run errands, or take their kids to soccer practice.
» AG is VERY inconsistent in striping and maintaining their bike lanes.

Lanes start and stop all over the city. Seems to be a very low priority. A complete evaluation of all roads with a speed limit over 25 is needed.
» AG may want to consider adopting a Vision Zero goal through the AT plan.
» AG needs to step it up.
» Alternate routes like bike/ walk paths would be really helpful leading to schools. I bike with my son from Courtland and Grand all the way to Trivium (near AG high school). We pass Harloe on the way.

Most of the commute is without any sort of bike lane protection.

There are no bike lanes or walking paths that lead to Elm St Park.

AG high school has no protected pedestrian/bike paths. It would be wonderful to encourage more bike/walking. Currently the lack of pathways/protection makes the whole thing very unattractive for most people.
» Areas around schools MUST be prioritized for the sake of parents and kids walking and encouraging active transportation. Our kids need to know that they can walk in our community and get around without a car.
» Bike lane protection or separation is important.
» Connecting important places in the city (schools, grocery stores) through a fully connected and protected network should be the main priority of a ATP. See SLO’s approach to their ATP. » Frequently dropped bike lanes are sometimes worse than none at all due to frequent merging. Even if I am capable of biking in high stress roads as Enthused and Confident, it still shouldn’t be so stressful.
» From St Patrick school to library, sidewalk must be added. There are students that walk to the library weekly.
» I am concerned with our terrible roads, my kids are constantly getting hurt Stagecoach road and Plomo court in particular. Kids can’t play basketball or skate without badly hurting their knees » I can’t bike, but better/more and continuous bike paths would be nice.
» I think it’s great to accommodate bikers but not to the detriment of drivers
» I used to walk from the Village to the library, however the lack of sidewalks makes it more difficult as I get older
» I would like to see a sidewalk along Branch Street between the Village and the Library and up to the Brisco Exchange. » I would love to see safe bike lanes near schools.
» In the Village, pedestrians can cross at Nevada Street but there are no longer blinking lights on the street. Drivers are not looking at the blinking poles on the sidewalk. I have seen several near misses.

The blinking lights need to be placed visibly.
» Lighted crosswalks would be appreciated in the areas mentioned » More biking and walking paths would draw more tourists which I don’t like but then the city could stop raising our tax rates to live here and then we could build a new preschool and get young families to move here instead of retirees from the Valley » More traffic circles and lower speed limits on hwy 1 on the mesa where there is a lot of housing directly off the street » I was the student hit by a car outside of AGHS on December 4th.

Despite being extremely cautious (staying in the bike lanes, wearing a helmet, etc.) I was still sent to the ER from the impact, and the injuries will make for lifelong dentist appointments, scarring, and medical bills. I strongly believe in the need for protected bike lanes in school zones. There are many, many children just like me who are vulnerable to lifelong injuries if the issue is not addressed. » Organize more biking events through Parks & Rec, encourage community members to start biking clubs and support them through access to resources and assistance. Switch parking to the newer style: lane/parked car/bicycle lane/sidewalk

214 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
» Our street in particular is where we would like the cul de sac to have handicapped accessible sidewalks at beginning of street so that strollers are able to go over and seniors and families even bikes. We are having to walk to nearest home in beginning of street to be able to use their driveway to get our strollers off the sidewalk or elders use it to get off and continue walking. Sometimes if cars are parked out side of driveway it makes it hard for us and incoming traffic into street to see each other. This has become a high safety concern around the street
» Please add more continuous sidewalks, bike paths and crosswalks » Please add paved sidewalk on W. Branch Street from Bank of America to the library. » Please look at the amount of crosswalks on grand from oak park to east of the 101 on grand
» Separated bike lanes
» Sidewalks could use repair along huasna road across from the bus barn, lots of tree roots lifting up sidewalks.
» Sidewalks to the library
» Stop or protected crosswalk at Dodson and Halcyon
» Thank you for asking!
» Thank you for looking into this.
» Thanks for working on this!
» that MY FRIEND WAS HIT BY A CAR when she was on her bike, so just please make stuff safer
» there needs to be more trails And the city needs to put side walks in crown terrace and they need to clean up the over brown of plants onto the sidewalks
» There seems to be too much focus on the village and not enough to promote walking/biking west of the 101
» Too many traffic signals are not bike aware
» We are in desperate need of continuous sidewalks. Try walking along Oak Park from Grande to Branch st and count how many times you need to cross the street due to sidewalks ending. » We need a sidewalk between the village and the library. » We visit the region several times a year. We always travel by bike once we’re there. We’ve opted to spend more time and money in the cities that have focused on improving bike infrastructure. Because of that we’ve spent much more time and money in SLO rather than in AG. AG would be more attractive if the streets were safer for bikes.
» What bothers me the most is Halcyon Drive on way to hospital from either end. It is a total mess. Never lived before in a town where hospital streets were not given priority!!! if sick on way to ER someone could definitely have an accident. » Would love to see some options of the free bikes or ebikes to travel around the areas of the 5 cities.
» Yes! My neighborhood is a wonderful mix of single family homes, apartments, condos, and flag lots. However, it is a very short block with high density, for which the city has made no effort to address or mitigate the street and parking problems. The number of people using street parking instead of their own garages, carports, and driveways causes safety issues for people trying to enter traffic, as their vision of oncoming traffic, bicycles, walkers, skateboarders, etc. is blocked. There’s no where to put out your trash cans each week. Mail delivery is blocked by cars parked in front of mailboxes.

I’ve asked the city to provide me with information about the density of my neighborhood, so I could start an informed discussion with the city about the problems. The information was never provided. » Yes, a sign for pedistians to look both ways before crossing on Branch and Nevada. People cross the streets without looking and they jay walk all areas of Branch.

APPENDIX 215

STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS
STAKEHOLDER MEETING #1
Date: March 7, 2024 Location: Virtual via Zoom
Attendees:
» Planning Team: Staff from City of Arroyo Grande, KTUA, and CCTC » Stakeholders: Bike SLO County, Caltrans - District 5, City of Grover Beach - Planning Department, City of Pismo Beach - Planning Department, Five Cities Fire Authority, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA), South County Chambers of Commerce, and a local resident of Arroyo Grande.

Minutes
Introductions
The group introduced themselves, the organizations they represent, and their connection to Arroyo Grande.

Project Overview
KTUA provided an introductory presentation that provided an overview of stakeholder roles, the ATP, and progress to date.

Discussion Notes
KTUA facilitated an open discussion related to active transportation concerns and opportunities, as well as desired outcomes of the ATP.

Comments from the discussion are provided below.
» SLOCOG asked if the City has a Vision Zero plan or goal and a second question about what types of infrastructure investments could support a Vision Zero goal.
» The City responded there is no existing Vision Zero policy but that could be a recommendation as a result of the ATP.
» SLOCOG received an ATP grant to do a regional Vision Zero plan and mentioned that the outcome of the ATP will likely align with Vision Zero efforts and can support the case for additional funding sources.
» A local resident suggested that all signalized intersections be checked for bike sensitivity (implement bike signals or signal timing) on a regular basis. » RTA is interested in learning about what transit improvements are desired in Arroyo Grande that RTA can support.
» The City responded that it received feedback on transit and route improvements for first-mile-last-mile treatments. » Bike SLO County shared numerous opportunities and resources. » SLOCOG funds Bike SLO County for bicycle education programming, which includes upcoming programs at Harloe Elementary. Bike SLO County offered to get feedback from 4th and 5th graders, many of whom have never ridden a bicycle, at upcoming programs at Harloe Elementary and asked if the project team is using Strava Metro data.
» Bike SLO County listed high-stress areas, such as James Way and Halcyon.
» Bike SLO County suggested the consideration of the agricultural access road from Fair Oaks to Highway 1 to become a class I multi-use path as a safe route to school connection.
» South County Chambers of Commerce mentioned that hospitality employees and visitors often use transit and other nonmotorized forms of transportation.
» City of Pismo Beach asked about looking into existing conditions and maintenance on Oak Park Road. There is an opportunity for collaboration between the City of Pismo Beach and the City of Arroyo Grande on road improvements to Oak Park Road. » Caltrans D5 mentioned the importance of bicycle lanes and offered to respond to data requests and answer any project or grant-related questions.

Desired Outcomes of the ATP
» SLOCOG shared the desire for the ATP to result in safe routes to key destinations such as schools and parks.

216 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
» South County Chambers of Commerce mentioned that tourism is a big component to factor in to ensure that visitors feel comfortable walking, renting a bicycle, and taking the bus from their hotel to their destination.
» Bike SLO County would like to see recommended projects listed in order of priority to help the City allocate resources and funding to high-need projects.
» City of Grover Beach would like to see the slowing down of vehicle traffic along commercial corridors and the provision of increased priority for separated bicycle lanes.
» A local resident would like to see bicycle safety be a higher priority in Arroyo Grande and would like there to be more bicycle racks available to the public, particularly in front of businesses.

STAKEHOLDER MEETING #2
Date: May 2, 2024 Location: Virtual via Zoom
Attendees:
» Planning Team: Staff from City of Arroyo Grande, KTUA, and CCTC » Stakeholders: Bike SLO County, Caltrans - District 5, City of Grover Beach - Planning Department, City of Pismo Beach - Planning Department, Five Cities Fire Authority, San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA), South County Chambers of Commerce, and a local resident of Arroyo Grande.

Minutes
Project Update & Discussion
KTUA presented a community engagement update, an overview of active transportation infrastructure around Arroyo Grande schools, and an introduction to project prioritization criteria.

Discussion Notes
KTUA facilitated open discussion related to active transportation infrastructure around schools, as well as the prioritization criteria used to rank recommended bikeway projects. Comments from the discussion are provided below.

Active Transportation Infrastructure Around Schools
» Bike SLO County asked how funding is captured in the ATP and if it will align with previous planning efforts, such as the Halcyon Complete Streets Plan, rather than starting from scratch. » KTUA responded the team will review the HCSP to align efforts and perhaps add things missing.
» RTA asked how prioritization differs from each school and if each school will have a list of prioritized projects.
» KTUA responded that each school has different priorities, demographics, land use, and road characteristics that can affect the outcomes. This will be a collaboration with the City. » Bike SLO County asked the team to address deficient striping throughout the City, especially around schools.
» KTUA noted this and will discuss it with the planning team. » City of Grover Beach asked if the ATP will look at routes to Fairgrove Elementary because it is located in Grover Beach but may have youth traveling from Arroyo Grande.
» The City responded that this is a great comment and that the team will talk internally.

Prioritization Criteria
» Bike SLO County commented on the prioritization criteria and how it is interesting that Households with No Vehicles (HNV) and Collisions are weighted the highest. Bike SLO County asked if it is possible to have the police department provide enforcement statistics for speeding, running stop signs, etc.
» The City responded that infrastructure may not be the reason for collisions (rather causes could be DUIs or reckless driving) and requested to lower it.
» City of Grover Beach shared that they would like to see the weight for Transit stops/routes increased from 0.25 to 0.50 to help promote ridership.. » The City agreed with the City of Grover Beach as there is a strong transit network, but people need to access transit safely. » RTA mentioned that South County Transit is currently the healthPage 396 of 475 APPENDIX 217
iest transit system in SLO County and has recovered the best post-covid.
» Bike SLO County also agreed with weighing transit higher. » The City would like to see child density weighting increased to 0.5 because children cannot drive.
» Bike SLO County asked about the scoring rubric and if there is a fixed number that the criteria should add up to or does changing the weights affect the ratio. Bike SLO County also asked if the criteria can be re-ranked from highest to lowest and shared with the stakeholder group.
» RTA said senior density is ranked too low as there is a large senior population and recommended increasing it to 0.5.
» South County Chambers of Commerce agreed as the population is only growing. » City of Grover Beach shared that there is a more localized, regional DAC map for SLO County that could be added as a prioritization criterion. to this table.
» KTUA responded that we typically focus on statewide tools and we’d love to review the tool.
» South County Chambers of Commerce said Arroyo Grande is working on updating their General Plan and Development code and believes that East Grand Avenue is a significant part. South County Chambers of Commerce asked if that been considered as well. » KTUA answered that yes, East Grand Avenue will be a big part of the ATP.
» A local resident asked if the position of the pedestrian crossing buttons was part of the ATP because the magnetic sensor usually doesn’t sense bicycles, which forces bicyclists to get off of their bikes.
» KTUA mentioned this is slightly out of the scope of this ATP, but it can be a recommendation in the report.
» City of Grover Beach shared additional regional resources, including the SLOCOG Housing and Access Plan and the 2050 Regional Growth Plan.

STAKEHOLDER MEETING #3
Date: July 30, 2024 Location: Virtual via Zoom
Attendees:
» Planning Team: Staff from City of Arroyo Grande, KTUA, and CCTC » Stakeholders: Bike SLO County, Caltrans - District 5, City of Grover Beach - Planning Department, City of Pismo Beach - Planning Department, Five Cities Fire Authority, San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG), San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA), and South County Chambers of Commerce.

Minutes
Project Update
KTUA provided an overview of project progress and recently completed outreach events.

Draft Bikeway Network
KTUA presented the draft bikeway network, including an overview of the methodology and considerations that went into developing bikeway recommendations. Stakeholders were invited to ask questions and provide feedback.

Discussion Notes
» SLOCOG asked about regional continuity and used Oak Park as an example. KTUA responded that Grover added Class IIB and it made sense to continue it. The proposed Class IV segments on Oak Park can be substituted with a Class IIB as an interim treatment. » SLOCOG also asked if traffic volumes were considered. KTUA responded they were considered and reviewed while bikeways were being recommended.
» RTA asked about any community push back on the bicycle network.

KTUA expressed that so far, there has been support for bicycle facilities and mentioned the next outreach event will be held on September 27th where the team will share bikeway recommendations and solicit feedback.

218 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
» South County Chamber of Commerce asked about the existing number of bicycle facilities. KTUA said there are 15.5 miles of existing bicycle facilities and the draft bikeway network proposes 33 miles of new bicycle facilities, for a total of 49 miles. » Bike SLO County mentioned that according to City Ratings, Arroyo Grande ranks below the state and national averages and suggesting including this in the narrative. Bike SLO County also expressed the enhanced mileage of bikeways is promising.
» Bike SLO County also mentioned that they feel the recent repaving of Branch through the Village increases stress by pushing cyclists towards cars.
» City of Grover Beach suggested adding icons for places people might enjoy on a bike such as where to grab ice cream as a fun, easy-to-understand revision for the public.
» SLOCOG mentioned that Branch Mill is a low volume, narrow road and is surprised that it is receiving a Class IV. KTUA responded this would require some regrading or road work to accommodate. SLOCOG appreciated this route as a regional, scenic bikeway. » CCTC noted that Branch Mill is not in County plans.
» SLOCOG asked if the SLOCOG Identified Projects layer came from the Regional Transportation Plan, specifically noting the Branch Mill project. KTUA responded yes and that Branch Mill is labeled as “Unconstrained Projects.”
» City of Grover Beach asked if pedestrian amenities are considered as part of this. KTUA responded that this will primarily come from the Safe Routes to Schools plan.
» SLOCOG suggested looking at lower cost amenities implementable at a wider scale such as Lead Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs). KTUA confirmed the team plans to do this alongside quick-build solutions. » Bike SLO County asked if the team can share the slide deck and the bikeway mileage statistics. KTUA confirmed this as an action item. » SLOCOG suggested splitting the SLOCOG Identified Corridors layers by “Constrained” and “Unconstrained” projects to be clear. » Bike SLO County asked what type of feedback is needed from stakeholders and asked for a list of roads with treatments. KTUA mentioned anything from a section of a corridor to sticky notes on a PDF, or notes in excel format.

STAKEHOLDER MEETING #4
Date: September 26, 2024
Location: Arroyo Grande City Council Chambers
Attendees: Bike SLO County, Caltrans - District 5, City of Grover Beach, and local resident member.

In lieu of a standard stakeholder meeting, stakeholders were invited to participate in Community Workshop #2. Stakeholder input was collected along with input from members of the public and can be found under Community Workshop #2.

STAKEHOLDER MEETING #5
Date: November 25, 2024
Location: Virtual via Zoom
Attendees:
» Planning Team: Staff from City of Arroyo Grande, KTUA, and CCTC » Stakeholders: Bike SLO County, Five Cities Fire Authority, and South County Chambers of Commerce.

Minutes
Project Thank Yous
KTUA thanked the stakeholders for their continued participation and consideration for the Arroyo Grande ATP.

Project Recap
» KTUA summarized the extensive community engagement conducted throughout the project and from the latest Fall events at the Harvest Festival and final workshop.
» KTUA walked through the organization of the draft ATP. KTUA highlighted the three projects that received planning-level design recommendations and the Safe Routes to Schools cut sheets.

APPENDIX 219
Open Discussion
» South County Chambers of Commerce thanked the group and said they learned a lot. They were part of this process for Grover Beach which is paired with a class from Cal Poly SLO. South County Chambers of Commerce plans to attend the Planning Commission meeting for the ATP. » Bike SLO County mentioned the while quick turnaround made it difficult to finish the review at the time requested, that the ATP is very impressive, and they like how community and stakeholder feedback was incorporated showing that the team listened. Bike SLO County shared that the priorities are outstanding, and the plan is very comprehensive. Bike SLO County also shared constructive feedback and general comments for the team listed below. » A cost scale (such as under 1 million dollars or between 1-5 million dollars) may help the City identify where to place priorities with limited funding.
» They did not see raised crosswalks pinpointed, however, it was in the toolkit, and is okay with this.
» There is debate about the effectiveness of Class IIIs and recent literature calls for roadways 20-25mph or less so they recommend more clearly defining this. » They appreciate the collaboration with Bike SLO County. » They would like to see recommendations about quick-builds or the use of bollards as an interim step to implementation. » The tone of the ATP should emphasize the shared responsibility and involvement from all roadway users. It’s not taking the vehicle world and making it safer for bikes, it’s that we’re all in this together. This is a document for the future so they recommend being bold and not writing as a vehicle-first community. » KTUA mentioned there’s a placeholder in the beginning for a message from the Planning Director and this could be a great place to set the tone. Bike SLO County agreed.
» Other recommendations include replicating the San Balto bike bus for the ‘Education & Encouragement’ for schools and driver Education safety, specifically for young drivers.
» Page 177 – They like the ATP promotes Walk to School Days partnering with Lucia Mar and recommends the Rideshare SRTS program by SLOCOG which promotes walk and bike to school days. The website shows Harloe ES and Fairgrove ES already partake.
» Under the ‘Open Street Events’ section, they recommend adding ‘Kidical Mass’ bike rides.
» Oceanview, Harloe, and Fairgrove ES have had the Bike SLO County on-bike program over the last five years.

220 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ONLINE COMMENT MAP
Table A-14: Online Map Comments

LOCATION COMMENT CATEGORY
Andre Drive Sidewalk has buckled up at 145 Andre Dr. A/G Missing Sidewalk Arroyo Grande Creek
A formal way to cross the creek in this area would allow kids near the village, Stagecoach, and Tanner areas reach each other. Other The idea for a bridge here is still a good idea. In general, AG could leverage cut throughs for bike/ped between developments better. Other
Arroyo Grande High School A pedestrian walkway to school in this area instead of Other Ash Street Bike lane exists in Grover, ends in AG Bicyclist Concern Bakeman Lane There's a trail here useful for avoiding Elm and Oak Park Other Corbett Canyon Road
Dangerous. People drive fast Traffic Calming needed
It would be nice to connect the Tally Ho bike lanes to Gularte with a short off-road path Bicyclist Concern Roundabout opportunity? Traffic Calming needed
Dodson Way All along Dodson Missing Sidewalk
E. Branch Street
Add safe walking/biking to the Village Pedestrian Concern Bikes are allowed on this trail, but you didn't create a curb ramp to access it, and you put up a sign saying "NO BIKING ON SIDEWALK" directly in front of it. Other
Safe Routes still an issue here despite bike lane addition Bicyclist Concern These parking spots at the steepest part of the hill are maddening for bike riders, even experienced ones. Bicyclist Concern E. Cherry Avenue
This section uses a concrete apron instead of an inside bike lane stripe because of different water collection area, and the result is that these trucks don't park close enough to the curb. Bicyclist Concern No comment. Missing Curb Ramp /
ADA truncated domes
El Camino Real
Can you combine through/right or through/left (and change signal operation) to fit a bike lane (and widen the existing bike lane)? Bicyclist Concern
It's important for bike access in this area to get better so people can reach the Park&Ride safely Bus concern The are some places where the thermoplastic lasts. This seems like just paint because it has faded so many times, even on the side without buses. Other
This bike lane ending is improperly signed to the right of a right turn lane with no protection or merge warning. You should have enough ROW to create a protected corner instead of a long "sandwich" bike lane. Bicyclist Concern This building was built in 2015 but the bike lane was not added on the whole frontage. Bicyclist Concern

APPENDIX 221
Elm Street
Parking blocks sight distance Other
The lack of bike lane in this segment is silly, and useless given the single travel lanes north and south of this segment. Bicyclist Concern This section was repaved in the 2012 paving project but bike lanes were not provided. Need to make sure all opportunities are used. Bicyclist Concern
No comment. Missing Sidewalk
No comment. ADA Concern
Fair Oaks Avenue Let bikes-only use this sidewalk instead of blocking it with gates Bicyclist Concern Fair View Drive Sidewalk incomplete. In vicinity of elementary school Missing Sidewalk Farroll Avenue
Bike lanes should still be able to fit up to here. Further down consider 1 side parking to allow lower traffic stress for kids going to Harloe while still meeting parking needs. Bicyclist Concern There are sections of Farroll near apartments where the parking is needed, but there are other sections without any homes fronting the street where the parking is not used at all, contributing to speeding. Consider making adjustments to reduce speeding and improve comfort and safety.

Bicyclist Concern
Garden Street No comment. Missing Sidewalk
Grand Avenue
Narrow sidewalks with no buffer between the traffic and pedestrians Pedestrian Concern Taking a bus from central AG to SLO involves taking the local bus to Pismo instead of transferring here. Part of that has to do with the lack of crosswalk and bus stop here. That could be improved. Bus concern There are many of these right turn lanes that could be continuous bike lanes. Cars are supposed to merge into bike lanes anyways but it at least gives a clue to drivers to look. Other No bike lane despite all the red curbing just for these 3-4 parking spaces? Bicyclist Concern No bike lanes on any 101 crossing (in both directions) Bicyclist Concern This is signed as a bike route but has what looks like a bike lane, which causes confusion. Also there are signs that say "Bike Route Ends" which don't really make sense. Bicyclist Concern This shopping center is an example of a miss on bike parking. What bike parking exists is often just 1 per building, so people are still locking to the Starbucks railing instead of the bike rack. Bicyclist Concern Halcyon Road
No comment. Missing Curb Ramp /
ADA truncated domes
No comment. Missing Sidewalk
Haven Court These driveway types are really nice for people in wheelchairs. If runoff concerns could be addressed, the driveway could be extended into the street where people can't park anyways so the sidewalk is flat and the driveway isn't too sharp for drivers. Other Huasna Road
Blinking beacon light? Traffic Calming needed
High vehicle speed, wide street, nearby park Pedestrian Concern Need to install flashing beacons and traffic calming measures such as bulbouts Pedestrian Concern Sidewalk missing Missing Sidewalk
Stop signs with solar lights Traffic Calming needed
No comment. Pedestrian Concern

222 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
James Way
1) Trail Access comment type doesn't work right, 2) Trails don't have curb ramps to easily access Other Add curb ramp Other
Linda Drive Consider moving the barriers around to allow bikes to go both ways here, to avoid Grand Other Nelson Street No ADA path to access this crosswalk ADA Concern Oak Park Boulevard
Probably the scariest place for bikes. Uphill, no lights so very fast traffic, no bike lanes Bicyclist Concern Transition from Bike Lane to Bike Route (Bikes May Use Full Lane) is not well defined Bicyclist Concern Oak Park Plaza
No curb ramp to use this perfectly good bridge Bicyclist Concern No comment. Missing Curb Ramp /
ADA truncated domes
Other Is this a bike ped path or fire only? Other
Platino Lane If this section of path to Platino became public then the path on Corbet Canyon could be even shorter. Other Printz Road Would be nice to route through for bikes to Printz Bicyclist Concern Short Street Convert to pedestrian only Pedestrian Concern Station Way
Even if this location doesn't meet warrants for a crosswalk, the stop line locations and corner radii contribute to confusion about where pedestrians are supposed to be and where people are supposed to yield. Pedestrian Concern No ADA ramp, if coming from south, must exist into parking aisle and wheelchair through rest of complex ADA Concern No comment. Missing Sidewalk
Strother Park Strother Park Common destination
Tally Ho Road Similar, no access ramp or turn lane to access the trail, so the only alternative is using the driveway way up the street and riding backwards on the sidewalk. Other
The Pike High speed traffic and small bike lanes Bicyclist Concern Traffic Way
Bus stop not ADA accessible Bus concern
High travel speeds and very wide area to cross Pedestrian Concern Just a note, you have a lot of "Bike Lane Ends" signs that are not actually true, such as here. Other Lack of ADA path into commercial area except by using wheelchair in the street ADA Concern This crosswalk and push button misses quite a few ADA features ADA Concern Traffic way bridge replacement project as currently proposed makes no significant improvement to bike LTS. Consider adjustments to lower LTS such as shared use path, raised bikeway, or otherwise. Bicyclist Concern Vernon Street There is no safe way to travel by wheelchair from the Village to the Woman's Center ADA Concern Via Bandolero Add curb ramp Other

APPENDIX 223
W. Branch Street
Bike lane ends on significant uphill grade without signage or sharrows Bicyclist Concern Bus stop and curb ramp ADA Concern
Bus stop not ADA Bus concern
Can you fit an uphill bike lane? Downhill is usually OK Bicyclist Concern Drive lane is 24', bike lane is 4'. This speaks to outdated engineering design guidelines that defaults to maximum car lane width and minimum bike lane width. It should be the other way around. Bicyclist Concern Even if the storm drain grate is designed correctly, the concrete seam is an issue, and the asphalt and concrete are usually at different angles also. Bicyclist Concern
Missing sidewalk adjacent to non-ADA bus stop Missing Sidewalk W. Branch Street The city standard design includes these concrete aprons which stick out into the bike lane. When the asphalt-concrete joint wears out over time, this becomes a problem Bicyclist Concern W. Branch Street The uphill bike lane isn't wide enough for how steep the hill is, to account for bike rocking. Bicyclist Concern Waller Place
Another example of the concrete apron / asphalt seam cracking. The thermoplastic also cracks at any seam. Bicyclist Concern Mailboxes not ADA accessible Other
Woodland Drive
This fire access gate is not accessible to bikes with trailers or trikes. Bicyclist Concern Woodland would be a decent bike route if not for crossings at Grand and Fair Oaks. Bicyclist Concern

224 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ARROYO GRANDE GENERAL PLAN
UPDATE
Transportation-related input collected during the community engagement process for the Arroyo Grande General Plan Update is summarized below. The information below is from the document titled Community Engagement Summary Report: City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Update prepared by Mintier Harnish for the City of Arroyo Grande.

The full report can be found at: https://planarroyogrande.com/

PROBLEMS
Active Transportation
Several participants identified a lack of safe pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure as a major problem in the community. The lack of sidewalks in certain areas make it dangerous for pedestrians, discouraging people from walking. Some participants expressed their desire for enhanced active transportation infrastructure along school routes, advocating for features like dedicated bike lanes and crosswalks equipped with flashing light beacons to encourage reduced traffic speed near educational institutions.

Additionally, some individuals expressed the view that Arroyo Grande lacks sufficient bike lanes throughout the city. Specific areas identified for active transportation improvements include the Brisco underpass and W. Branch Street. The community also identified the lack of bike routes to Paulding Middle School and the absence of sidewalks along routes to Ocean View Elementary as areas for improvements.

Parking
Some respondents identified the shortage of parking in the central part of town and challenges with parking enforcement as an issue in Arroyo Grande. Multiple respondents commented on the general lack of parking throughout the city, especially in the Village, including handicap spaces. A few respondents commented on issues with illegal parking, specifically on El Camino Real between Faeh Avenue and Bennett Avenue, where motor homes, trailers, and cars park for extended periods of time.

Traffic
The most commonly reported issue in Arroyo Grande is traffic and congestion. Some of the comments in this category included references to active transportation infrastructure including sidewalks and bike lanes; however, vehicular traffic and roadway infrastructure was the primary concern among these respondents. Many of the comments in this category reported on traffic issues observed citywide, while others reported specific roads or intersections that have daily congestion, such as the Fair Oaks Avenue exit off Highway 101, and Highway 101 near the El Camino Real exit. Respondents also noted congestion at the Cabrillo Highway and South Halcyon Road intersection, and although it is located outside of city limits, serves as a main point of vehicular entry from the south. The most reported location for frequent high-volume traffic is the Brisco Road and West Branch Street exit off of Highway 101. There were also numerous comments reporting roadway safety issues and reckless driving. Branch Street running through the Village was frequently cited for safety issues due to high vehicle speeds and the presence of trucks traveling through an area with a high concentration of pedestrians.

OPPORTUNITIES
Active Transportation
Respondents expressed a desire for enhanced active transportation infrastructure in Arroyo Grande. They believe that improving bicycle infrastructure could alleviate traffic congestion and enhance safety, particularly on school routes. Specific suggestions for bicycle infrastructure improvements were made for Corbett Canyon Road, Branch Street through the Village, and Tally Ho Road. Pedestrian infrastructure improvements were also recommended, with a focus on East Branch Street, the Village, and walking paths. Additional suggestions included improving signage along the Grace Lane Trail.

Parking
Respondents in Arroyo Grande highlighted the need for enhanced parking infrastructure and design. Suggestions included the construction of a sizable parking garage in the Village, with a specific mention

APPENDIX 225
of the parcel near Klondike Pizza. Additionally, two comments advocated for replacing street parking with parklets and enhancing pedestrian infrastructure. To address the potential loss of on-street parking, there was a suggestion to expand the existing parking lots behind businesses along West Branch Street. Another participant emphasized the importance of maintaining free parking and improving directional signage for existing parking lots.

Traffic and Roadway Infrastructure
Many participants suggested opportunities for improved traffic and roadway infrastructure, especially for citywide roadway improvements, traffic reduction, and improved street safety. Several comments discussed Brisco Road between West Branch Street and El Camino Real. There were also comments discussing opportunities to bypass West Branch Street and reduce traffic through the Village. Additional comments included the need for improved signage at the Huasna Road and Corbett Canyon Road intersection and improvements to the Bridge Street and Branch Street intersection.

VISION FOR THE FUTURE
“In the future, Arroyo Grande will… be easier to get around without a car.”
Transportation
Community members in Arroyo Grande share a vision for the city’s transportation system, emphasizing both active transportation and general roadway improvements. They aspire to transform the city into a more bicycle and pedestrian-friendly community, reducing dependence on cars. This vision includes crucial enhancements to pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure such as bike lanes, sidewalks, and trails, promoting a healthier and sustainable urban lifestyle. Simultaneously, the community envisions safe, efficient, and well-maintained roadways. This involves addressing issues like potholes, and improving freeway interchanges, high-volume intersections, and traffic signals to alleviate congestion and enhance safety for all road users.

I LOVE ARROYO GRANDE BECAUSE…
Walkability
Residents appreciate the city’s walkable nature, recognizing it as one of its most commendable features. This quality not only fosters a dynamic and active community but also contributes to the overall appeal of Arroyo Grande. The emphasis on walkability signifies a commitment to creating an environment where residents can easily navigate on foot, fostering a sense of connection, vibrancy, and community engagement.

226 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

APPENDIX C - CALTRANS GUIDANCE
The ATP was funded by Caltrans and administered by Caltrans District 5. Caltrans District 5 staff reviewed the ATP and provided the following guidance for the City to reference during the ATP implementation:

General
» Any proposed improvements on the State Highway System, including ramp intersections and overcrossings/undercrossings, are conceptual and will require a safety, operational, and/or warrant analysis prior to any Caltrans approval.
» All active transportation network(s) that cross or tie into State facilities (interchanges, ramps intersections, freeways, or highways) need to be consistent with Caltrans Director Policy DP-36 (Safe System Approach) and DP-37 (Active Transportation).
» The Cities of Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, and Pismo Beach should coordinate when planning, designing, and implementing active transportation infrastructure to eliminate gaps in active transportation networks and ensure facilities in the three cities eventually connect to serve both tourists and residents.

Pedestrian Facilities
» Any pedestrian hybrid beacon planned will need to be warranted per CA-MUTCD Chapter 4F.
» Recommendations regarding parking around/adjacent to crosswalk facilities must be consistent with AB 413.

Bicycle Facilities & Use
» Bike detections must be provided in the bike lane design when the lane approaches any signalized intersection per California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Section 4D.105. » Typical bike lane design shall be in accordance with Highway Design Manual (HDM) Section 403.6.
» Contact Caltrans Traffic Safety for any questions about bike green pavement markings, striping, and signing.
» Off-tracking of design vehicle must be checked with the bike lane to ensure the vehicle off-tracking does not overlap the bicycle path.

All design vehicle checks shall be in accordance with HDM Topic 404.
» Per the California Vehicle Code (CVC) a bicycle is a non-motorized vehicle and must obey all Streets and Highway Codes, California Vehicles Codes, and share the road with other road users in a safe and considerate manner like any other vehicles on the road.

Bicyclists have the same rights and responsibilities as other drivers.

Also see CA DMV Driver Handbook, Bicycles section.
» California Vehicle Codes pertaining to the operations of nonelectric bicycles and electric bicycles include: DIVISION 1. WORDS AND PHRASES DEFINED [100 - 681] (Division 1 enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch. 3.) Section 312.5. Electric Bike Defined VEH ARTICLE

4. Operation of Bicycles [21200 - 21214] (Article 4 added by Stats. 1963, Ch. 479) Section 21201., Section 21206., and Section 21207.5.

Roadway & Intersection Modifications
» For any existing intersection that has a higher than Statewide average pedestrian or bicyclist crash rate, an innovative and safer intersection control type (ISOAP process would be required if the intersection is a State-owned intersection) should be considered to improve the safety performance and mobility of these intersections. » If a roundabout is desired and becomes the preferred intersection control type on the State-owned intersection, all roundabout design standards shall follow HDM 405.10 and NCHRP 672.
» If a lane reduction is desired on a State-owned roadway, all lane width designs shall be in accordance with HDM Index 301.1. » If a turning lane width reduction is desired at a State-owned roadway section or intersection, lane width reduction design should be in accordance with HDM Section 405.2 & 405.3.
» Any reduction in an existing two-way left turn lane (TWLTL) shall be in accordance with HDM 405.2(4). The minimum width shall not be less than 12 feet per HDM Index 301.1.
» Physical traffic calming measures should factor in Truck (Medium & Heavy Duty) Mobility (Turning, Width, & Height), especially along corridors that have higher truck traffic, to avoid inhibiting the flow of traffic (i.e., motorized vehicles, bicyclists, pedestrians, etc.) if they

APPENDIX 227

APPENDIX D - PRIORITY PROJECT CONCEPTUAL DRAWINGS
Pages 228 through 247 contain planning-level conceptual drawings and cost estimates for the ATP’s three priority projects (Table A-15). The conceptual drawings can be used by the City to apply for and secure grant funding. All improvements shown in the conceptual drawings are subject to further evaluation. The conceptual drawings should not be viewed as the ultimate solution, but are indicative of how active transportation principles can be implemented to create safer streets for bicyclists and pedestrians. As the City begins the construction design process, the conceptual drawings presented in this ATP may be modified based on considerations for cost, maintenance, safety, feasibility, and availability of adequate right-of-way to install the improvements.

Additionally, the City will need to coordinate with a Caltrans project development team for all proposed projects within the Caltrans right-of-way, including along the Fair Oaks Avenue overcrossing and East Grand Avenue overcrossing. Any proposed improvements on the State Highway System are conceptual and will require a safety, operational, and/or warrant analysis prior to any Caltrans approval.

Table A-15: Priority Projects
STREET

BETWEEN

LENGTH (MILES) FROM TO
E. Grand Avenue Oak Park Boulevard Branch Street 1.68
Elm Street Linda Drive City Limit 1.05
Fair Oaks Avenue Elm Street Traffic Way 1.59

COST ESTIMATES
Tables A-16 through A-18 provide planning-level cost estimates for the three conceptual drawings. Unit costs are based on expected labor and material costs plus percent markups for the following: mobilization (5 percent), traffic control (8 percent), design (10 percent), contingency (30 percent), and inflation to 2030 (3 to 4 percent per year). Costs are based on similar projects from agencies across the region and State. These costs are to be used for planning purposes only and are subject to further evaluation.

228 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

COUNTERMEASURE UNIT COST UM QTY LENGTH WIDTH ESTIMATED
COST
Concrete or Pavement Construction (low cost options use pavement markings) Remove/Reconstruct Existing Medians $62,866.81 LS 1 $62,866.81 Install Landscaping $31,433.41 LS 1 $31,433.41
Widen Elm Street to Brisco $2,514.67 LF 250 $628,668.13 Install Median (Rena to El Camino Real) $251.47 LF 1,350 $339,480.79 Install Tactile Domes $628.67 EA 28 $17,602.71
Install Curb Ramps $12,573.36 EA 2 $25,146.73
Grinding $31,433.41 LS 1 $31,433.41
Slurry Seal $2.10 SF 8640 60 $1,086,338.54
Install Protected Intersection (Elm) $1,257,336 LS 1 $1,257,336.27 Bell Street Intersection Crosswalk $125,734 LS 1 $125,733.63 Install Landscaping $188,600 LS 1 $188,600.44
Pavement Markings
Install Class IV Separated Bikeway $314,334.07 MI 1.35 $424,350.99 Thermplastic Striping $50.29 LF 8,000 $402,347.61
Thermoplastic Arrows and Symbols $314.33 EA 200 $62,866.81 Green Bicycle Lane Markings $25.15 SF 667 6 $100,637.19 Signs or Signal Infrastructure
Install Lighting (Crosswalks) $18,860.04 EA 4 $75,440.18 Install RRFB $31,433.41 EA 2 $62,866.81
Install Roadside Signs $628.67 EA 75 $47,150.11
Traffic Signal Installation (El Camino Real) $1,257,336.27 LS 1 $1,257,336.27 Traffic Signal Upgrades $62,866.81 EA 4 $251,467.25
Traffic Signal Timing $31,433.41 LS 1 $31,433.41
Install Pedestrian Scale Lighting $1,257,336 LS 1 $1,257,336.27 Total $7,767,873.76
UM=Unit of Measure, EA=Each, SF=Square Feet, LF=Linear Feet, LS=Lump Sum Note: Cost estimates are provided from Oak Park Boulevard to El Camino Real because a traffic study is needed east of El Camino Real.

Table A-16: Cost Estimate: East Grand Avenue (Oak Park Boulevard to El Camino Real)

APPENDIX 229
Table A-17: Cost Estimate: Elm Street (Linda Drive to Paul Place)

COUNTERMEASURE UNIT COST UM QTY LENGTH WIDTH ESTIMATED
COST
Concrete or Pavement Construction (low cost options use pavement markings) Curb Ramp $11,760.00 EA 39 $458,640.00
Concrete Sidewalk $33.60 SF 1,601 10 $537,936.00
Pavement Markings
High Visibility Crosswalks $5,880.00 EA 25 $147,000.00
Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane (2 lines-crosshatch-both sides of road) $42.00 LF 4,700 $197,400.00 Class III Bicycle Sharrows $504.00 LF 1,200 $6,048.00
Parallel Parking (2 white lines) $16.80 LF 4,700 $78,960.00 Bicycle/Vehicle Conflict Markings $201.60 LF 2,200 $443,520.00 Bicycle Green Box Segment $126.00 LF 250 $31,500.00
Vehicle Lane Striping (general lane solid or dashed) $16.80 LF 4,700 $78,960.00 Left Turn Lane (road marking line at intersection) $4,200.00 EA 6 $25,200.00 Total $2,005,164.00
UM=Unit of Measure, EA=Each, SF=Square Feet, LF=Linear Feet, LS=Lump Sum

230 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

COUNTERMEASURE UNIT COST UM QTY LENGTH WIDTH ESTIMATED
COST
Concrete or Pavement Construction (low cost options use pavement markings) Modern Roundabout $840,000.00 EA 1 $840,000.00
Curb Ramp $11,760.00 EA 17 $199,920.00
Curb and Gutter pan (concrete) $117.60 LF 5,100 $599,760.00 Landscape Plant Irrigation $25.20 SF 5,000 4 $504,000.00 Pavement Markings
High Visibility Crosswalks $5,880.00 EA 10 $58,800.00
Class II Bicycle Lane (1 line - both sides of road) $16.80 LF 900 $15,120.00 Class IIB Buffered Bicycle Lane (2 lines - crosshatch - one side or road) $21.84 LF 2,500 $54,600.00 Class III Bicycle Sharrows $504.00 LF 500 $2,520.00
Class IV Separated Bikeway (3 lines - crosshatch - one side of road) $33.60 LF 2,500 $84,000.00 Parallel Parking (2 white lines) $16.80 LF 1,000 $16,800.00 Bicycle/Vehicle Conflict Markings $201.60 LF 1,000 $201,600.00 Bicycle Solid Green box segment $126.00 LF 50 $6,300.00 Vehicle Lane Striping (general lane solid or dashed) $16.80 LF 3,500 $58,800.00 Signs or Signal Infrastructure
Street Lighting $13,440.00 EA 15 $201,600.00
Total $2,843,820.00
UM=Unit of Measure, EA=Each, SF=Square Feet, LF=Linear Feet, LS=Lump Sum Note: Cost estimates are provided from Elm Street to Valley Road because a traffic study is needed east of Valley Road.

Table A-18: Cost Estimate: Fair Oaks Avenue (Elm Street to Valley Road)

APPENDIX 231
Page intentionally left blank.

232 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 412 of 475

234 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 414 of 475

236 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN Page 416 of 475 APPENDIX 237
Modify traffic signal and timing (i.e., reflective backplates, push buttons, leading pedestrian intervals, clearance values, etc.).

Consider protected intersection at Elm Street. Widening and median reconstruction required.

Proposed bicycle sharrow markings and
regulatory signage for Class III bicycle route.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes.

Green striping and high-visibility crosswalks
to be added at major intersections.

Consider a road diet from Grand Avenue to Ash
Street to increase space for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities while maintaining on-street parking.

238 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes.

Green striping and high-visibility crosswalks
to be added at major intersections.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes.

Green striping and high-visibility crosswalks
to be added at major intersections.

Consider a road diet from Grand Avenue to Ash
Street to increase space for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities while maintaining on-street parking.

Consider a road diet from Grand Avenue to Ash
Street to increase space for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities while maintaining on-street parking.

APPENDIX 239
Proposed curb extensions, high-visibility
crosswalks, green striping, and wayfinding
signage.

Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

Install green striping along transit stops. Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

Proposed high-visibility crosswalks,
green striping, wayfinding signage,
and missing curb ramps.

240 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Proposed curb extensions, high-visibility
crosswalks, green striping, and wayfinding
signage.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes.

Green striping and high-visibility crosswalks
to be added at major intersections.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes.

Green striping and high-visibility crosswalks
to be added at major intersections.

Install missing sidewalks and
curb ramps along corridor.

Consider a road diet from Farroll Avenue to The
Pike to increase space for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities while maintaining on-street parking.

Consider a road diet from Farroll Avenue to The
Pike to increase space for bicycle and pedestrian
facilities while maintaining on-street parking.

APPENDIX 241
Proposed redesign of intersection to improve
safety and comfort includes removal of rightturn slip lane and the addition of signage, green striping, and high-visibility crosswalks.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle lanes. Green
striping to be added at major intersections and
transit stops.

Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

242 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Proposed high-visibility crosswalks,
green striping, wayfinding signage,
and missing curb ramps.

Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

Proposed high-visibility crosswalks,
green striping, and curb ramps at
intersections.

APPENDIX 243
A roundabout will be installed
at Halcyon Road as part of the
Halcyon Complete Streets Project.

Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

Existing Class II bicycle lanes.

City to coordinate with SLO RTA
to relocate existing transit stop to
accommodate proposed roundabout.

Install green striping along transit stops.

Proposed high-visibility crosswalks
and green striping at intersections.

244 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Consider installing
improvements for
safe pedestrian
crossing at
Woodland Drive.

Consider a road diet from Woodland Drive to Valley Road to increase space for bicycle, pedestrian, and urban
greening facilities while maintaining on-street parking on south/east side of Fair Oaks Avenue.

Proposed Class II bicycle lanes.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle
lanes or Class IV separated bikeways.

Green striping to be added at major
intersections and transit stops.

Proposed high-visibility
crosswalks, green striping, and
curb ramps at intersections.

APPENDIX 245
Consider a protected
intersection or a roundabout.

Install a speed feedback
sign to alert drivers heading
eastbound toward Arroyo
Grande High School.

Consider a road diet from Woodland Drive to Valley Road to increase space for bicycle, pedestrian, and urban
greening facilities while maintaining on-street parking on south/east side of Fair Oaks Avenue.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle
lanes or Class IV separated bikeways.

Green striping to be added at major
intersections and transit stops.

Consider a road diet from Woodland Drive to Valley Road to increase space for bicycle, pedestrian, and urban
greening facilities while maintaining on-street parking on south/east side of Fair Oaks Avenue.

Proposed Class IIB buffered bicycle
lanes or Class IV separated bikeways.

Green striping to be added at major
intersections and transit stops.

Install green striping along transit stops.

246 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Future development along Fair Oaks Avenue should integrate active transportation facilities, including safe bicycle and pedestrian connections to Arroyo Grande High School.

Note: The City is exploring intersection improvements
at the entrance of the school parking lot.

Future development along Fair Oaks Avenue should integrate active transportation facilities, including safe bicycle and pedestrian connections to Arroyo Grande High School. Coordinate improvements along Fair Oaks Avenue with any future modifications to the U.S. 101 off-ramp.

Conduct a traffic study between Valley Road and Traffic Way to explore options for improving bicycle and pedestrian safety. Coordinate with a Caltrans project development team for any portions of the traffic study within the Caltrans right-of-way, including the Fair Oaks Avenue overcrossing.

Conduct a traffic study between Valley Road and Traffic Way to explore options for improving bicycle and pedestrian safety. Coordinate with a Caltrans project development team for any portions of the traffic study within the Caltrans right-of-way, including the Fair Oaks Avenue overcrossing.

Install LED stop signs.

APPENDIX 247
Page intentionally left blank.

248 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

APPENDIX E - POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES
Each year, federal, state, and local government agencies invest millions of dollars in active transportation projects nationwide. Table A-19 contains an extensive list of potential federal, state, and local funding opportunities that may be used for a wide range of active transportation projects.

Funding sources for active transportation projects vary in purpose and scope, but are intended to help the City plan, design, maintain, and implement ATP projects and programming. The City is encouraged to use Table A-19 to identify and pursue grant funding to implement this ATP. However, it is important to note that all funding sources are subject to change and further research will be necessary to apply for grant funding as not all funding sources apply to the recommended projects.

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS
Congestion
Mitigation and
Air Quality
Improvement
Program
Federal
Highway
Administration
The Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality Improvement Program provides
funding to State and local governments
for transportation projects and programs
to help meet the requirements of the
Clean Air Act. The program supports
surface transportation projects and
other efforts that contribute to air quality
improvement and congestion relief.

Annual X X
• Travel Demand Management to
promote clean commutes
• Public Education and Outreach
• Bicycle amenities and facilities, such
as Class I, II, III, & IV bike lanes
Highway Safety
Improvement
Program
Federal
Highway
Administration /
Caltrans
The Highway Safety Improvement
Program funds work on any public road
or publicly owned bicycle or pedestrian
pathway or trail, or on tribal lands for
general use of tribal members, that
improves the safety for its users.

Two year
cycle X
• Install hybrid pedestrian signals at
trail crossings
• Install RRFBs at locations adjacent to
parks, trails, and schools
• Improve pedestrian and bicycle
safety at locations with uncontrolled
crossings
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming Table A-19: Potential Funding Sources

APPENDIX 249

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Rebuilding
American
Infrastructure
with
Sustainability
and Equity
Discretionary
Grant Program
U.S.

Department of
Transportation
The Rebuilding America Infrastructure
with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE)
Discretionary Grant Program funds
projects for planning or constructing
surface transportation infrastructure
projects that will improve safety;
environmental sustainability; quality
of life; mobility and community
connectivity; economic competitiveness
and opportunity including tourism;
state of good repair; partnership and
collaboration; and innovation.

Annual X X
• Trail and active transportation
construction projects
• Planning and engineering work for
bicycle, pedestrian, and trail planning
Reconnecting
Communities
and
Neighborhoods
Grant Program
U.S.

Department of
Transportation
The Reconnecting Communities and
Neighborhoods Program provides
grant opportunities to redress the
legacy of harm from transportation
infrastructure including: constructionrelated displacement, environmental degradation, limited access to goods
and services, degraded public health
due to air and noise pollution, limited
opportunities for physical activity, and
hampered economic vitality of the
surrounding community.

Annual
(through
2026)
X X
• Study for the removal, retrofit
or mitigation of a highway or
transportation facility that acts as a
barrier to community connectivity
• Replacement or mitigation of a
transportation barrier with a linear park
and trail
Safe Streets
and Road for
All
U.S.

Department of
Transportation
The Safe Streets and Road for All
program funds regional, local, and Tribal
initiatives through grants to prevent
roadway deaths and serious injuries.

The program offers two grant types:

Implementation Grants and Planning and
Demonstration Grants.

Annual X X X
• Eligible Implementation Grant
projects include developing bikeway
networks, safety treatments, creating
safe routes to school and public transit
services, installing pedestrian safety
enhancements, closing network gaps,
running an education campaign, and
more.
• Eligible Planning and Demonstration
Grants fund the development or
supplementation of a comprehensive
safety action plan.
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

250 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Transportation
Alternatives
Federal
Highway
Administration
The Transportation Alternatives SetAside from the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program provides funding
for a variety of generally smaller-scale
transportation projects.

Annual X X
• Pedestrian and bicycle facilities
• Construction of turnouts, overlooks,
and viewing areas
• Community improvements such as
historic preservation and vegetation
management
• Environmental mitigation related to
stormwater and habitat connectivity
• Recreational trails
• Safe Routes to School projects
• Vulnerable road user safety
assessments
Urban and
Community
Forestry
Program
U.S. Forest
Service
The Urban and Community Forestry
Program delivers nature-based
solutions to ensure a resilient and
equitable tree canopy in cities,
towns, and suburbs where more than
84 percent of Americans live. 40
percent of the program’s investments
are delivered through established
and new partnerships working to
support disadvantaged communities
experiencing low tree canopy and
environmental justice issues.

Varies X X
• Urban tree planting projects
• Urban forest planning and
management and related activities
(particularly in disadvantaged
communities)
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

APPENDIX 251

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM

STATE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS
Active
Transportation
Program
Caltrans
The Active Transportation Program
provides funding to increase use of
active modes of transportation by
achieving the following goals: increase
the proportion of trips accomplished
by biking and walking, increase safety
and mobility for non-motorized users,
advance active transportation efforts
to achieve greenhouse gas reduction
goals, enhance public health, ensure
that disadvantaged communities fully
share in the benefits of the program,
and provide projects that benefit various
types of active transportation users.

Annual X X X
• Safe Routes to School Plan
• Active Transportation Plan
development
• Trail construction
• Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
Affordable
Housing and
Sustainable
Communities
Program
Strategic
Growth Council
and Department
of Housing and
Community
Development
The Affordable Housing and Sustainable
Communities Program funds land
use, housing, transportation, and land
preservation projects to support infill
and compact development that reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.

Annual X X
• Class I, II, III, & IV bike lanes
• Active transportation projects to
encourage connectivity to transit
networks
• Bikeways and sidewalks to affordable
housing and transit center
• Install dedicated bicycle facilities
• Pedestrian facilities such as bulb-outs
Clean Mobility
Options Pilot
Program
California Air
Resources
Board
The Clean Mobility Options Pilot Program
provides funding for zero emissions
shared mobility projects (i.e., car sharing,
bike sharing, and on-demand sharing)
in disadvantaged and low-income
communities, including some tribal and
affordable housing communities.

Unknown X X
• Bikeshare programs
• “Quick build” right-of-way safety
improvements for bicycles and
scooters
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

252 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Coastal
Conservancy
Grants
State of
California
Coastal
Conservancy
The Coastal Conservancy funds a wide
variety of projects along the California
coast, San Francisco Bay, and in coastal
watersheds to increase availability of
beaches, parks and trails for the public,
protect and restore natural lands and
wildlife habitat, preserve working lands,
and increase community resilience to the
impacts of climate change.

Ongoing X X X
• Provide coastal experiences for
communities who face barriers to
coastal access
• Accessibility projects that reduce
barriers to coastal access for people
with disabilities
• Build regional trails
• Enhance coastal recreational
amenities, such as restrooms, parking,
picnic areas, interpretive centers,
shade structures, etc.

Habitat
Conservation
Fund Program
California
Department
of Parks and
Recreation
The Habitat Conservation Fund provides
funding to cities, counties, and districts
to protect fish, wildlife, and native plant
resources; to acquire or develop wildlife
corridors and trails; and to provide for
nature interpretation programs and other
programs which bring urban residents
into park and wildlife areas.

Annual X X
• Build new trails
• Rehabilitate existing trails
• Install interpretive trail elements
• Install seating or lighting along trails
• Develop educational or interpretive
activities or trips
Land and Water
Conservation
Fund
California
Department
of Parks and
Recreation/
National Park
Service
The Land and Water Conservation Fund
provides funding for the acquisition
OR development of land to conserve
irreplaceable lands and to create new
outdoor recreation opportunities for the
health and wellness of Californians.

Annual X
• Land acquisition for a new park, an
existing park expansion, a wildlife
corridor with public viewing and
outdoor recreational use, and/or a
recreational/active transportation
corridor
• Development of recreation features
and amenities for outdoor recreation
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

APPENDIX 253

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Local
Partnership
Program
California
Transportation
Commission
The Local Partnership Program provides
funding to counties, cities, districts,
and regional transportation agencies
in which voters have approved fees or
taxes dedicated solely to transportation
improvements or that have imposed
fees, including uniform developer fees,
dedicated solely to transportation
improvements. Funding is intended
to improve aging Infrastructure, road
conditions, active transportation, transit
and rail, health and safety benefits.

Annual X X
• Close sidewalk gap, install Class
II bike lanes and cycle track, curb
extensions, pedestrian enhancements,
improvements to lighting and signage
• Construct 4 single-lane and 1 multilane roundabouts, and improvements to street, pedestrian and bicycle
facilities
• Expressway pedestrian overcrossing
Local Streets
and Roads
Program
California
Transportation
Commission
The Local Streets and Roads Program
provides funds to cities and counties for
basic road maintenance, rehabilitation,
and critical safety projects on the local
streets and roads system.

Annual X X
• Implement enhanced crosswalk
signing and striping
• Create safety separation between
motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians
• Design and construction of school
access and safety improvements to six
schools
Office of Traffic
Safety Grant
Program
CA Office of
Traffic Safety
The Office of Traffic Safety Grant
Program provides annual funds to
prevent serious injury and death
resulting from motor vehicle crashes
so that all roadway users arrive at their
destination safely. Funds can be used for
bicycle and pedestrian safety.

Annual X X
• Safety education and encouragement
• Campaigns to promote safety
• SRTS safety programs
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

254 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Outdoor
Equity Grants
Programs
California
Department
of Parks and
Recreation
The Outdoor Equity Grants Program
(OEP) provides funding to improve the
health and wellness of Californians
through new educational and
recreational activities, service learning,
career pathways, and leadership
opportunities that strengthen a
connection to the natural world. The
OEP funds the creation, operation, and
transportation costs of outdoor programs
in underserved communities. Outdoor
programs should include activities in the
community AND natural area trips. OEP
will not fund capital projects.

Annual X
Activities in the community can
include:
• Environmental education activities
• Educational nature discovery walks
• Preparation for natural area trips
Natural area trips can include traveling
to a regional, state, national park,
tribal land, river or lake, beach, forest,
mountain, or desert area for day or
overnight trips within California.

Outdoor
Recreation
Legacy
Partnership
Program
National Park
Service (NPS)/
California
Department
of Parks and
Recreation
The Outdoor Recreation Legacy
Partnership Program is a federal National
Park Service grant program administered
by the California Department of Parks
and Recreation. ORLP focuses on
communities with little to no access to
publicly available, close-by, outdoor
recreation opportunities in urban
areas. ORLP funds the acquisition or
development of new parks/outdoor
spaces, or substantial renovations to
parks/outdoor spaces in economically
disadvantaged cities or towns of at least
30,000 people.

Annual X X
• Land acquisition for outdoor
recreation
• Development of recreation features
and amenities for outdoor recreation
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

APPENDIX 255

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Recreational
Trails Program
U.S.

Department of
Transportation
Federal
Highway
Administration
/California
Department
of Parks and
Recreation
The Recreational Trails Program
(RTP) is a federal U.S. Department
of Transportation grant program
administered by the California
Department of Parks and Recreation.

The RTP provides funding to develop
and maintain recreational trails and trailrelated facilities for both non-motorized and motorized recreational trail uses.

Annual X
• Land acquisition
• Development/rehabilitation of trails,
trailheads, and trail amenities
• Construction of new trails
• Maintenance of existing trails
(motorized projects only)
State Highway
Operations
and Protection
Program
California
Transportation
Commission
The State Highway Operations and
Protection Program funds repairs and
preservation, emergency repairs, safety
improvements, and some highway
operational improvements on the State
Highway System.

Annual X
• Upgrade sidewalks to ADA
compliance
• Reconstruct damaged pavement
• Add bike lanes to updated corridors
• Upgrade pedestrian push buttons,
refresh striping, and improve
pedestrian and bicycle access
State
Transportation
Improvement
Program
California
Transportation
Commission
The State Transportation Improvement
Program provides funding for state
highway improvements, intercity rail,
and regional highway and transit
improvements.

Two year
cycle X X
• Bike/ped Overcrossing and Access
Improvements and bicycle and
pedestrian bridge
• Class I, II, III, & IV bike lanes
• Shared-use paths
• Complete Streets improvements
Statewide Park
Development
and Community
Revitalization
Program
California
Department
of Parks and
Recreation
The Statewide Park Program provides
funding to create new parks and
recreation opportunities in critically
underserved communities across
California. Project selection is based
on several criteria, including needbased criteria, such as critical lack of park space, significant poverty,
community challenges, and more. A
project must involve either development
or a combination of acquisition AND
development to create a new park,
expand an existing park, or renovate an
existing park.

Annual X
• Land acquisition
• Rehabilitation of existing or
development of new recreation
features, such as, an aquatic
center, athletic fields, amphitheater,
community gardens, dog parks, open
space, trails, skate parks, public art,
picnic areas, etc.
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

256 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Sustainable
Communities
Planning Grants
Caltrans
Sustainable Communities Planning
Grants encourages local and regional
planning that advances state goals
and practices cited in the Regional
Transportation Plan Guidelines adopted
by the California Transportation
Commission.

Annual X
• Safe Routes to School Plan
• Active Transportation Plan
• Bike/ped Trail/Path Feasibility Study
• Complete Streets Plan
• Sustainable Communities Plan
• Transit-Oriented Development Plan
• First/Last Mile Connectivity Plan
Sustainable
Transportation
Equity Project
California Air
Resources
Board
The Sustainable Transportation
Equity Project funds a variety of clean
transportation and supporting projects,
such as public transit and shared
mobility services, active transportation
infrastructure, land use planning and
housing policy, workforce development,
and clean transportation planning
and education. Funded projects
work together within low-income and
disadvantaged communities to increase
transportation equity.

Annual X X
• New bike routes (Class I, Class II, or
Class IV) and supporting infrastructure
• Publicly-accessible bike parking,
storage, and repair infrastructure (e.g.,
bike racks, bike lockers, bike repair
kiosks)
• New walkways that improve
mobility/access/safety of pedestrians
(nonmotorized users)
• Street crossing enhancements,
including accessible pedestrian signals
• Plan development
Sustainable
Transportation
Planning Grant
Program
Caltrans
The Sustainable Transportation Planning
Grant Program was created to support
the Caltrans Mission: Provide a safe
and reliable transportation network
that serves all people and respects the
environment. Grant programs include
Sustainable Communities Grants,
Climate Adaptation Planning Grants, and
Strategic Partnership Grants.

Annual X
• Safe Routes to School Plan
• Active Transportation Plan
• Bike/ped Trail/Path Feasibility Study
• Complete Streets Plan
• Sustainable Communities Plan
• Transit-Oriented Development Plan
• First/Last Mile Connectivity Plan
Transformative
Climate
Communities
Program
Strategic Growth
Council and
Department of
Conservation
The Transformative Climate Communities
Program funds community-led
development and infrastructure projects
that achieve major environmental, health,
and economic benefits in California’s
most disadvantaged communities.

Annual X X X
• Bike share program
• Creating and considering active
transportation corridors for better nonmotorized connections • Shared-use paths
• Urban greening for pedestrian
facilities
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

APPENDIX 257

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Transit and
Intercity
Rail Capital
Program
Caltrans
The Transit and Intercity Rail Capital
Program provides grants from the
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund to fund
transformative capital improvements
that will modernize California’s intercity,
commuter, and urban rail systems,
and bus and ferry transit systems,
to significantly reduce emissions of
greenhouse gases, vehicle miles
traveled, and congestion.

Annual X
• Pedestrian and bike trail
• First/last mile connections via bike
lanes and separated paths
• Bike share programs
• Bike parking facilities
• Plan development
Urban
Greening
Program
California
Natural
Resources
Agency
The Urban Greening Program supports
the development of green infrastructure
projects that reduce GHG emissions and
provide multiple benefits. Must include at
least one of the following: sequester and
store carbon by planting trees; reduce
building energy use by strategically
planting trees to shade buildings; or
reduce commute vehicle miles traveled
by constructing bicycle paths, bicycle
lanes or pedestrian facilities that
provide safe routes for travel between
residences, workplaces, commercial
centers, and schools.

Annual X X
• Non-motorized urban trails that
provide safe routes for both recreation
and travel between residences,
workplaces, commercial centers, and
schools
• Projects that expand or improve
the usability of existing active
transportation routes (e.g., walking or
bicycle paths) or create new active
transportation routes that are publicly
accessible by walking
• Complete Green Streets
Wildlife
Conservation
Board Grants
Wildlife
Conservation
Board
The Wildlife Conservation Board
provides funding for fish and wildlife
habitat acquisition, conservation, and
restoration, as well as development
of compatible public access facilities.

Project benefits should include one
or more of the following: protected
biodiversity, increased climate resilience,
enhanced public access, conserved/
enhanced working landscapes,
conserved/enhanced water-related
projects, and/or support of the State
Wildlife Action Plan.

Ongoing X X
• Open-space corridors or trail linkages
• Publicly accessible hunting, fishing,
wildlife viewing, and other wildlifedependent recreational opportunities • Climate adaptation and resilience
projects
• Habitat restoration
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

258 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM

LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS
Community
Betterments
Grant Program
SLOCOG
SLOCOG provides grant funding
for smaller-scale community level
infrastructure improvements that support
sustainable transportation goals set by
SLOCOG and its member agencies.

X X X
• Projects that encourage, enhance,
and improve facilities for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and motorists.
• Transportation enhancement
activities such as pedestrian and
bicycle facilities and wayfinding

PHILANTHROPIC PROGRAMS
Asphalt Art
Initiative
Bloomberg
Philanthropies
The Asphalt Art Initiative grant program
is designed to fund visual art on
roadways, pedestrian spaces, and public
infrastructure.

Annual X X
• Painted curb extensions, pedestrian
plazas, and crosswalks.
• Public space activations
• Traffic safety improvements
Community
Change Grants America Walks
The Community Change Grants program
supports the growing network of
advocates, organizations, and agencies
working to advance walkability. Grants
are awarded to innovative and inclusive
programs and projects that create
change and opportunity for walking and
movement at the community level.

Annual X X
• Trail or walking path development
• Guided or self-guided walking, hiking,
or cycling tours
• Design and installation of public art
Community
Spark Grant
Program
League of
American
Bicyclists
The Community Spark Grant program
supports the growing number of
local grassroots changemakers and
organizations nationwide working to
improve their communities through
better bicycling with $2,000 mini-grants.

Annual X
• Community event or class (one time
or series)
• Giveaways for bike equipment
• Temporary demonstration project
• End-of-trip facilities such as bike
racks, bike parking, bike repair stations
and bike storage
• Bike audit/count
Energize the
Environment
Grant Program
Quadratec
Quadratec offers small one-time grants
for projects that promote environmental
connection, responsibility, and/or
stewardship.

Annual X
• Trail building or restoration projects
• Park beautification events
• Environmental education projects
• Youth educational engagement
events
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

APPENDIX 259

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Outdoor
Access
Initiative
Yamaha
Yamaha provides funding to non-profit or
tax exempt groups (clubs & associations),
public riding areas (local, state and
federal), outdoor enthusiast associations
and land conservation organizations,
and communities with an interest in
protecting, improving, expanding and/or
maintaining access for safe, responsible
and sustainable use by motorized offroad vehicles.

Quarterly X
• Trail development
• Trail signage
• Trail mapping/map production
• wildlife and habitat management
• Establishing public access to land
for outdoor recreation (including
motorized recreation)
PeopleForBikes
Community
Grant Program
PeopleForBikes
The PeopleForBikes Community Grant
Program supports bicycle infrastructure
projects and targeted initiatives that
make it easier and safer for people of all
ages and abilities to ride.

Annual X
• Bike paths, lanes, trails and bridges
• Mountain bike facilities
• Bike parks and pump tracks
• BMX facilities
• End-of-trip facilities such as bike
racks, bike parking, bike repair stations
and bike storage
Placemaking
Grant Program
National
Association of
Realtors
Placemaking means many things to
different people, but the National
Association of Realtors (NAR) looks
as placemaking as a way to make
communities better places to live by
transforming unused and underused
sites and “eyesores” into welcoming
destinations accessible to everyone in a
community.

Annual X X
• Amenities (street furniture, paint,
signage, materials, landscaping,
murals, etc.)
• Site preparation
• Artist fees
Rails to Trails
Grant Program Rails to Trails
Rails to Trails provides funding to
organizations and local agencies that
are working to develop and connect
equitable trail network.

Annual X X
• Rail-trail
• Greenway
• Multi-use trail
• Shared-use path
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

260 CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

FUNDING

PROGRAM

FUNDING

SOURCE PROGRAM DESCRIPTION FUNDING CYCLE

PROJECT TYPE

PROJECT EXAMPLES

INF PLN PGM
Riding for
Focus Grant
Program
Outride
The Riding for Focus grant promotes
cycling as an outlet for students to
improve their cognitive, physical, and
socio-emotional well-being. Schools are
provided with everything they need to
get their 6th-8th grade students riding,
including bikes, helmets, curriculum,
teacher training, and an opportunity
to attend our annual instructor training
event at a Specialized bikes office.

Annual X
• Bikes and helmets
• Student curriculum
• Teacher training
Road to Zero
Community
Traffic Safety
Grant Program
National Safety
Council / U.S.

Department of
Transportation
National
Highway
Traffic Safety
Administration
(NHTSA)
The Road to Zero Community Traffic
Safety Grant Program is focused on
supporting innovative and promising
approaches for implementing evidencebased countermeasures, supporting a Safe System approach, and performing
necessary research to address traffic
fatalities and serious injuries, and
disparities in mobility safety and access.

Annual X
• Community outreach tools/
campaigns
• Driver education curriculum
• Guide for quick-build
countermeasures
• Demonstration projects for traffic
calming
• E-bike education and safety training
• Data analysis and reporting
Smart Growth
Grant Program
National
Association of
Realtors
Smart Growth Grants support state and
local REALTOR® Associations’ efforts
to advance programs, policies and
initiatives aligned with one or more of
the 10 Smart Growth Principles.

Annually X
• Community planning and visioning
charrettes
• Studies and assessments
• Walkability workshops or audits
• Comprehensive plan and zoning
analysis
• Transportation policy
• Marketing materials
* INF - Infrastructure PLN - Planning and Design PGM - Programming

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Jessica Matson, Director of Legislative & Information Services/ City Clerk
SUBJECT: Supplemental Information
Agenda Item 10.b. – January 28, 2025 City Council Meeting Approval of the Active Transportation Plan and Finding this Action Exempt from CEQA
DATE: January 28, 2025
Attached is public comment received prior to 2 p.m. for the above referenced item. cc: City Manager
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director
Director of Community Development
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website and Public Review Binder
Enc

Connectivity to the Outlying Neighborhoods
·Class IV facilities are proposed along Branch Mill Rd and Valley Rd. While it’s unclear from the plan what is envisioned beyond Arroyo Grande’s city borders, these facilities would provide strong connectivity to outlying neighborhoods.

General Comments
· Figure 2-10, Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
oDue to vehicle speeds, commercial driveways, and parked cars the entire length of E Grand Ave could be considered LTS 4 (rather than LTS 3), despite the existing Class II bike lanes.
· Figure 5-1 Proposed Bicycle Network
o It's great to see the Class I path proposed along the creek. The project would significantly benefit both locals and tourists. My understanding is the current phase II (levee repair) has a long timeline, with completion anticipated before 2046.
·Bicycle Parking
o It would be beneficial to include bicycle parking requirements in the bicycle recommendations sections
Questions
·How will pedestrian enhancement recommendations listed in Table 5-3 be prioritized? On page 140, a prioritization analysis for the bicycle network is described. Would a similar analysis be conducted for the pedestrian network? ·Are “Arroyo Grande Creek Trail” and “Scenic Creekside Walkway” and “Scenic Creekside Shared Use Path” referring to the same facility (Table 1-2 and Table 1-3)?
I look forward to learning about the City Council's adoption of the ATP later this month.

I'm very excited to see this plan moving forward!
Best regards,
Olivia Potash, PE

From: Jim Dececco
Sent: Monday, January 27, 2025 4:31 AM
To: Andrew Perez <[email protected]>
Cc: Curt Eichperger <[email protected]>
Subject: ATP
Arroyo Grande City Council Members,
The ATP as presented is a very good plan. While some specifics could be altered (such as protected intersections along Grand Ave. at Halcyon, Elm Street, and Oak Park, plus there is an over reliance on Class 3 bike ways which are not safe bike infrastructure), the overall plan is a vast improvement from what we have now in the city. This ATP will be

good for the students and families of the Lucia Mar Unified School District. For the most part, it will give families safe access to schools by walking and biking. We understand that not all families can drive their children to school, and families need safe alternatives such as walking or biking. This plan achieves that objective.

Lucia Mar Unified School District endorses the ATP, and we look forward to working with the city as this plan is implemented.

Thank you,
Jim DeCecco
Safe Routes Coordinator
Lucia Mar Unified School District
This is a staff email account managed by Lucia Mar Unified School District. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender.

2) Your project prioritization is based on needs only, not on costs. That isn't prioritization, that's a wish list. Prioritization in this way will fail to move the needle, because it starts with some of the most intractable and difficult routes instead of improving incrementally.

Your ability to accomplish this plan is based on day to day, not on grants. You need to implement this into your day to day in order to bring this plan to fruition. The way to do this effectively is to make sure you take full advantage of repavings by having designs ready in advance. I can tell you that you haven't implemented it into your day to day because your plans for the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement don't reflect best practice for a low stress bicycle network.

The designs for Fair Oaks and Elm are decent to good overall where they are shown, and with your traffic numbers on those routes, I think they will probably work out fine, but those designs often bury the sticking points. Note how everything east of Valley on Fair Oaks is "future study" - because the answers are very difficult.

I don't expect anything to come to fruition from Grand Avenue - look at the designs and consider just how many "widenings required", "intersection reconfiguration required", and "consider" language is used just to get a bike lane that still has weak links in it. I think the proposed concept looks great, but I also recognize just how massive a project that is.

My recommendation: Create a prioritization quadrant system to find the opportunity projects.

3) Execution is about repeatability and design guidelines I noted multiple areas in online comments where development has occurred since 2007 and even the 2007 bicycle plan designated facility was not constructed. Your plan references multiple design guidelines, many of which are excellent, but the execution on your staff side requires CAD designs to be on hand and ready to go, not created from scratch with each repaving and development.

My recommendation: Make sure that your staff's next action after approval of this document is to create publicly-reviewable CAD and PDF standard details to ensure that best practices are being followed in your own organization and by engineering consultants when necessary.

Thank you for your time and attention. I wish you all the very best.

Sincerely,
Steven Dunbar
In my personal capacity only
AGHS '12
P.S. - The school area map analyses are very weak in their bike tools. They completely fail to

analyze LTS and do not account for routes that only have a bike lane in one direction. They really fail to consider anything that isn't super close, the Paulding route HAWK beacon placement is awkward, and there are many other small things that should have been caught.

P.P.S. - Personal pet peeve, don't BS people. On page 98, "all minor arterials within the fiveminute walk zone [for AGHS] have Class I or Class II bicycle facilities, indicating a strong bicycle network." This is factually wrong as there are missing facilities in certain directions and near intersections, it's subjectively wrong as your LTS map Figure 2-10 shows most of these facilities are the highest traffic stress level, and it misses the point because the 15 minute bike zone is what you should be looking at for bike access, not the 5 minute walk zone.

From: Steven Dunbar
To: public comment
Cc: Bill Robeson; Jill McPeek
Bcc: Mom; Rick Ellison
Subject: Public Comment for Circulation Element, Planning Commission Item 9a, Meeting 4/20/2021 Hello Arroyo Grande Planning Commissioners and Staff,
Please accept my thanks for the work completed thus far in the Circulation Element update and responding to many of the comments I have made via the feedback tools.

As someone who rode his bicycle to Paulding and AGHS because only 1 parent drives, as an environmentalist, and as someone who sees my mom getting back on her trike in AG after many years, I know that a high quality circulation element is absolutely critical to city planning. Furthermore, as the city climate action plan notes, 44% of AG's emissions are from transportation. Transportation policy is climate policy.

I am pleased to hear that an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) update is recommended, because an update is sorely needed. The city isn't competitive for grants with such an out of date plan, and even beyond city-initiated projects, infrastructure provided by private development could be of higher perceived comfort and quality with modern design standards and guidelines enforced - see the rather narrow "door zone"-ish bike lanes on East Cherry.

I am also happy to see that the ATP process has specific goals, such as identifying a low stress network, and integrating safety improvements within maintenance projects as a standard operating procedure.

I offer you the following suggestions on the current draft plan:
1) Draft a strong vision statement. Staff suggested they were open to a vision recommendation in response to someone else's comment.

As such, here is my recommendation that you are free to use or modify:

The core value of this Circulation Element is to provide safe, sustainable, comfortable, convenient, and predictable travel within and through the City for all roadway users. The circulation element reinforces and enhances the Land Use Element by equitably linking housing, employment, community, and recreation together. (added sustainable and comfortable, removed "easy" in favor of "convenient" and "predictable", changed "peds/bikes/motor vehicles" to "all roadway users", modified last sentence to match better)
2) Staff mentioned many of my comments were overly specific. That feedback is correct, and made me reconsider my approach. Ironically, I have come to use the same point against the current draft: I believe we're actually mapping the "wrong thing" when we map proposed pedestrian improvements, proposed bike lane classifications, and even proposed number of travel lanes in a circulation element. Those maps are overly specific. A good example is that I don't believe a Bike Boulevard is really the most feasible option to reduce LTS on Branch Street through downtown.

I actually think these maps should be removed and replaced by other displays (although I

know roadway classifications are important for other reasons). These are: Goal roadway level of service, Goal or expected roadway ADT volume, Goal pedestrian level of service, and Goal bicycle level of traffic stress. This will help guide staff through the ATP process in the future while requiring less rewriting of the circulation element as the ATP is completed. These could be generalized to particular corridors if alternative routes are available, as well.

Pedestrian Level of Service was not mentioned in the document, but it could be generally summarized and then analyzed as part of the ATP.
3) I would specifically ask that public transit stop design guidance be updated with the ATP update, including amenities, level boarding, and other features as appropriate. Alternatively, SLORTA could be tasked with updating standards, but detailed integration of standards needs to be facilitated between SLORTA and the design documents that city staff uses on a daily basis.
4) Finally, a parting "specific" feedback: I understand well that CalTrans will push for their interchange to be brought up to modern standards. However, that will likely cost tens to hundreds of millions of dollars. I've seen CalTrans push to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to raise an interchange, only to back down when pressed on how many trucks actually needed that extra few inches (which is already above the legal height). That is to say, CalTrans doesn't do a good job of value engineering relative to all of the local needs. There is only so much money to go around, and therefore my request is: Please carefully consider the cost / benefit of a new interchange near Traffic Way. If CalTrans wants to pay for literally all of it, that is their business, but I believe AG has much better ways to make a "Strong Town." As you'll notice, I am familiar with the commitment you have to making AG a better place - it truly is a public service. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Steven Dunbar
In my personal capacity only
For reference:

Vice Chair, Planning Commission, City of Livermore
Board Secretary, Bike East Bay
AGHS '12

Item 11.a.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Nicole Valentine, Director of Administrative Services SUBJECT: Five-Year Financial Forecast
DATE: January 28, 2025
RECOMMENDATION:

Review and discuss the Five-Year Financial Forecast (“Forecast”).

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

The forecast provides an analysis of the financial impact of revenue and expenditure changes in the current fiscal year and the following five years. Preparation of the forecast required several hours of staff time, with additional review and input provided by the City’s financial consultant.

BACKGROUND:

As shown in Figure 1, Step 1 in the Biennial Budget Process, the focus is on providing information to the City Council and community on the state of the City’s finances. This background sets the stage for goal-setting and budget development that will occur over the next several months. Accordingly, this report provides an updated Five-Year Forecast of General Fund operations, along with information on revenues and expenditures from the recently approved local sales tax, Measure E-24, as well as Measure O-06. Here are some key points regarding this Forecast:
 Forecast is not a budget proposal, but rather a planning tool to facilitate a discussion for the creation of the upcoming FY 2025-27 Biennial Budget;  Focuses on the General Fund and Measures E & O;
 Assumes no enhancements to current service levels or increases in staffing (Status Quo); and
 Contains estimates based on the best information available at the time it is prepared.

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

Figure 1 – Biennial Budget Process
On June 11, 2024, City staff presented a 2024-25 Mid-Cycle Budget Update1to the City Council that showed a General Fund that was balanced overall with the use of an excess available fund balance. The largest use of the fund balance in the FY 2024-25 budget was for a $2.36 million transfer to the Capital Improvement Program2for pavement improvement. Repairing and maintaining the City’s 73 miles of roads was one of three top priorities3identified by Arroyo Grande residents in 2024, and City staff believes that community priority contributed to the passage of Measure E-24 in November of 2024.

Given this high priority identified by the community, in addition to the one-time General Fund dollars included in the FY 2024-25 budget, this Forecast assumes all $6+ million received annually from Measure E will be allocated to road infrastructure improvements.

Note that this is not a proposal from City staff at this time. The City Manager will make a recommendation on the allocation of this funding to the City Council as part of the upcoming budget process. However, as a starting point for purposes of forecasting the City’s future finances, staff has assumed Measure E would be used to fund the large infrastructure needs. It is also important to note that while this allocation would give a

1 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=11090 2 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=10770 3 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=10915

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

significant boost to the City’s road improvement program, it will not directly pay for City services paid for by the General Fund in an ongoing manner.

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

As previously prefaced, below are some highlights of this Forecast:
 Projected beginning fund balance of $7.7 million for FY 2025-26; o $1.6 million higher beginning fund balance than the FY 2024-25 mid-cycle budget update, primarily due to:
 FY 2023-24:
o Revenues higher than estimate by $0.6 million;
o Expenditures lower than estimate by $0.5 million;
 FY 2024-25:
o Revenues expected to be $0.5 million higher;
 General Fund shortfall projected to an average of $1.4 million annually throughout Forecast;
o Note: this shortfall does not include any impact from Measure E since that new funding is allocated to only road improvement projects in this Forecast;  Fund balance drops below 15% minimum target by FY 2027-28 and to only 2% by FY 2029-30 as shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Status Quo Financial Forecast
For discussion and information only, staff made two adjustments to the above Forecast scenario to give an example of how a portion of the $1.4 million annual shortfall could be addressed. Currently, the General Fund pays for 75% of the cost of the Five Cities Fire Authority (FCFA) contract and the Measure O Local Sales Tax Fund pays for 25%. In addition, Measure O currently pays for one police officer position. The following table includes two changes to these two safety budget items:

1. Change percentage split of FCFA contract from 75% General Fund/25% Measure O to 65%/35%

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

2. Add funding for one additional police officer position to Measure O, for a total of two positions.

Table 2: Scenario - Increased Measure O Contributions to Public Safety With the above two budgetary shifts in public safety funding, the average General Fund shortfall for the Forecast period (FY 2025-26 through FY 2029-30) drops from $1.4 million annually to approximately $740,000 annually over the same period. This is shown in Table 2 by a larger fund balance at the end of the five-year period.

Again, this is not a budget proposal but is presented to the City Council for the purpose of discussion. Of course, shifting even more public safety costs from the General Fund to Measure O would change the budget picture further. For example, a 50/50 split of FCFA costs between the General Fund and the Measure O Fund would result in an almost $700,000 annual savings to the General Fund, bringing the average shortfall to almost zero. This would limit what the Measure O Fund could spend on infrastructure improvements. However, with the funding from the new Measure E, most of the road improvement costs would be budgeted using that source.

Analysis of Major Revenues and Expenditures in Forecast After an expected modest increase of 0.4% projected for FY 2024-25, revenues are projected to increase 3.2% annually thereafter. Chart 1 shows major revenue projections in the Forecast.

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

Chart 1 – Major Revenue Projections
Property Tax
 40% of General Fund revenue.
 Key drivers: annual increase assessed by the County of up to 2%, home sales, and home prices.
 County Auditor-Controller’s office provided property tax estimates for FY 2024-25 and FY 2025-26.
 Forecast includes growth of 4.25% annually.

Sales Tax
 24% of General Fund revenue.
 Key drivers: consumer confidence, unemployment, consumer spending, business retention and development.
 City’s sales tax consultant provided estimates of 1.5% in FY 2024-25 and 2.8% in FY 2025-26.
 Sales tax is projected to grow approximately 3% per year for remaining years of the Forecast.

Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT)
 7% of General Fund revenue.
 Key drivers: lodging capacity, room rates, and occupancy rates.  TOT is forecasted to grow 3% annually throughout this Five-Year Forecast.  Forecast does not factor in any increase in room capacity.

Expenditures
Chart 2 shows the major expenditure categories and projected costs throughout the Forecast period. This assumes the two changes in public safety funding discussed above.

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

Since cities are largely service agencies that provide general government services, personnel-related costs represent the majority of expenditures.

Chart 2 – Major Expenditure Projections
Under the scenario noted above, that funding for public safety be allocated from the General Fund to Measure O, an 8.7% decrease in General Fund expenditures would be expected in FY 2025-26. This is primarily due to:
• Moving some public safety costs (greater FCFA funding and one additional police officer funding) to the Measure O Fund;
• One-time expenditures in FY 2024-25 budget for pavement maintenance that are not present in the FY 2025-26 Forecast;
• For the remainder of the Forecast period, expenditures are projected to increase

3.7% on average annually thereafter.

Salary and payroll taxes are forecasted to increase 4.3% in FY 2024-25 and 3.5% in FY 2025-26. The increase in FY 2025-26 would be 1.1% under the scenario that moved the cost of one additional police officer to Measure O Local Sales Tax funding. For the remainder of the Forecast salaries and taxes are projected to increase 3.5% per year.

The City’s unfunded accrued liability (UAL) is expected to increase 9% annually on average according to projections from CalPERS. Employee benefits are projected to increase on average 4.6% over the Forecast period. Health insurance costs alone account for 85% of all employee benefit costs. Workers’ compensation costs are forecasted to increase 8% per year over the Forecast period.

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

After an expected 7.2% decrease in contractual and professional service costs in FY 2025-26, due to the completion of the General Plan update, these costs are expected to increase 2% per year for the remainder of the Forecast. During the period of the Forecast, the cost of services provided by Five Cities Fire Authority is projected to average $4.5 million annually.

General Fund, Measure O, and Measure E Consolidated Five-Year Forecast Sales tax revenue received from Measures O and E are deposited into separate funds in the City’s financial accounting system. This enhances transparency and allows for more efficient reporting on how these voter-approved tax sources are being spent. However, since sales tax funding from these two measures are designed to be used for programs that are also funded by the General Fund (e.g. public safety and street and road improvements), their budgets should be looked at as a whole when allocation decisions are being made. Table 3 below is a consolidation of all three funds (General, Measure O, Measure E) so the budgetary connection between the funds can be seen more clearly.

The numbers in Table 3 for the General Fund are the same as shown earlier in Table 2.

This can be seen most clearly in the FCFA expenditure line when the cost increases from $995,000 in FY 2024-25 to $1,487,000 in FY 2025-26.

The impact of allocating all Measure E funding to pavement improvement can be seen most clearly in the ending fund balance line for that fund, that shows a zero balance for the entire five-year forecast. Note that this assumption (like the assumption moving public safety costs to Measure O) has not been approved by the City Council. It is only a starting point for discussion of the General Fund’s shortfall throughout the Forecast.

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

Table 3 – General Fund, Measure O, and Measure E
Consolidated Five-Year Forecast

Item 11.a.

City Council
Five-Year Financial Forecast
January 28, 2025

ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Review and discuss the Five-Year Financial Forecast “Forecast” and determine that the Five-Year Financial Forecast is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378); or

2. Provide other direction to staff.

ADVANTAGES:

Receiving and discussing the Five-Year Financial Forecast Report will assist in informed discussions between the community, City Council, and staff about budgetary priorities as the City develops the upcoming FY 2023-25 Biennial Budget. In future budget cycles, this Report will be provided prior to the City Council’s goal-setting process.

DISADVANTAGES:

There are no disadvantages in relation to the recommended action.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No environmental review is required for this item. Review and discussion of the Five-Year Financial Forecast is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.)
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

Item 11.b.

MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Matthew Downing, City Manager
BY: Aleah Bergam, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
DATE: January 28, 2025
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive an update regarding progress made toward meeting the City Council’s Goals and Priorities for Fiscal Years 2023-25 (July 1, 2023 through June 30, 2025).

IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:

There are no financial impacts associated with receipt of the update regarding progress toward meeting the Goals and Priorities for FY 2023-25. Any fiscal impacts associated with the implementation of Goals and Priorities will be analyzed at the time actionable items are brought to the City Council for consideration.

BACKGROUND:

Every two years, staff and the City Council prepare a Biennial Budget document, which commits government resources and services to accomplish the City’s mission of making Arroyo Grande the best place possible for everyone who lives, works, and visits here. As part of the budgeting process, the City utilizes a thoughtful process to establish the City’s focus and priorities, culminating in the City Council determining goals for the following two-year period. These goals become the foundation upon which staff prepare the Biennial Budget.

On March 2, 20231, the City Council considered and approved a list of Goals and Priorities for FY 2023-25 to help direct the work of the City Council and staff during the biennial budget cycle. The identified Goals and Priorities are outlined below. This report provides an update regarding the City’s progress over the last year on completing the identified Goals and Priorities for FY 2023-25. This also provides an opportunity for the public to learn of the City’s progress and share input with the City Council on any of the Goals and Priorities or for consideration of any additional direction to staff.

1 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=5588

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

Major City Goals
The City Council has set four goals for the City for FY 2023-25.

Goal #1: Funding – Support a thriving community through fiscal responsibility, economic development efforts, and additional and alternative revenue streams.

Strategies for the next two years:
 Economic Development
 Pursue Potential Revenue Measure
 Evaluate Potential to Enable Cannabis Businesses within the City Goal #2: Fire Services – Implement operational and fire emergency service delivery improvements through the Five Cities Fire Authority, and complete the transition of services to Oceano due to its exit from the Authority.

Strategies for the next two years:
 Work with Regional Partners on Fire Services in 5 Cities  Funding for Fire Services
Goal #3: Infrastructure – Invest in and complete critical infrastructure projects throughout the City through the strategic prioritization of projects based on available resources.

Strategies for the next two years:
 Pursue Alternative Funding Sources for Infrastructure Needs  Work with Regional Partners on Infrastructure Projects  Prioritize Key Infrastructure Projects
Goal #4: General Plan Update – Prioritize and complete major work efforts for the comprehensive General Plan update to provide a vision and framework for future development within the city.

Strategies for the next two years:
 Public Outreach
 Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity, and Justice Lens
 General Plan Elements
 Baseline Analysis of Existing and Future Business Needs  Climate Action Plan
 Code Update
 Environmental Impact Report
 Objective Design Standards

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:

While each of the goals is large and complex, staff is pleased to report that substantial progress has been made in many areas. Below is additional information and details of each goal accompanied by major accomplishments toward meeting those goals.

Additional information regarding the status of work toward meeting the Goals and Priorities is included in Attachment 1.

Review of Major City Goals
Goal #1: Funding
Strategy: Economic Development
 The City has entered into a professional service agreement to conduct an organizational assessment with an emphasis on Economic Development Management Services. Staff anticipates bringing recommendations to City Council in Spring regarding Economic Development Management Services.  Staff completed the process of fulfilling Surplus Land Act requirements for the disposition and development of the City-owned site located at 400 W. Branch Street.
 Staff are currently working with regional partners on potential new events to drive visitation during shoulder and winter months, as well as build destination awareness.

Strategy: Pursue Revenue Measure
 The City completed a robust public outreach and education campaign to better understand the community’s priorities and educate the community on the City’s needs for the future.
 The City Council determined to place a ballot measure to establish a one-cent sales tax for 10 years on the November 2024 ballot.
 At the November 5, 2024 election, Measure E-24 was approved by approximately 65% of voters, establishing a one-cent sales tax for 10 years, providing $6,000,000 annually for general government use.

Strategy: Evaluate Potential to Enable Cannabis Businesses within City  Staff met with individuals well-versed in cannabis regulations, taxation, and opportunities to better understand the regulatory landscape and potential opportunities to unlock additional revenue streams for the City.

Goal #2: Fire Services
Strategy: Work with Regional Partners on Fire Services in 5 Cities  Along with partners at the City of Grover Beach, staff worked to negotiate a contract with the County of San Luis Obispo to provide fire service to the community of Oceano.

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

 Staff worked with the Local Area Formation Commission to support the process for the community of Oceano to divest its fire service responsibility in support of the contract with the County of San Luis Obispo.
 The contract with the County of San Luis Obispo to provide fire service to the community of Oceano went into effect on January 1, 2025.

Strategy: Funding for Fire Services
 Fire and EMS services were determined to be among the services to prioritize through the potential revenue measure feasibility study.

Goal #3: Infrastructure
Strategy: Pursue Alternative Funding Sources for Infrastructure Needs  Staff worked with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments for funding of the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Project.
 Staff applied for grant funding for improvements on East Branch Street near Paulding Middle School and Huasna Road adjacent to Strother Park.  Staff continues to work with the federal Highway Bridge Program through Caltrans Local Assistance to meet grant requirements to maintain adequate funding for the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project.
 Infrastructure funding needs were determined to be among the services to prioritize through the revenue measure feasibility study.

Strategy: Work with Regional Partners on Infrastructure Projects  Staff brought forward updated information regarding the status of the Central Coast Blue (CCB) project costs.
 Following City Council direction, staff worked with CCB member agencies and the JPA to withdraw from the Cost Sharing Agreement.
 Following City Council direction, staff worked with CCB member agencies to maintain cooperative relationships for a potential future water resiliency project.  Staff continued to participate with NCMA partners on Management Agreement Amendments.

Strategy: Prioritize Key Infrastructure Projects
 Staff secured construction services and managed the successful completion of the Swinging Bridge Retrofit Project on budget and ahead of schedule.  Staff coordinated a ribbon cutting for the community to celebrate the completion of the Swinging Bridge Retrofit Project.
 The City entered into a contract and completed the construction of concrete repair work, including sidewalk repairs, throughout the city.
 The City Council entered into a contract for the design phase of the Halcyon Road Complete Streets Plan.

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

 Staff completed design and right-of-way work for the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project.
 The City completed the construction of the Public Safety Camera System Project.  The City entered into a contract and completed the construction of the Station 1 Apparatus Doors Replacement Project.
 The City entered into contracts and completed street repair, including over four miles of overlay and eight miles of slurry.
 The project to replace the generator at Station 1 was completed.  The City entered into contracts for water main projects, completing the Fair Oaks waterline replacement and initiating the Cornwall waterline replacement.  The City entered into a contract and completed sewer main lining, including a critical section of sewer main under Highway 101.
 Staff facilitated the installation of a modular building to support the demolition of the previous Mark M. Millis Community Center building.
 Staff and consultants developed a draft of the Active Transportation Plan, anticipated for approval by the City Council in January 2025.  Roadway improvements on Tally Ho Road were completed and accepted by the City Council.

Goal #4: General Plan Update (GPU)
Strategy: Public Outreach
 On February 28, 2024, the City held its second community workshop for the GPU.  On July 2, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a Study Session regarding the citywide vision statement and guiding principles options.  On August 13, 2024, the City Council conducted a Study Session regarding the citywide vision statement and guiding principles options.  On September 28, 2024, City staff held a pop-up event at the Harvest Festival for the GPU.
 In November 2024, the City sent out a mailer to all residents of Arroyo Grande to fill out a community survey and gather input on land use scenarios for the GPU.  On November 9, 2024, City staff held a pop-up event at Soto Sports Complex during the annual soccer tournament to gather input on land use scenarios for the GPU.

Strategy: General Plan Elements
 Staff managed the consultant to begin the development of draft General Plan Elements.
 The City Council adopted an Ordinance updating the City’s Municipal Code to implement the Housing Element.

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

Other Administrative Accomplishments
In addition to making substantial progress on the City Council’s goals, staff has made noteworthy progress in other administrative areas, including:
 The City Council supported the County of San Luis Obispo rejoining the Integrated Waste Management Authority through the approval of the Second Amended and Restated Joint Powers Agreement.
 The City Council authorized additional use of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund in support of 63 affordable housing units at 700 Oak Park Boulevard.  City staff secured grant funding for traffic safety programs, including DUI enforcement, and alcoholic beverage sales education and enforcement.  The City received a $10,000 grant from the Integrated Waste Management Authority to install water filling stations at three City locations.  The City Council adopted new regulations regarding Formula Businesses.  Appropriated $300,000 in American Rescue Recovery Act (ARPA) Funds for Homeless Support Services.
 The City Council adopted the Corbett Canyon Stream Restoration Conditional Use Permit and the Arroyo Grande Creek Stream Gauge Conditional Use Permit.  The City Council adopted several new public art projects and updated public art regulations, guidelines, and donation program requirements.  During the Council Chamber Audio/Video System Upgrade Project, staff implemented automated production equipment and terminated the service agreement with the City’s previous production company.
 City staff produced four quarterly citywide newsletters providing the public with more information about City operations, projects, and opportunities to connect.  City staff launched a mobile application, “My AG,” to help facilitate easier access to information on the City’s website and provide timely information through push notifications.
 Staff managed the installation of a programmable tree lighting system for the Village Gateway Redwood Tree, developed a lighting schedule that honors various holidays, community pride, and local heroes, and coordinated a public tree lighting event.
 Updated the User Fees, Development Impact Fees (DIF), and Cost Allocation Plan, as well as, updated the DIF ordinance.
 Updated the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures and Municipal Code.  Updated the City’s Reserve Fund Balance Policy.
 City received GFOA Distinguished Budget Presentation Award and CSMFO Meritorious Operating Budget Award for FY 2023-25.
 The City updated Accessory Dwelling Unit regulations in compliance with State law.
 The City conducted the 2024 General Municipal Election.  Staff worked with community members for the approval and painting of the Rancho Hoops basketball court painting project.

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

 Staff worked with partner agencies to approve an updated MOU for the Regional Special Weapons and Tactics Team.
 Staff developed a City Seal, City Logo, and Police Badge Policy.  Staff updated the Ticket Distribution Policy in accordance with FPPC guidelines.  Staff participated in a comprehensive Risk Management Evaluation to conduct an inventory and identify potential liability, workers’ compensation, and property loss exposures.
 Staff conducted 10 recruitments and successfully onboarded 18 new employees.  Staff completed digitization of all personnel records creating greater records efficiencies and eliminating the need for physical storage.

FY 2025-27 Council Goal Development
On December 9, 2024, a Community Priorities Survey was published. This four-question online survey was posted on the City website and promoted on social media channels.

The survey was open for one month and closed on January 15th. The survey allowed community members to provide input regarding their thoughts on what the top priorities should be for the City over the next 2-3 years. The survey included a combination of multiple choice and short response questions. There was a total of 259 respondents.

Staff is currently analyzing the results of the survey in preparation for the February 10, 2025, City Council Goal Setting Workshop and is providing the priorities identified by over 20% of respondents for Council review in anticipation of a more detailed overview of the results at the Goal Setting Workshop.

Table 1: Top Community Priorities Identified by 20% of Community Respondents Responses
Response
Percentage
Maintain and Repair Streets and Sidewalks 126 48.65%
Economic Vitality/Thriving Economy 73 28.19%
Public Safety 68 26.25%
Community Events/Recreation Activities 55 21.24%
Fiscal Sustainability 55 21.24%
Water Resiliency (Securing sustainable water sources) 52 20.08% ALTERNATIVES:

The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:

1. Receive an update regarding progress toward the Goals and Priorities for FY 2023- 25; or

2. Provide other direction to staff.

Item 11.b.

City Council
Update on City Council Goals and Priorities
January 28, 2025

ADVANTAGES:

Receiving the status report on the Goals and Priorities for FY 2023-25 provides an update to the City Council and the public on the City’s efforts toward completing and accomplishing a number of vital work efforts.

DISADVANTAGES:

There are no disadvantages at this time.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

No environmental review is required for this item.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:

The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Goals and Priorities for FY 2023-25 Status Update

Goal Strategy Task/Action Carryover Action or New Responsible Department Anticipated to Start Completion Target Update Funding 1. 1 Economic Development 1.1a Evaluate Economic Development Management Services New CMO 1Q FY2023-24 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

1.1b Obtain Economic Development Management Services New CMO 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2024-25 Not started

1.1c Support Modifications to the AGTBID New CMO/CA/Rec/LIS In Progress 2Q FY 2023-24 Completed

1.1c.i. Transition Administration to City staff New CMO/Rec/PW In Progress 1Q FY 2023-24 Completed

1.1c.ii. Complete Modifications to AGTBID Bylaws and Advisory Board Structure New CMO/CA/LIS In Progress 2Q FY 2023-24 Completed

1.1d 400 W. Branch Disposition and Development Agreement New CMO/CA/CD In Progress 2Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

1.1e Complete Transition of Temporary Parklets to Permanent Parklets Carryover CD/PW In Progress 1Q FY2023-24 Completed1.1f Develop 1-3 Special Events that drive visitation during shoulder and winter months and build destination awareness New Rec In Progress 2Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

1.2 Pursue Revenue Measure 1.2a Issue an RFP for a consultant to develop a survey and outreach strategy to community New CMO/LIS 1Q FY2023-24 1Q FY2023-24 Completed1.2b Award contract with consultant to develop a survey and outreach strategy to community New CMO/LIS 1Q FY2023-24 1Q FY2023-24 Completed1.2c Conduct public outreach to the community to communicate need for additional revenue, including facilitation of a Citizen Committee Carryover CMO/LIS 1Q FY2023-24 1Q FY 2024-25 Completed1.2d Bring Revenue ballot measure to Council for consideration Carryover
CMO/AS/LIS 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed

1.3 Evaluate Potential to Enable Cannabis Businesses within City

1.3a Conduct study session with the City Council regarding potential cannabis ordinance Carryover CD/CA/CMO 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2024-25 Not started

1.3b Prepare and adopt cannabis ordinance, if directed by the City Council New CD/CA/CMO 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2024-25 Not started

1.3c Evaluate feasibility of a Cannabis Tax New CD/AS/CA/CMO 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2024-25 In Progress Fire Services 2.1 Work with Regional Partners on Fire Services in 5 Cities 2.1a Pursue potential contract with the County to serve Oceano New Fire/CMO 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed

2.2 Funding for Fire Services 2.2a Consider including Public Safety in proposed Revenue measure New CMO/AS/LIS 3Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed Infrastructure 3.1 Pursue Alternative Funding Sources for Infrastructure Needs 3.1a Consider Community partnership for Mark M. Millis Community Center construction Carryover CMO/Rec/PW In progress 4Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

3.1b Include infrastructure in new Revenue Measure plans and outreach Carryover AS/CMO/LIS/ PW/CD 1Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2024-25 Completed Council Goal's Work Plan
Attachment 2Attachment 1

Goal Strategy Task/Action Carryover Action or New Responsible Department Anticipated to Start Completion Target Update Council Goal's Work Plan

3.1c Collect FEMA reimbursement for January - March 2023 storm damage New AS In progress 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress3.1d Pursue Grant applications and administration for infrastructure projects Carryover PW/CD/AS In progress Ongoing In Progress

3.2 Work with Regional Partners on Infrastructure Projects

3.2a Support ongoing development and financing of Central Coast Blue project Carryover CMO/AS/PW In Progress 2Q FY 2024-25 Project Stopped Due to Council Direction3.2b NCMA Management Agreement Amendments New PW 3Q FY 2023-24 Ongoing In Progress

Goal Strategy Task/Action Carryover Action or New Responsible Department Anticipated to Start Completion Target Update Council Goal's Work Plan

3.3 Prioritize Key Infrastructure Projects 3.3a Traffic Way Bridge Carryover CD/PW In progress 2Q FY 2025-26 In Progress

3.3a.i. Traffic Way Bridge Design Carryover CD/PW In progress 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed3.3a.ii. Traffic Way Bridge ROW Carryover CD/PW Completed 1Q FY 2024-25 Completed

3.3a.iii. Traffic Way Bridge Construction Carryover CD/PW 3Q FY 2024-25 2Q FY 2025-26 In Progress

3.3b Swinging Bridge Rehabilitation Carryover CD/PW Completed 2Q FY 2024-25 Completed

3.3b.i. Swinging Bridge Rehabilitation NEPA Carryover CD/PW Completed 3Q FY 2023-24 Completed

3.3bii Swinging Bridge Rehabilitation Bid for Construction Carryover CD/PW Completed 3Q FY 2023-24 Completed

3.3b.iii. Swinging Bridge Construction New CD/PW Completed 2Q FY 2024-25 Completed

3.3c Halcyon Complete Streets New CD/PW In Progress

3.3c.i. Halcyon Complete Streets Design New CD/PW 1Q FY 2024-25 1Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

3.3c.ii. Halcyon Complete Streets ROW acquisition New CD/PW 1Q FY 2023-24 1Q FY 2024-25 Not started

3.3c.iii. Halcyon Complete Streets Construction New CD/PW 1Q FY 2024-25 2Q FY 2025-26 Not started

3.3d ATP Development New CD/PW In Progress 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

3.3d.i. Award ATP Contract to Consultant New CD/PW Completed 4Q FY 2022-23 Completed

3.3d.ii. Final Approval of ATP by Council New CD/PW 3Q FY 2024-25 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

3.3e 2022 Pavement Management Program Construction New CD/PW 1Q FY 2023-24 2Q FY 2023-24 Completed

3.3f 2024 Pavement Management Program Design New CD/PW 2Q FY 2023-24 1Q FY 2024-25 Completed

3.3g 2024 Pavement Management Program Construction New CD/PW 4Q FY 2023-24 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

3.3h Community Safety Camera Network Carryover Police/CD In Progress 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed

3.3i Replacement Generator at Station 1 New CD/PW/Fire Completed 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed Infrastructure (continued)Infrastructure (continued)

Goal Strategy Task/Action Carryover Action or New Responsible Department Anticipated to Start Completion Target Update Council Goal's Work Plan

3.3j Lift Station 3 New CD/PW Completed 1Q FY 2024-25 Completed3.3k AG Creek Remediation (Debris removal and bank stabilization) New CD/PW 4Q FY 2022-23 4Q FY 2023-24 Completed3.3l Concrete Repair Program New CD/PW 1Q FY 2024-25 4Q FY 2024-25 In Progress3.3m Concept plan/design for new Mark M. Millis Community Center Building New CD/PW/Rec 1Q FY 2023-24 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress3.3n CMP Lining New CD/PW 1Q FY 2024-25 Ongoing Not started

4.1 Public Outreach 4.1a Plan and Host a Kick-Off Meeting with Community New CD/LIS 1Q FY 2023-24 1Q FY 2023-24 Completed4.2 Diversity Equity Iinclusivity Justice Lens 4.2a Management of DEIJ consultant New CD In Progress Ongoing In Progress4.3 General Plan Elements New CD 2Q FY 2023-24 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress4.4 Baseline Analysis of Existing and Future Business Needs 4.4a Survey Local Businesses Carryover Action CD 1Q FY 2023-24 3Q FY 2024-25 In Progress

4.4b Conduct a Retail Market Analysis New CD 1Q FY 2023-24 3Q FY 2024-25 Not started

4.5 Climate Action Plan New CD 2Q FY 2023-24 3Q FY 2025-26 In Progress4.6 Code Update 4.6a Bring code changes to Planning Commission for approval New CD 3Q FY 2025-26 3Q FY 2025-26 Not started

4.6b Bring draft Ordinance of code revision update to Council New CD 4Q FY 2025-26 4Q FY 2025-26 Not started

4.7 EIR 4.7a Complete draft EIR New CD 1Q FY 2024-25 3Q FY 2024-25 Not started

4.7b Complete final EIR New CD 3Q FY 2024-25 4Q FY 2024-25 Not started

4.8 Objective Design Standards Carryover CD/CA 1Q FY 2023-24 4Q FY 2024-25 In Progress CMO City Manager's Office
AS Administrative Services
LIS Legislative and Information Services
PD Police Department
PW Public Works
Rec Recreation Services
Fire Five Cities Fire Authority
CD Community Development
General Plan Update
Key