CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA SUMMARY
Tuesday, February 24, 2026, 6:00 p.m.
In person at:
Arroyo Grande City Council Chamber
215 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, CA 93420
AND via Zoom at:
https://arroyogrande-org.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_NRsyFrUIQ_6179_iBTyDVA Please click the link above to register to join the Zoom Meeting This City Council meeting is being conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format. Please be advised that while the City will endeavor to ensure these remote participation methods are available, the City does not guarantee that they will be technically feasible or work all the time. Further, the City reserves the right to terminate these remote participation methods (subject to Brown Act restrictions) at any time and for any reason. Members of the public may participate and provide public comment on agenda items during the meeting in person at the location identified above, by joining the Zoom meeting, or by submitting written public comments to the Clerk of the Council at [email protected]. Meetings will be broadcast live on Channel 20 and streamed on the City’s Website.
CLOSED SESSION:
None.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. MOMENT OF REFLECTION
4. FLAG SALUTE
5. AGENDA REVIEW
5.a Closed Session Announcements
None.
5.b Ordinances read in title only
None.
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
6.a Honorary Proclamation Recognizing March 2026 as "Women's History Month"
6.b Introduction of Public Works Manager Mike Robles
(ROBESON)
6.c Recognition of Annual Employee Award Recipients
(DOWNING)
6.d City Manager Communications
(DOWNING)
Recommended Action:
Receive correspondence/comments as presented by the City Manager and Provide direction, as necessary.
7. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
7.a MAYOR RAY RUSSOM:
1. Audit Committee
2. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA)
3. Five Cities Fire Authority JPA Board
4. San Luis Obispo County Mayor's Meeting
5. South San Luis Obispo County Sanitation District (SSLOCSD)
6. Other
7.b MAYOR PRO TEM MARAVIGLIA:
1. Five Cities Fire Authority JPA Board
2. Visit SLO CAL Advisory Board
3. Other
7.c COUNCIL MEMBER GUTHRIE:
1. Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) Policy Board
2. Integrated Waste Management Authority Board (IWMA)
3. REACH Economic Development Roundtable
4. Other
7.d COUNCIL MEMBER SECREST:
1. Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
2. Homeless Services Oversight Council (HSOC)
3. South County Chambers of Commerce Governmental Affairs Committee
4. Other
7.e COUNCIL MEMBER LOE:
1. Council of Governments/Regional Transit Authority (SLOCOG/SLORTA)
2. County Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC)
3. Zone 3 Water Advisory Board
4. Other
8. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
This public comment period is an invitation to members of the community to present issues, thoughts, or suggestions on matters not scheduled on this agenda. Comments should be limited to those matters that are within the jurisdiction of the City Council. Members of the public may provide
public comment in-person or remotely by registering and joining the Zoom meeting utilizing the link provided below. Once in the meeting, please use the “raise hand” feature to indicate your desire to provide public comment.
Click the link below to register to join the webinar: https://arroyograndeorg.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_NRsyFrUIQ_6179_iBTyDVA •
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.
•
Please be advised that while the City will endeavor to ensure these remote participation methods are available, the City does not guarantee that they will be technically feasible or work all the time.
Further, the City reserves the right to terminate these remote participation methods (subject to Brown Act restrictions) at any time and for any reason. Please attend in person or submit your comment via email to the City Clerk by 2:00 p.m. the day of the meeting to have it included as part of the record.
The Brown Act restricts the Council from taking formal action on matters not published on the agenda. In response to your comments, the Mayor or presiding Council Member may:
• Direct City staff to assist or coordinate with you.
• A Council Member may state a desire to meet with you.
It may be the desire of the Council to place your issue or matter on a future Council agenda.
•
Please adhere to the following procedures when addressing the Council:
• Comments should be limited to 1 minute or less.
Your comments should be directed to the Council as a whole and not directed to individual Council members.
•
Slanderous, profane or personal remarks against any Council Member or member of the audience shall not be permitted.
•
9. CONSENT AGENDA
The following routine items listed below are scheduled for consideration as a group. The recommendations for each item are noted. Any member of the public who wishes to comment on any Consent Agenda item may do so at this time. Any Council Member may request that any item be withdrawn from the Consent Agenda to permit discussion or change the recommended course of action. The City Council may approve the remainder of the Consent Agenda on one motion.
9.a Approval of Minutes
(MATSON)
Recommended Action:
Approve the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of February 10, 2026, as submitted.
9.b Cash Disbursement Ratification
(VALENTINE)
Recommended Action:
Review and ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 16 through January 31, 2026.
9.c Accept Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project, PW 2023-02 (ROBESON)
Recommended Action:
1) Adopt a Resolution accepting the project improvements as constructed by Granite Construction Company in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project, PW 2023-02; and
2) Direct staff to file a Notice of Completion.
9.d James Way Sewer Easement Vacation
(ROBESON)
Recommended Action:
1) Adopt a Resolution ordering the vacation of a Sewer Easement at James Way; and 2) Find that Adopting a Resolution Vacating the Sewer Easement at 1281 James Way is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.);
9.e Monthly Water Supply & Demand Update
(ROBESON)
Recommended Action:
Receive and file the Monthly Water Supply and Demand Update.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
11. BUSINESS ITEMS
11.a San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Transportation Expenditure Plan (ROBESON)
Recommended Action:
Adopt a Resolution approving the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Final Draft Transportation Expenditure Plan (Plan) and authorizing SLOCOG to use the City’s logo on website and informational materials.
11.b Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan (PEDROTTI)
Recommended Action:
Receive public comment and provide direction for revisions to the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan.
11.c Study Session on Efforts to Redevelop East Grand Avenue (PEDROTTI)
Recommended Action:
Receive public comment and provide direction to staff regarding next steps for the project.
12. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Any Council Member may ask a question for clarification, make an announcement, or report briefly
on his or her activities. In addition, subject to Council policies and procedures, Council Members may request staff to report back to the Council at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter or request that staff place a matter of business on a future agenda. Any request to place a matter of business for original consideration on a future agenda requires the concurrence of at least two other Council Members.
13. ADJOURNMENT
All staff reports or other written documentation, including any supplemental material distributed to a majority of the City Council within 72 hours of a regular meeting, relating to each item of business on the agenda are available for public inspection during regular business hours in the City Clerk’s office, 300 E. Branch Street, Arroyo Grande. If requested, the agenda shall be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act. To make a request for disability-related modification or accommodation, contact the Legislative and Information Services Department at 805-473-5400 as soon as possible and at least 48 hours prior to the meeting date.
This agenda was prepared and posted pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2 Agenda reports can be accessed and downloaded from the City’s website at www.arroyogrande.org If you would like to subscribe to receive email or text message notifications when agendas are posted, you can sign up online through the “Notify Me” feature.
City Council Meetings are streamed live on the City’s Website and recorded for replay on Arroyo Grande’s Government Access Channel 20.
Item 6.a.
Item 9.a.
ACTION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
February 10, 2026, 5:30 p.m.
Hybrid City Council Chamber/Virtual Zoom Meeting
215 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande
Council Members Present: Mayor Caren Ray Russom, Mayor Pro Tem Jamie Maraviglia, Council Member Jim
Guthrie, Council Member Kate Secrest,
Council Member Aileen Loe
Staff Present: City Clerk Jessica Matson, Assistant City Attorney Scott Shapses, Assistant City
Manager/Public Works Director Bill Robeson,
Community Development Director Brian
Pedrotti
This meeting was conducted in a hybrid in-person/virtual format.
CLOSED SESSION 5:30 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Ray Russom called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Matson took roll call.
3. FLAG SALUTE
Mayor Ray Russom led the flag salute.
4. PUBLIC COMMENT ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS
Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No comments were received.
5. CLOSED SESSION
Assistant City Attorney Shapses announced that the City Council will recess to a closed session for the following and will report any reportable action at the City Council Regular meeting at 6:00 p.m.:
a) CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION: (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 54956.9)
Name of 1 Case: Kathy Stutchman v. City of Arroyo Grande, California Division of Workers' Compensation, Case No. ADJ18718871
City Council adjourned to Closed Session at 5:33 p.m.
6. ADJOURNMENT
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
FEBRUARY 10, 2026
PAGE 2
2 Item 9.a.
City Council adjourned Closed Session at 5:44 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING 6:00 P.M.
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Ray Russom called the Regular City Council Meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
City Clerk Matson took roll call.
3. MOMENT OF REFLECTION
4. FLAG SALUTE
Mayor Ray Russom led the flag salute.
5. AGENDA REVIEW
5.a Closed Session Announcements
Assistant City Attorney Shapses announced that there was no reportable action from the following meeting:
February 10, 2026
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION: (Paragraph (1) of subdivision (d) of Government Code § 54956.9)
Name of 1 Case: Kathy Stutchman v. City of Arroyo Grande, California Division of Workers' Compensation, Case No. ADJ18718871
5.b Ordinances read in title only
Moved by Mayor Ray Russom
Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Maraviglia
Move that all ordinances presented at the meeting shall be read by title only and all further readings be waived.
AYES (5): Mayor Ray Russom, Council Member Secrest, Council Member Guthrie, Mayor Pro Tem Maraviglia, and Council Member Loe
Passed (5 to 0)
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
FEBRUARY 10, 2026
PAGE 3
3 Item 9.a.
6. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS
6.a City Manager Communications
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Robeson provided updates on the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC) drill that took place on February 2, 2026; and the annual Meet the Machines event on February 21st.
No action was taken on this item.
7. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS
None.
Reports are made during the Second Council Meeting each month.
8. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. Speaking from the public were Patrick Sparrow, Larry Cooper, Jan Raddery, Andy Dibburn, and Matt Anderson. No further public comments were received.
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Robeson responded to comments from the public.
9. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Ray Russom asked the Council if there were any questions or any items to be pulled from the consent agenda for further discussion. There were none.
Mayor Ray Russom invited public comment. No public comments were received.
Moved by Council Member Guthrie
Seconded by Council Member Secrest
Approve Consent Agenda Items 9.a. through 9.g., with the recommended courses of action.
AYES (5): Council Member Guthrie, Council Member Secrest, Council Member Loe, Mayor Pro Tem Maraviglia, and Mayor Ray Russom
Passed (5 to 0)
9.a Approval of Minutes
Approved the minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 27, 2026, as submitted.
9.b Cash Disbursement Ratification
Reviewed and ratified the listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 1 through January 15, 2026.
9.c Statement of Investment Deposits for December 2025
Received and filed the report listing investment deposits of the City of Arroyo Grande as of December 31, 2025, as required by Government Code Section 53646(b).
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
FEBRUARY 10, 2026
PAGE 4
4 Item 9.a.
9.d Fiscal Year 2025-26 Second Quarter Financial Status Report 1) Received and filed the Fiscal Year 2025-26 Second Quarter Financial Status Report; 2) Approved seven Budget Adjustment Requests; and
3) Received an update from the Citizens’ Sales Tax Oversight Committee Meeting.
9.e Appointment to the Community Service Grant Program Committee Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPOINTING KATHLEEN CHRISTENSEN TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICE GRANT PROGRAM COMMITTEE".
9.f Final Approval of Community Development Block Grant Programs for Year 2026 1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
APPROVAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROJECTS FOR YEAR 2026"; and
2) Found that the preliminary approval of projects is exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 subd. (b)(3).
9.g 2025-2030 Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 1) Adopted a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING THE 2025-2030 UPDATE TO THE SAN LUIS OBISPO
COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AND ACCOMPANYING CITY-SPECIFIC ANNEX"; and
2) Found that the approval of the MJHMP is exempt from CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 subd. (b)(3).
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
10.a Architectural Review 25-003; Proposal for Public Art Installation on Public Property; Location – Centennial Park
Community Development Director Pedrotti presented the Item. Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Robeson and Director Pedrotti responded to questions from Council.
Mayor Ray Russom opened the public hearing. Speaking from the public were Cindy Blankenburg, Vivian Krug, Sam Cotton. Upon hearing no further public comments, Mayor Ray Russom closed the public hearing.
Cindy Blankenburg and Vivian Krug, Arroyo Grande Public Art, responded to questions from Council.
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director Robeson responded to questions from Council.
CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
FEBRUARY 10, 2026
PAGE 5
5 Item 9.a.
Council Member Loe made a motion to adopt the Resolution. Council Member Guthrie seconded the motion. Mayor Ray Russom provided comments regarding the location for the statue and plaque.
Council directed staff to consult with the City arborist regarding the statue's potential impacts on the tree in the tree well.
Moved by Council Member Loe
Seconded by Council Member Guthrie
1) Adopt a Resolution entitled: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 25-003 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A PUBLIC ART PIECE AT CENTENNIAL PARK"; and 2) Find that this is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15301(a) regarding minor alterations to existing structures.
AYES (4): Council Member Loe, Council Member Guthrie, Council Member Secrest, and Mayor Pro Tem Maraviglia
NOES (1): Mayor Ray Russom
Passed (4 to 1)
11. BUSINESS ITEMS
None.
12. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS
Council Member Loe commented on the vacancy on the SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Citizen Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) and encouraged Arroyo Grande residents interested in serving to apply.
13. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, Mayor Ray Russom adjourned the meeting at 6:48 pm.
_________________________
Caren Ray Russom, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Jessica Matson, City Clerk
Item 9.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Nicole Valentine, Director of Administrative Services BY: Megan Schotborgh, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: Cash Disbursement Ratification
DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Review and ratify the attached listing of cash disbursements for the period of January 16 through January 31, 2026.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
There is a $3,939,419.50 fiscal impact for the period of January 16 through January 31, 2026, that includes the following items:
Accounts Payable Checks $3,449,846.71
Payroll & Benefit Checks $489,572.79
BACKGROUND:
Cash disbursements are made weekly based on the submission of all required documents supporting the invoices submitted for payment. Prior to payment, Administrative Services staff review all disbursement documents to ensure that they meet the approval requirements adopted in the Municipal Code and the City’s Purchasing Policies and Procedures Manual.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The attached listing represents the cash disbursements required of normal and usual operations during the period. The disbursements are accounted for in the FY 2025-26 budget.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Approve staff’s recommendation;
2. Do not approve staff’s recommendation; or
3. Provide other direction to staff.
Item 9.b.
City Council
Cash Disbursement Ratification
February 24, 2026
ADVANTAGES:
The Administrative Services Department monitors payments of invoices for accountability, accuracy, and completeness using standards approved by the City Council.
Invoices are paid in a timely manner to establish goodwill with merchants. Discounts are taken where applicable.
DISADVANTAGES:
There are no disadvantages identified in this recommendation.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Ratifying the cash disbursements is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (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.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. January 16 through January 31, 2026 – Accounts Payable Check Register
2. January 23, 2026 – Payroll & Benefit Check Registers
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
100 1111 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE - FCFA
ICMA RETIREMENT CORP, PLAN ID 673.21
10004000 4605 SPEC.INT.CLASSES
ONE TIME PAY 292.00
10004000 4809 DONATIONS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 26.09
BARCELLOS CONSTRUCTION 175.00
FOUR STAR VILLAGE AUTO SERVICE 300.00
HEACOCK TRAILERS 175.00
ONE TIME PAY 700.00
ROTARY CLUB OF AG 175.00
10014001 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
GRAND AWARDS, INC 47.85
10014002 5501 TRAVEL/CONFERENCE/TRAINING
CITY OF SANTA MARIA 475.00
DOWNING, MATTHEW 129.00
10014003 5304 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP 33,814.16
10014003 5327 SERVICES-LITIGATION NON-INSUR.
ADAMSKI MOROSKI MADDEN 721.50
10014003 5503 MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS
SESAC 641.00
10014099 5136 RETIREES HEALTH INSURANCE
ICMA RETIREMENT CORP, PLAN ID 4,348.94
10014101 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
TOWNSEND PUBLIC AFFAIRS INC 11,000.00
10014101 5319 SERVICES-MISCELLANEOUS
BRISCO MILL & LUMBER YARD 270.36
GRAND AWARDS, INC 441.53
10014101 5503 MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS
MUNICIPAL MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATI 125.00
10014120 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 78.28
10014120 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
BAKER TILLY US LLP 3,097.50
ROBERT HALF 1,080.63
10014140 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 1,040.00
CIO SOLUTIONS LP 6,516.23
EVERON LLC 3,790.41
QUADRANT SYSTEMS, INC 2,375.00
SDI PRESENCE LLC 8,250.00
10014140 5607 MAINTENANCE-COMPUTER SOFTWARE
CIO SOLUTIONS LP 7,119.00
10014145 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 600.00
10014145 5401 UTILITIES
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 3,209.08
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 13,308.62
SOCALGAS 332.16
10014145 5403 TELECOMMUNICATIONS
AT & T 185.43
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
VERIZON WIRELESS 631.45
10024130 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 84.76
10024130 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
MINTIER HARNISH LP 40,629.20
10024160 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
JAS PACIFIC 20,041.30
10024160 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 47.91
10034201 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 204.87
10034201 5261 SANTA COP
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1,110.54
10034201 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ATC SEQUOIA LLC 142.57
PARAMOUNT CLEANERS 59.50
RICHETTI COMPLETE WATER 16.50
VITAL RECORDS CONTROL 122.22
10034201 5315 PRE-EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS
BELLA VISTA INVESTIGATIVE SVCS 10,900.00
MILLER MENDEL INC 143.14
10034201 5403 TELECOMMUNICATIONS
AT&T 304.04
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 199.98
VERIZON WIRELESS 1,600.74
10034201 5501 TRAVEL/CONFERENCE/TRAINING
ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGE JCCD 138.00
VEGA, ELIZABETH 583.14
10034201 5503 MEMBERSHIPS & SUBSCRIPTIONS
CPCA - CA POLICE CHIEFS ASSN 875.00
10034201 5504 PUBLIC RELATIONS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 326.31
10034201 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 26.00
10034201 5604 MAINTENANCE-BUILDINGS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 144.19
10034201 5605 MAINTENANCE-GROUNDS
MACEDO, JORGE 140.00
10034201 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 340.78
10034201 5701 OFFICE EQUIPMENT & FURN
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 209.41
10034203 5255 SPECIAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 105.05
10034203 5272 PROTECTIVE/SAFETY CLOTHING
ADAMSON INDUSTRIES, INC 113.47
SKAGGS PUBLIC SAFETY UNIFORMS 392.30
10034203 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
PARAMOUNT CLEANERS 362.00
10034203 5501 TRAVEL/CONFERENCE/TRAINING
ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGE JCCD 1,161.10
BURNS, JEREMY 300.00
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
DOHERTY, STEPHEN 300.00
10034203 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 211.00
FIGUEROA'S TIRES 280.00
10034203 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 3,133.78
10034204 5272 PROTECTIVE/SAFETY CLOTHING
B3CK & COMPANY 1,455.37
10034204 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
OFFICE1 877.08
PARAMOUNT CLEANERS 166.00
TRANSUNION RISK 100.00
10034204 5329 LIVE SCAN FINGERPRINTING EXP.
CA ST DEPT OF JUSTICE 291.00
10034204 5501 TRAVEL/CONFERENCE/TRAINING
ALLAN HANCOCK COLLEGE JCCD 113.14
BURNS, JEREMY 850.65
PULLEN, BRADLEY 375.00
10034204 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
APEX AUTO GLASS 1,194.92
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 127.00
NICK'S TELECOM 70.00
10034204 5602 MAINTENANCE-OFFICE EQUIPMENT
PITNEY BOWES, INC 253.31
10034204 5606 MAINTENANCE-RADIO COMM.
APPLIED TECHNOLOGY GROUP INC 1,724.12
GSA-INFORMATION TECH 947.01
10034204 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 523.42
10044420 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 107.94
10044420 5255 SPECIAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES
BRAND CREATIVE 13.05
10044420 5273 SMALL TOOLS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 194.66
10044420 5274 CHEMICAL SUPPLIES
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 709.80
10044420 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
GROVER TOOL AND RENTALS 357.50
JD ELECTRIC 350.00
UNITED STAFFING ASSOC. 3,481.05
WATERBOYS PLUMBING 210.00
10044420 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BACK ON THE ROAD AUTOMOBILE 891.39
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 50.00
10044420 5605 MAINTENANCE-GROUNDS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 664.96
ARROYO GRANDE IN BLOOM INC 550.00
FASTENAL COMPANY 519.19
MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS 630.75
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 479.64
NOBLE SAW, INC 177.88
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 194.66
10044420 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 998.68
10044421 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 112.14
ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS LLC 134.38
10044421 5602 MAINTENANCE-OFFICE EQUIPMENT
DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SVCS 459.21
VERIZON WIRELESS 38.01
10044421 5701 OFFICE EQUIPMENT & FURN
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 92.97
10044424 5250 SUPPLIES-VOLUNTEER PROGRAM
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 153.63
10044424 5351 SERVICES-CLASSES
BEATTY, IRINA 144.00
BOWLING, KENDRA 1,330.00
CINOWALT, KATHLEEN J 32.00
CROSS, SHIRLEY J 980.00
CUDDY, GAYLE 725.90
FIVE CITIES DUPLICATE BRIDGE 1,197.00
FRYER, ELIZABETH 840.00
LEONG, PRINCESS 536.00
MANGIARDI, HEIDY 1,585.36
NELSON, NICCOLA 425.60
THE AGILE MIND 399.00
YOUTH EVOLUTION BASKETBALL 2,040.50
10044424 5353 SERVICES-EVENTS
LUCIA MAR UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 296.51
10054301 5255 SPECIAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES
BRAND CREATIVE 100.00
10054301 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
MNS ENGINEERS INC 650.90
10054301 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BACK ON THE ROAD AUTOMOBILE 51.74
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 42.00
10054301 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 58.29
10054305 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 80.87
10054305 5255 SPECIAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 40.40
10054305 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
NWESTCO LLC 160.00
10054307 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 340.71
10054307 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 185.02
SP MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC 7,342.50
WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC, L 5,782.22
10054307 5402 POWER
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 22,219.59
10054307 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
BACK ON THE ROAD AUTOMOBILE 51.74
10054308 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 53.24
10054308 5273 SMALL TOOLS
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 85.91
10054308 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
ALPINE REFRIGERATION 1,635.33
BREZDEN PEST CONTROL, INC 316.00
LOS PADRES FIRE PROTECTION 652.31
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 148.38
10054308 5604 MAINTENANCE-BUILDINGS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 1,166.58
FASTENAL COMPANY 493.87
JD ELECTRIC 340.00
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 231.52
10054308 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 273.93
10054330 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 58.72
10054330 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
GROVER TOOL AND RENTALS 143.00
10054330 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
FIGUEROA'S TIRES 240.55
TOM'S AUTO SERVICE 1,329.46
10054330 5605 MAINTENANCE-GROUNDS
BSN SPORTS, LLC 1,034.29
CREATIVE FENCE CO. 1,900.00
FASTENAL COMPANY 650.54
GROVER TOOL AND RENTALS 95.00
PACIFIC GOPHER CONTROL 1,020.00
10054330 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 71.99
110 2115 FIRE EMPLOYEE DUES
FIVE CITIES PROF. FIREFIGHTERS 3,990.00
110 2116 POLICE ASSOCIATION DUES
ARROYO GRANDE POLICE ASSN 2,598.20
110 2117 DEFERRED COMPENSATION
ICMA RETIREMENT CORP PLAN ID 1 4,083.30
ICMA RETIREMENT CORP, PLAN ID 66,484.58
110 2118 S.E.I.U. EMPLOYEE DUES
S.E.I.U. LOCAL 620 1,586.30
110 2125 PREPAID LEGAL SERVICE
LEGALSHIELD 43.90
110 2126 SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE
AFLAC INSURANCE 535.46
21114101 5330 CABLE CASTING EXPENSE
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS 1,349.00
21454550 5606 MAINTENANCE-RADIO COMM.
DORMAN HYDRO-SEEDING 11,000.00
MIER BROS LANDSCAPE PRODUCTS 16,867.13
21754560 5355 PARKWAY MAINTENANCE-TR 1769
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 14.54
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
21954560 5304 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 9.18
22064303 5136 RETIREES HEALTH INSURANCE
ICMA RETIREMENT CORP, PLAN ID 295.36
22064303 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 105.41
22064303 5273 SMALL TOOLS
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 190.49
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 88.01
NOBLE SAW, INC .00
22064303 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
CA ST DEPT OF CORRECTIONS 2,169.38
HARVEY'S HONEY HUTS 106.08
SP MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC 7,342.50
WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC, L 5,028.17
22064303 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 66.00
SUNSET NORTH CAR WASH 67.99
TOM'S AUTO SERVICE 175.00
22064303 5603 MAINTENANCE-MACH & EQUIP
NOBLE SAW, INC 133.05
QUINN COMPANY 376.33
22064303 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 447.26
22064303 5613 MAINTENANCE-STREETS & BRIDGES
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 73.41
BURKE AND PACE OF AG, INC 97.58
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 133.64
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PRODUCTS IN 2,162.16
WILSON ELECTRIC COMPANY INC, L 957.57
22654306 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
STREATOR PIPE & SUPPLY 216.41
WATERBOYS PLUMBING 399.00
22654306 5554 REBATES
ONE TIME PAY 1,224.00
24014150 5301 ADVERTISING
COMMUNE COMMUNICATIONS CORP 13,450.00
SHOP TALK LOS ANGELES INC 1,450.00
24014150 5504 PUBLIC RELATIONS
ARROYO GRANDE VILLAGE MERCHANT 4,910.00
35055422 7001 CONSTRUCTION
ATLAS PERFORMANCE INDUSTRIES I 4,446.39
35055614 7001 CONSTRUCTION
QUINCON INC 22,906.30
35055679 7001 CONSTRUCTION
FILIPPIN ENGINEERING 96,590.60
GRANITE CONSTRUCTION CO 619,874.95
SWRCB 619.00
35055699 7001 CONSTRUCTION
CENTRAL COAST FENCE, INC 73,055.00
35055794 7001 CONSTRUCTION
MAINLINE UTILITY COMPANY 1,000.00
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
35505080 7501 DESIGN & SURVEY
CRISP IMAGING 366.98
NORTH COAST ENGINEERING INC 59,785.50
61254610 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 51.64
61254610 5255 SPECIAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES
BURT INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 289.25
61254610 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
WALLACE GROUP A CALIF CORP 564.28
61254610 5402 POWER
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 3,541.69
61254610 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 50.00
L. DIESEL MOBILE SERVICE 1,274.23
61254610 5603 MAINTENANCE-MACH & EQUIP
PLUMBERS DEPOT INC. 377.86
61254610 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 333.40
640 2301 DEPOSIT RENTERS
ONE TIME PAY REFUND 3,541.96
64054710 5201 SUPPLIES-OFFICE
AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES 187.62
64054710 5303 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES
TRIPEPI SMITH 2,313.75
WATER SYSTEMS CONSULTING INC 2,132.49
64054710 5310 WATER TREATMENT SERVICES
CLINICAL LABORATORY OF 767.50
64054711 5402 POWER
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 3,125.17
64054712 5143 UNIFORM ALLOWANCE
PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 154.02
64054712 5207 SUPPLIES-WATER METERS
AQUA-METRIC SALES CO 12,184.23
64054712 5255 SPECIAL DEPARTMENT SUPPLIES
BURT INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 289.25
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 17.38
64054712 5273 SMALL TOOLS
BRISCO MILL & LUMBER YARD 18.48
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 63.03
64054712 5402 POWER
PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO 10,279.27
64054712 5601 MAINTENANCE-VEHICLES
BACK ON THE ROAD AUTOMOBILE 51.74
BOB'S EXPRESS WASH 50.00
64054712 5604 MAINTENANCE-BUILDINGS
SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC 70.98
64054712 5608 GAS & OIL
JB DEWAR, INC 990.95
64054712 5610 MAINTENANCE-LINES & PUMPS
AUTOSYS LLC 615.00
FAMCON PIPE AND SUPPLY INC 3,298.48
ICONIX WATERWORKS (US) INC 443.04
Attachment 1
City of Arroyo Grande
INV GROUP PUBLICATION LIST
Report generated: 02/09/2026 10:42
User: mschotborgh
Program ID: appdwarr
INV GROUP RANGE:011626 TO 013126 DATES: 07/01/25 TO 06/30/26
ACCOUNT
VENDOR NAME AMOUNT
MINER'S ACE HARDWARE, INC 96.69
PLUMBERS DEPOT INC. 186.24
64054712 5611 MAINTENANCE-METERS
AQUA-METRIC SALES CO 246.65
64055978 7001 CONSTRUCTION
CRISP IMAGING 99.53
64154750 5612 MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS-LOPEZ
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY 2,100,408.59
64505030 7701 CONCEPT STUDIES
CK CONSULTING 1,750.00
TOTAL 3,449,846.71
** END OF REPORT - Generated by Megan Schotborgh **
Attachment 1
.
General Fund 428,473.30 5101 Salaries Full time 289,107.71 Streets Fund 20,642.04 5101 Volunteer Employee Retirement - Sewer Fund 16,802.51 5102 Salaries Part-Time - PPT 7,111.78 Water Fund 23,654.94 5103 Salaries Part-Time - TPT 4,308.89 489,572.79 5105 Salaries OverTime 17,191.25
5106 Salaries Strike Team OT -
5107 Salaries Standby 2,179.72
5108 Holiday Pay 590.15
5109 Sick Pay 10,216.21
Administrative Services - 5110 Annual Leave Buyback -
Information Services 194.29 5111 Vacation Buyback -
Community Development - 5112 Sick Leave Buyback -
Police 15,248.52 5113 Vacation Pay 6,390.84
Public Works - Maintenance 847.79 5114 Comp Pay 5,526.12 Public Works - Enterprise 900.65 5115 Annual Leave Pay 9,628.70 Recreation - Administration - 5116 Salaries - Police FTO - Recreation - Special Events - 5121 PERS Retirement 40,135.47 17,191.25 5122 Social Security 26,806.27
5123 PARS Retirement 166.87
5126 State Disability Ins. 4,540.91
5127 Deferred Compensation 2,041.65
5131 Health Insurance 56,571.93
5132 Dental Insurance 2,833.92
5133 Vision Insurance 731.91
5134 Life Insurance 368.59
5135 Long Term Disability 493.84
5137 Leave Payouts -
5142 Unemployment Insurance -
5143 Uniform Allowance 134.56
5144 Car Allowance 1,055.50
5146 Council Expense -
5147 Employee Assistance -
5148 Boot Allowance -
5149 Motor Pay -
5150 Bi-Lingual Pay 175.00
5151 Cell Phone Allowance 1,265.00
489,572.79
OVERTIME BY DEPARTMENT:
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
DEPARTMENTAL LABOR DISTRIBUTION
PAY PERIOD
01/02/2026 - 01/15/2026
1/23/2026
BY FUND BY ACCOUNT
Attachment 2
Item 9.c.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works BY: Shannon Sweeney, City Engineer
SUBJECT: Accept Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project, PW 2023-02 DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt a Resolution accepting the project improvements as constructed by Granite Construction Company in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project, PW 2023-02; and
2) Direct staff to file a Notice of Completion.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
The actual total construction cost for the subject project, including authorized construction changes, is estimated at $10,990,000.
BACKGROUND:
On December 10, 2024,
1 the Council awarded a construction contract to Granite Construction Company to construct the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project for $10,799,051 and authorized the City Manager to approve change orders in the amount of $1,079,905.10 for a total construction budget of $11,878,956.10. The project scope of work involved replacing Traffic Way Bridge.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications. There are no outstanding issues.
1https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=d97188a8-cbd4-44a5-8b29- 561fdea7102b&Agenda=Agenda&lang=English&Item=62&Tab=attachments
Item 9.c.
City Council
Accept Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project, PW 2023-02 February 24, 2026
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Approve staff’s recommendations;
2. Do not accept the project; or
3. Provide direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
The project is complete. Accepting the improvements will allow staff to close out the project and return remaining funds to the fund balance.
DISADVANTAGES:
The disadvantage of accepting the improvements would be if subsequent deficiencies in the work are identified. However, the contract documents include a one-year warranty period for the contractor to address any construction defects that may arise.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
This item is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment (State CEQA Guidelines, Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
2. Notice of Completion
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE ACCEPTING THE PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS AS
CONSTRUCTED BY GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
TRAFFIC WAY BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT, PW 2023-02
WHEREAS, On December 10, 2024, the Council awarded a construction contract to Granite Construction Company to construct the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project for $10,799,051 and authorized the City Manager to approve change orders in the amount of $1,079,905.10 for a total construction budget of $11,878,956.10; and WHEREAS, The project scope of work involved replacing Traffic Way Bridge; and WHEREAS, The contractor has completed the work in accordance with the approved plans and specifications with no outstanding issues and within the approved budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby:
1. All recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.
2. Accept the project improvements as constructed by Granite Construction Company in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project, PW 2023-02.
3. Direct staff to file a Notice of Completion for this project.
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 24th day of February, 2026.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY
ATTACHMENT 2
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE
300 EAST BRANCH STREET
ARROYO GRANDE, CA 93420
NOTICE OF COMPLETION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT:
1. The undersigned is owner or agent of owner of the interest or estate or the property hereinafter described as stated below.
2. The FULL NAME of the OWNER is: The City of Arroyo Grande
3. The FULL ADDRESS of the OWNER is: 300 East Branch Street, Arroyo Grande, California 93420
4. The NATURE OF THE INTEREST or ESTATE of the undersigned is: in fee
5. THE FULL NAME and FULL ADDRESS of ALL PERSONS, if any, who hold such interest or estate with the undersigned as JOINT TENANTS or as TENANTS IN COMMON are:
NAMES ADDRESSES
None
6. THE FULL NAMES and FULL ADDRESSES of the PREDECESSOR’S in interest of the undersigned if the property was transferred subsequent to the commencement of the work of improvements herein referred to:
NAMES ADDRESSES
None
7. All work of improvement on the property hereinafter described was COMPLETED February 24, 2026
8. The NAME OF THE ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR, if any, for such work of improvement is:
Granite Construction Company
9. The street address of said property is: Traffic Way Bridge
10. The property on which said work of improvement was completed is in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California, and is described as follows: Traffic Way Bridge Replacement Project (PW 2023-02) Verification of NON-INDIVIDUAL owner: I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that I am the Public Works Director of the aforesaid interest or estate in the property described in the above notice; that I have read the said notice, that I know and understand the contents thereof, and the facts stated therein are true and correct. _________________________________________________
Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director February 24, 2026, Arroyo Grande, California
-- END OF DOCUMENT --
Item 9.d.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works BY: Natalie Riddering, Planning and Engineering Permit Technician SUBJECT: James Way Sewer Easement Vacation
DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt a Resolution ordering the vacation of a Sewer Easement at James Way; and 2) Find that Adopting a Resolution Vacating the Sewer Easement at 1281 James Way is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.); IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
No financial impact is projected.
BACKGROUND:
The subject 10-foot-wide public sewer easement encumbers two properties: 1271 and 1281 James Way. The sewer easement was initially established with the recordation of Parcel Map 79-8381 on June 25, 1982. The original recordation package contained an incorrectly plotted exhibit graphic that erroneously showed an existing sewer easement for related facilities within the easement. However, there are no sewer facilities located within this sewer easement, as shown in the updated and corrected Exhibit A and Exhibit B of the Resolution (Attachment 1).
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The property owner of 1271 and 1281 James Way requested vacation of the erroneously plotted sewer easement because it does not encompass any sewer facilities. Public Works has confirmed the utilities are not located within this sewer easement. The sewer facilities serving these parcels are located within the corrected sewer easement previously approved by the City Council through adoption of Resolution No. 2025-0632.
1 https://slocountypwd.org/MapFiles/PM/PM_031/PM_031_047_001.pdf 2 http://weblink.arroyogrande.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=365086&dbid=0&repo=ArroyoGrande
Item 9.d.
City Council
James Way Sewer Easement Vacation
February 24, 2026
Vacating this sewer easement will complete the correction of all incorrectly plotted sewer easements within 1271 and 1281 James Way in accordance with California Streets and Highways Code Section 8333, et seq., which authorizes the City to vacate an excess public utility easement if it is no longer required.
Section 8333 provides that the City Council may summarily vacate a public service easement, like this sewer easement, under any of the following circumstances:
a. The easement has not been used for the purpose for which it was dedicated or acquired for five consecutive years immediately preceding the proposed vacation. b. The date of dedication or acquisition is less than five years, and more than one year, immediately preceding the proposed vacation, and the easement was not used continuously since that date.
c. The easement has been superseded by relocation, or determined to be excess by the easement holder, and there are no other public facilities located within the easement.
In this case, the City is vacating a sewer easement that was incorrectly plotted and has been determined to be excess by the easement holder because it does not contain any city-maintained sewer facilities, pursuant to Section 8333(c). There are no other public facilities of any other entity located within the easement area, and all other requirements of the Streets and Highways Code are satisfied. Therefore, the City may vacate the sewer easement.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Adopt the Resolution;
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Vacating the excess sewer easement will correct an erroneously recorded easement, align City records with actual field conditions, and eliminate an unnecessary encumbrance on private property. This action promotes accurate public records, supports efficient infrastructure management, and finalizes the correction of sewer easement discrepancies within the James Way Shopping Center.
DISADVANTAGES:
The primary disadvantage is the permanent loss of a dedicated utility corridor, which reduces the City’s future flexibility to install new infrastructure in that location without negotiating a new, likely more costly easement. Further, because the vacation is based on existing utility records and field verification, any unknown or undocumented facilities could present future maintenance or coordination challenges. In addition, processing the
Item 9.d.
City Council
James Way Sewer Easement Vacation
February 24, 2026
vacation, including staff time, legal review, and recording fees, results in a minor fiscal impact associated with correcting a historical mapping error.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Adopting a Resolution Vacating the Sewer Easement at James Way is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (b)(2)-(3), 15378.) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Resolution
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE ORDERING THE VACATION OF A SEWER
EASEMENT ON JAMES WAY
WHEREAS, Chapter 4 of the Public Streets, Highways and Services Easements Vacation Law, commencing with Streets and Highways Code Section 8330, provides for vacation of streets and public service easements; and WHEREAS, the subject sewer easement (the “Easement”) to be vacated is a ten-foot wide (10’) easement shown on Parcel D of Lot 5 of Tract No. 604 of Parcel Map No. 79-838 in 1982, described in Exhibit “A” and depicted in Exhibit “B”, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
WHEREAS, Section 8333, subdivision (c), of the Streets and Highways Code authorizes the City Council to vacate a public service easement when it has been determined to be excess by the easement holder, and there are no other public facilities within the easement; and
WHEREAS, the sewer easement is excess, not needed for public utility purposes, and there are no utilities or public improvements located within the easement to be vacated; and
WHEREAS, all other prerequisites required by the Streets and Highways Code have been met, including that from the date this resolution is recorded, the vacated sewer easement no longer constitutes a street, highway, or public service easement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby resolve as follows:
1. Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
2. Vacation of Easement. This Resolution is adopted pursuant to the summary vacation procedures set forth in California Streets and Highways Code section 8330 et seq., as the Easement to be vacated is excess, not required for public utility purposes, and there are not public facilities located within the Easement area. The City Council hereby orders the vacation of the Easement and any and all interests that the City may have therein. From and after the date the Resolution is recorded, the Easement no longer constitutes a public service easement.
3. Environmental Review. The City Council hereby determines that the summary vacation of the easement is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
Act (“CEQA”) because it has no potential to result in either direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)-(3), 15378.) Alternatively, the vacation of the easement is exempt from CEQA on the basis that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15061, subd. (b)(3).)
4. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.
5. Recordation. The City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of this Resolution of vacation, attested by the City Clerk under seal, to be recorded without acknowledgement, certificate of acknowledgement, or further proof in the Office of the San Luis Obispo County Clerk-Recorder. Pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Section 8336, no fee shall be charged for recordation.
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 24th day of February, 2026.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY
C:\0-WORK FILES\0-CFryE&S_Inc\CFry Jobs\00101_AG-James Way (Sheppel Meadow Creek)\WORKING\sewer easement #2 Vacation 31PM47.docx
Exhibit “___”
Legal Description
for
Sewer Easement Vacation
A 10-foot strip of land located in the City of Arroyo Grande, County of San Luis Obispo, State of California offered for dedication and shown as “10’ PUBLIC SEWER LINE ESMT.
PER THIS MAP” on Parcel Map No. AG 79-838 filed January 29, 1982 in Book 31, Page 47 of Parcel Maps in the office of the County Recorder of said County.
Containing: 4,330 square feet, more or less
Legal Description prepared by
or under the supervision of:
_________________________1/14/2026
Cristi E. Fry, LS 8356 date
2/14/2026 A
Page __ of __
EXHIBIT “____”
8/20/24
NOTE: TO REMAIN - 10' SEWER LINE EASEMENT SHOWN
AND DEDICATED ON PARCEL MAP NO. AG 82-35, PER MAP
RECORDED 6/25/1982 IN BOOK 32, PAGE 31 OF PARCEL MAPS
VACATE: ENTIRETY OF 10'
PUBLIC SEWER LINE
EASEMENT DEDICATED ON
PARCEL MAP NO. AG 79-838,
PER MAP RECORDED 1/29/1982
IN BOOK 31, PAGE 47 OF
PARCEL MAPS (SEE CL
COURSES HEREON)
CL COURSES OF SEWER ESMT
1 N 20°15'04" E 351.28'
2 N 72°49'37" W 57.24'
3 N 32°25'00" E 24.50' 1
2 3
2/14/2026 1 1 PARCEL MAP NO. AG 79-838 B
C Fry Engineering & Surveying Inc
PO Box 444 Cayucos, CA 93430
805-550-0361
Item 9.e.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works BY: Shane Taylor, Utilities Manager
SUBJECT: Monthly Water Supply & Demand Update
DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file the Monthly Water Supply and Demand Update.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
Approximately two (2) hours of staff time are required to prepare the report.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Arroyo Grande’s water entitlements are calculated on a water year that began April 1, 2025. The current water supply 2025-26 includes:
2,290 Acre Feet (AF) from Lopez Lake Reservoir/Lopez contract entitlement. The current modeled safe yield is 357 AF of groundwater from the Santa Maria River Santa Maria River Groundwater Basin, with an entitlement of 1,323 AF. An additional 160 AF of groundwater is available from the Pismo formation from the existing City well system.
In addition to the annual Lopez Lake Reservoir contract entitlement, the City will have 689.69 AF of stored Lopez water, which is unused entitlement from water year 2024-25.
The City also previously accepted an offer to purchase 470.33 AF of surplus Lopez water.
The surplus water cost is $55,146.74 or $117.14 per AF.
The total supply from Lopez Lake Reservoir for this water year is 3,450 AF. The predicted water use for the 2025-26 water year is 2,200 AF.
Item 9.e.
City Council
Monthly Water Supply & Demand Update
February 24, 2026
In January 2026, the City’s water use was 132.0 AF. The overall per capita use was 77 gallons per day. The residential per capita use was 59 gallons per day. There has been a total of 13.3 inches of rain since July 2025 at the Corp Yard gauge.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
As of February 12, 2026, the USDA Drought Monitor reports San Luis Obispo County as normal. Lopez Lake is at 83.7% (41,496 AF). The deep well index for the fourth quarter of 2025 was completed on October 21, 2025. The index level was 10.54 feet above sea level, which is 3.04 feet above the threshold value. The current deep well index is 1.09 feet lower than July 2025 and 0.97 feet lower than October 2024.
In the current water year, the City took delivery of all stored and surplus water totaling 1,160 AF. The use of this water prevented it from possibly spilling and being lost. It is estimated that 1,500 AF of unused entitlement will be available for storage at the end of the current water year, March 31, 2026.
On January 15, 2025, in response to a preliminary injunction issued by the United States District Court to the County of San Luis Obispo, Lopez Lake downstream releases were increased from 2.0 million gallons per day to 5.1 million gallons per day. This release rate was in place until December 29, 2025.
The 9th District Court of Appeals overturned the preliminary injunction and returned the water releases to the interim downstream release schedule. The current release rate on January 14, 2026, was 4.8 cubic feet per second (cfs) or 3.1 million gallons per day. A gradual decrease in the release process to former rates is necessary to monitor creek conditions. The current rate as of February 13, 2026, is 3.6 cfs or 2.3 million gallons per day.
The City and all other Zone 3 contractors will continue to work with the County to assess and report on the impact on our water supply from Lopez Lake until the litigation is resolved. However, the significant costs of the ongoing litigation and future improvements will be shared by the ratepayers of the City and other Zone 3 member agencies.
To keep the community informed of the current status of the litigation and the City’s water system, staff have developed a webpage where updates will be published. The webpage can be accessed at www.arroyogrande.org/lopezlakelitigation.
Council Goals Workplan
In the current Council Goals workplan for Fiscal Year 2025-27, under the Council Goal of “Achieve Water Resilience”, the Council has directed staff to Pursue 2026 State Water Ballot Measure, with the specific subtask to Seek Council approval placing a November Ballot Measure. It is anticipated that this item will be brought to the Council for direction in the near future.
Item 9.e.
City Council
Monthly Water Supply & Demand Update
February 24, 2026
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Receive and file the report, or
2. Provide other directions to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
The report provides the City Council and the public with the current and projected water supply and demand conditions.
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. Monthly Operations Report for January 2026
2. Lopez Lake Reservoir Storage Projections
3. Previous Year Water Use Comparison
4. Deep Well Index Levels for 4th Quarter
Item 11.a.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Matthew Downing, City Manager
Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager/Director of Public Works BY: Shannon Sweeney, City Engineer
SUBJECT: San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Transportation Expenditure Plan
DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a Resolution approving the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Final Draft Transportation Expenditure Plan (Plan) and authorizing SLOCOG to use the City’s logo on website and informational materials.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
There is no immediate fiscal impact associated with this action.
If the regional half-cent sales tax measure proceeds and is approved by voters in November 2026, Arroyo Grande would receive a significant, stable, multi-decade revenue stream of approximately $1,256,955 annually to supplement road repair and transportation-related infrastructure improvements within the City.
BACKGROUND:
SLOCOG developed a Plan associated with a potential half-cent countywide transportation sales tax measure targeted for the November 2026 ballot.
The Plan is intended to address a region-wide transportation funding shortfall, respond to public feedback collected through polling, workshops, and focus groups, and establish an equitable distribution of new transportation revenues.
On January 13, 2026,
1 SLOCOG staff presented the draft Plan to the City of Arroyo Grande City Council to gather input prior to final Board consideration. The Council provided input and comments to SLOCOG on its Draft Plan, including the request that
1https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=49dd393f-4950-4c01-9319- d402aa6b33a5&Agenda=Agenda&lang=English&Item=43&Tab=attachments
Item 11.a.
City Council
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Transportation Expenditure Plan
February 24, 2026
language be incorporated into the Plan that requires consensus among the south county region representatives before south county regional funds are allocated elsewhere within the county. SLOCOG staff discussed this comment with their legal counsel and determined that such additional approval cannot be accomplished on a formal level because none of the regional areas are represented by a single legislative body through which that concurrence can be sought. Although the Council’s input and comments were not incorporated into the Plan presented to the SLOCOG board as envisioned, in discussion with SLOCOG staff, the concept of ensuring that regional corridor improvement funds are equitably allocated is incumbent on the Citizen Oversight Committee, which is comprised of members of each community, by the SLOCOG board, which approves implementation plans, and by the Final Expenditure Plan if the measure passes, which has regional percentages to be met over the life of the 30-year measure.
On February 4, 20262, the Plan was presented to the SLOCOG board for review of recommended changes, excluding the directed Council language. The SLOCOG board approved the final draft Transportation Expenditure Plan and directed staff to present the final draft Plan to the jurisdiction for approval consideration.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The proposed sales tax is projected to generate approximately $35 million annually (2024 estimate), escalating each year. The Plan describes revenue distribution across four primary categories:
55% - Local Road Repairs, Safety, and Improvements (allocated to each jurisdiction based on population)
40% - Regional Corridor Improvements (allocated to four subregions by population share)
4% - Senior/Disabled/Veterans’ Mobility Improvements
1% - Administrative Costs (maximum)
The Plan emphasizes transparency, local control, subregional equity, and accountability through safeguards such as a Citizens’ Oversight Committee, maintenance-of-effort requirements, regular audits, and multi-year implementation plans.
SLOCOG is seeking approval by resolution on the final draft Plan and will return with results to the SLOCOG Board on April 1. SLOCOG may adopt the plan if a majority of cities, with a majority of incorporated population approve the draft final Plan.
Under the Plan, Arroyo Grande would receive an estimated $1,256,955 annually from the Local Road Repair category (55% share). Additional funds are guaranteed to fund
2 https://slo-span.org/meeting/slocog_20260204/
Item 11.a.
City Council
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Transportation Expenditure Plan
February 24, 2026
regional improvements in the South County communities through the Regional Corridor improvements category.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Adopt the Resolution;
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
A dedicated, local transportation sales tax is an invaluable tool that 25 California county transportation authorities use to deliver timely, cost-efficient transportation improvements to their communities. Adding San Luis Obispo County to the list of counties in California that have such dedicated sales taxes would help unlock hundreds of millions of dollars in additional transportation funding, helping deliver much-needed transportation improvements and repairs for our residents and to our communities.
A San Luis Obispo regional, ½ cent sales tax for transportation would:
Generate $35M annually, escalating each year (topping $1B over 30 years without escalations);
Reclaim $0.8M to $1M annually from State funds;
Collect a $3M to $5M one-time windfall from State funds; Qualify the region to receive our fair share of State and Federal funds (our neighboring Central Coast Counties have seen average annual grants that equal or nearly double collected tax amounts);
Include Investment Guidelines providing safeguards, assurances, and oversight of all funds; and
Guarantee 99% of all funds are for transportation-related improvements within the Expenditure Plan.
DISADVANTAGES:
The community may oppose an additional ½ cent sales tax. The Maintenance of Effort element of the sales tax may dictate that each Agency receiving revenues for “Local Projects” shall annually maintain, at a minimum, the same level of local fully discretionary general fund revenues that were expended on average for fiscal years 2021-22, 2022- 23, 2023-24, 2024-25 and 2025-26, for transportation purposes.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
Adopting this Resolution is exempt from CEQA on the basis that it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, § 15061, subd. (b)(3).)
Item 11.a.
City Council
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Transportation Expenditure Plan
February 24, 2026
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. Resolution
2. Final Draft Transportation Expenditure Plan
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE APPROVING THE SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNCIL OF
GOVERNMENTS (SLOCOG) FINAL DRAFT TRANSPORTATION
EXPENDITURE PLAN (PLAN) AND AUTHORIZING SLOCOG TO USE
THE CITY’S LOGO ON WEBSITE AND INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS
WHEREAS, the streets, roads, highways, transit systems, bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the incorporated and unincorporated areas of San Luis Obispo County are of regional concern and are essential to the safety, mobility, economic vitality, environmental sustainability, and quality of life of residents, businesses, visitors, seniors, veterans, and persons with mobility challenges; and
WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of California has authorized counties to establish voter-approved local transportation sales taxes pursuant to Public Utilities Code Division 19 (commencing with Section 180000) and Revenue and Taxation Code Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251); and
WHEREAS, keeping roads and highways in good condition and enhancing mobility helps protect public safety by allowing police, firefighters, and ambulances to respond quickly to emergencies and ensuring first responders are not stuck in traffic or slowed down by failing infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, a county-wide half-cent sales tax is proposed for voter consideration on the November 2026 ballot; and
WHEREAS, the ½ cent sales tax is paid by both residents and visitors shopping in San Luis Obispo County, including visitors, to ensure all users of local roads and transportation infrastructure contribute; and
WHEREAS, by law, this money must stay in San Luis Obispo County for local transportation improvements only and cannot be taken away by the State or used for other purposes; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 180206, and through extensive public engagement and coordination with all incorporated cities and the County of San Luis Obispo, SLOCOG has prepared a countywide Transportation Expenditure Plan which guides the investment of revenues generated by this Ordinance, provides for locally controlled funding for transportation repairs and improvements, and requires strict fiscal accountability protections, including a Citizen's Oversight Committee, annual independent audits, and public disclosure of all spending; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the voters and the Authority/SLOCOG that revenues generated by this Ordinance supplement, and not supplant, existing transportation funding.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo Grande does hereby:
1. All recitals above are true and correct and incorporated herein.
2. Approve the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) final draft Transportation Expenditure Plan (Plan); and
3. Authorize SLOCOG to use the city’s logo on website and informational materials.
On motion of Council Member , seconded by Council Member , and on the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted this 24th day of February, 2026.
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 4
CAREN RAY RUSSOM, MAYOR
ATTEST:
JESSICA MATSON, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
MATTHEW DOWNING, CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ISAAC ROSEN, CITY ATTORNEY
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 1 San Luis Obispo County Transportation
Expenditure Plan
I. Introduction
San Luis Obispo County’s transportation system is essential to the safety, mobility, and economic vitality of its residents, businesses, and visitors. Yet existing state and federal revenues are inadequate to maintain local streets and roads, operate reliable transit, and deliver major regional improvements.
This Transportation Expenditure Plan establishes a dedicated local funding source — a voter-approved ½-cent transactions and use tax — projected to generate approximately $35 million per year. All revenues will remain in San Luis Obispo County and may only be used for transportation purposes.
The Plan emphasizes geographic equitable distribution of funds, fairness, transparency, and strong taxpayer safeguards while ensuring flexibility to leverage state and federal funds.
II. Revenue Distribution
Revenues shall be allocated as follows:
A. 55% Local Road Repairs and
Improvements distributed by population
to each city and the County. (Reviewed
every ten years based on census data1
).
B. 40% Regional Corridor
Improvements distributed by subregion
population within the areas defined as
shown.
C. 4% Mobility Services for Seniors,
Veterans and Mobility Challenged
D. 1% Administration
1 Should a new city become incorporated, the percentages would be adjusted to reflect the updated population distribution.
ATTACHMENT 2
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 2 III. Eligible Uses of Funds
Local Road Repairs and Improvements (55%)
Funds are distributed by population to the cities and the County. County funds shall be distributed equally by Supervisorial District over the life of the measure as monitored and reported by the Citizens Oversight Committee. Funds may be used for:
A. Local road maintenance, rehabilitation, and repair.
B. Safe Routes to School and Safe Routes to College programs.
C. Local intersections, operational and traffic safety improvements.
D. Bridge safety and seismic retrofits.
E. Bicycle and pedestrian improvements (sidewalks, crosswalks, multi-use paths).
F. Community enhancements tied to transportation
(streetscape, lighting, landscaping, wayfinding).
G. Traffic signal improvements and synchronization.
H. Piers, walkways and other pedestrian or bike paths in and around waterfront and river areas.
I. Transit services including local trolley services may be funded if desired by a City.
Regional Corridor Improvements (40%)
Regional project funds shall be distributed by population among subregions over the life of the measure as monitored and reported by the Citizens Oversight Committee and used for:
A. Highway and major corridor congestion relief such as van or carpool lanes or other congestion relief measures.
B. Safety and interchange improvements.
C. Regional bicycle and pedestrian connectors between communities like the Bob Jones Trail.
D. Interagency Transit Access.
E. Mitigation impacts for proposed improvements.
F. Other projects consistent with the adopted Regional Transportation Plan (RTP).
Mobility Services for Seniors, Veterans and Mobility Challenged (4%) Funds shall support improvements to mobility programs that prioritize services for seniors, veterans, and mobility challenged.
Administration (1%)
No more than 1% of annual revenues shall be allocated by the Authority for administration, reporting, auditing, and program oversight.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 3 IV. Governing Board and Organizational Structure
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) serves as the designated Local Transportation Authority for San Luis Obispo County and is responsible for administering the Transportation Measure in compliance with Public Utilities Code (PUC) 180000 et seq. Upon voter approval of the Transportation Measure, the Board of Directors of SLOCOG will serve as the Authority Board, hereafter the Authority, and will oversee its implementation in accordance with the plans and programs detailed in this and future updates of the Expenditure Plan.
This Expenditure Plan provides for the creation of a Citizens’ Oversight Committee to ensure transparency and accountability. Details regarding the Committee are contained in this plan (Section XIV). The Biennial Implementation Plan will be prepared and updated by SLOCOG staff and approved by the Authority Board as per the Ordinance Section 14.
Per PUC 180000, the Authority’s governing board will include representation as follows:
• Five (5) members of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors • One (1) member representing each incorporated city within San Luis Obispo County—Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, and San Luis Obispo—appointed by their respective city councils.
Alternates to the regular members may participate in accordance with SLOCOG bylaws.
Should another city become incorporated, it will have one seat on the Authority Board.
V. Maintenance of Effort (MOE)
The enabling legislation in Public Utilities Code PUC 180001(e) states:
It is the intent of the Legislature that funds generated pursuant to this division be used to supplement and not replace existing local revenues used for transportation purposes.
Each Agency receiving revenues for “Local Projects” shall annually maintain, at a minimum, the same level of local fully discretionary general fund revenues that were expended on average for fiscal years 2021/22, 2022/23, 2023/24, 2024/25 and 2025/26, for transportation purposes. Dedicated funds for transportation such as gas tax revenues are not counted as general fund revenues. Transfers into the general fund will not be counted as general fund revenues. Grant awards and general fund revenues used as matching funds for grant awards will not be counted as general fund revenues. Revenue from general or special tax measures over and above the agency’s baseline tax of 1 ½% will not be counted as part of general fund revenues for the purposes of MOE.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 4 Unusual one-time general fund allocations that have been expended for transportation purposes may be exempted prior to determining the Agency’s average expenditure for the five fiscal years noted above at the discretion of the Authority.
An agency petitioning for an exception under this provision must supply evidence of the need for special consideration, and the petition must be approved by a majority vote of the Authority Board.
The Authority shall not allocate any Net Revenues to any jurisdiction for any fiscal year until that jurisdiction has certified to the Authority that it has included in its budget for that fiscal year an amount of local discretionary funds for streets and roads purposes at least equal to the level of its maintenance of effort requirement. An annual independent audit will be conducted by the Authority to verify that the maintenance of effort requirements are being met by the jurisdiction. Any Net Revenues not allocated pursuant to the maintenance of effort requirement shall jurisdictions be allocated to the remaining eligible jurisdictions according to the formula described in the Section III.
Exceptions
Subject to Authority approval, if any local jurisdiction had extraordinary local discretionary fund expenditures during any fiscal year it may determine that year’s minimum expenditure base level of local discretionary funds by:
(a) subtracting those extraordinary expenses funding, assessment district contributions, development impact funds, redevelopment agency contributions, or other non-recurring contributions) from its total expenditures; or (b) petitioning the Authority for special consideration. It is possible that a local jurisdiction may need to revise its minimum expenditure base beyond the subtraction of extraordinary expenses. In this instance, the Authority may allow the establishment of a new base for that jurisdiction's Maintenance of Effort requirement.
A local jurisdiction petitioning the Authority under this provision must supply evidence of the need for special consideration and the petition must be approved by a majority vote of the Authority.
VI. Requirements for Eligible Jurisdictions
To be eligible to receive Net Revenues, a jurisdiction shall satisfy and continue to satisfy the following requirements.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 5 A. Mitigation Fee Program. Assess traffic impacts of new development and require new development to pay a fair share of necessary transportation improvements attributable to the new development.
B. Circulation Element. Adopt and comply with its Circulation Element as part of the jurisdiction’s General Plan,
C. Capital Improvement Program. Adopt and update a minimum Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP shall include all capital transportation projects, including projects funded by Net Revenues, and shall include transportation projects required to demonstrate compliance with pavement management requirements.
D. Pavement Management Plan. Adopt and update a Pavement Management Plan and provide regular reporting on the status of road pavement conditions and implementation of the Pavement Management Plan.
E. Expenditure Report. Adopt an Expenditure Report to account for Net Revenues, developer/traffic impact fees, and funds expended by the Eligible Jurisdiction which satisfy the Maintenance of Effort requirements. The Expenditure Report shall be submitted by the end of six (6) months following the end of the jurisdiction’s fiscal year and include the following:
1. All Net Revenue fund balances and interest earned.
2. Expenditures identified by type (i.e., capital, operations, administration, etc.), and program or project.
F. Project Final Report. Provide Authority with a Project Final Report for regional projects within six months following completion of a project funded with Net Revenues.
G. Time Limits for Use of Net Revenues for Regional Projects.
1. Agree that Net Revenues for Regional Projects shall be expended or encumbered no later than the end of the fiscal year for which the Net Revenues are programmed. A request for extension of the encumbrance deadline for no more than thirty-six months may be submitted to the Authority no less than ninety days prior to the deadline. The Authority may approve one or more requests for extension of the encumbrance deadline.
2. In the event the time limits for use of Net Revenues for Regional Projects are not satisfied then any retained Net Revenues that were allocated to an Eligible Jurisdiction and interest earned thereon shall be returned to the
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 6 Authority and these Net Revenues and interest earned thereon shall be available for allocation to any project within the same source program.
H. No Supplanting of Funds. Agree that Net Revenues shall not be used to supplant developer funding which has been or will likely be committed for any transportation project.
I. Public Notice of Use of Measure Funds. Member agencies will provide the public with planned use of measure funding as part of its annual or biennial budget process. This includes each City and Community Advisory Council will receive at a minimum, twice per programming year presentations from jurisdictional staff to review proposed investments prior to annual allocations.
Determination of Non-Eligibility
A determination of non-eligibility of a jurisdiction shall be made only after a hearing has been conducted and a determination has been made by the Authority that the jurisdiction is not an Eligible Jurisdiction as provided hereinabove.
VII. Taxpayer Safeguards
A. A transportation special revenue fund (the “Local Transportation Authority Special Revenue Fund”) shall be established to maintain all Revenues.
B. Accounting Receipt, maintenance and expenditure of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable in each jurisdiction’s accounting records from other funding sources, and expenditures of Net Revenues shall be distinguishable by program or project. Interest earned on Net Revenues allocated pursuant to the Ordinance shall be expended only for those purposes for which the Net Revenues were allocated.
C. No Net Revenues shall be used by a jurisdiction for other than transportation purposes authorized by the Ordinance. Any jurisdiction which violates this provision must fully reimburse the Authority for the Net Revenues misspent and shall be deemed ineligible to receive Net Revenues for a period of five (5) years.
D. A Citizens Oversight Committee (“Committee”) shall be established to provide an enhanced level of accountability for expenditure of Revenues under the Ordinance.
The Committee will help to ensure that all voter mandates are carried out as required. The roles and responsibilities of the Committee, the selection process for Committee members and related administrative procedures shall be carried out as described in the Section XIII below and Ordinance Section 15.
E. A performance assessment shall be conducted at least once every five years to evaluate the efficiency, effectiveness, economy and program results of the Authority in satisfying the provisions and requirements of the Investment Summary
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 7 of the Plan, the Plan and the Ordinance. A copy of the performance assessment shall be provided to the Committee.
F. Annual status reports regarding the regional corridor projects and improvements shall be brought before the Authority by local agencies and Authority staff at least annually in public meetings.
G. Annual Report Annually the Authority shall publish a report on how all Revenues have been spent and on progress in implementing projects in the Plan and shall publicly report on the findings and posted on the agency website.
VIII. Ten-Year Comprehensive Program Review
At least every ten years the Authority shall conduct a comprehensive review of all projects and programs implemented under the Plan to evaluate the performance of the overall program and may revise the Plan to improve its performance. The review shall include consideration of changes to local, state and federal transportation plans and policies; changes in land use, travel and growth projections; changes in project cost estimates and revenue projections; right-of-way constraints and other project constraints; level of public support for the Plan; and the progress of the Authority and jurisdictions in implementing the Plan. The Authority may amend the Plan based on its comprehensive review, subject to the requirements of Section IX: Reporting, Implementation and Amendments.
IX. Reporting, Implementation and Amendments
Administration
In compliance with state and federal requirements, SLOCOG regularly prepares a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) that identifies priority projects across all transportation modes, including highways, local roads, public transit, bikeways, and aviation.
All updates to the Expenditure Plan will undergo public review and hearings. Candidate projects and priorities may evolve, but the county’s extensive transportation needs will ensure robust use of all available funding, including sales tax revenues. During each update, the Authority will review investments across multiple transportation modes to ensure efficiency and equity in addressing mobility needs throughout San Luis Obispo County.
Annual Report
Each year, the Citizens’ Oversight Committee (Section XIV) reviews expenditures and communicates results to the public through an Annual Report.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 8 Amendment Process
As specified in PUC Section 180207:
(a) Once per calendar year, the Authority may review and propose amendments to the county’s transportation expenditure plan to incorporate additional revenues, account for unanticipated funds, or respond to unforeseen circumstances.
Amendments adopted late in the year will not preclude additional amendments in the following year.
(b) The Authority must notify the County Board of Supervisors and each city council, providing copies of proposed amendments for their review. (c) Amendments become effective 45 days after notification.
Voter approval (2/3 majority) is required for changes to funding categories or overall allocation formulas as per Ordinance Section 10.
Biennial Implementation Plan
At least once every two years, the Authority will prepare and adopt a Measure TBD Implementation Plan. This plan will include a financial component consistent with both the SLOCOG Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and the STIP.
Process steps include:
A. SLOCOG staff, working with member agencies and stakeholders, will draft and update the Implementation Plan biennially.
B. The Authority Board will review the Draft Implementation Plan, hold public hearings, and incorporate feedback.
C. Following review, the Authority formally adopts the Implementation Plan.
Implementation Guidelines
Following voter approval of this Measure, the Authority shall adopt Implementation Guidelines to administer and implement the Expenditure Plan in a manner consistent with the voter-approved purposes of this Measure. The Implementation Guidelines shall establish procedures for project programming and delivery, eligibility requirements, fund distribution, accountability and reporting, audits, amendments, and other administrative matters necessary to ensure effective and transparent use of Measure revenues. The Implementation Guidelines shall not expand or alter the uses of funds authorized by this Measure and shall be adopted by the governing board at a public meeting following a noticed public process.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 9 X. Bonding Authority
To reduce overall costs by advancing construction timelines, the Authority shall have the option to sell or issue, at any time, and from time to time, including on or before the collection of the taxes authorized by the Ordinance Section 16, bonds, notes or other evidences of indebtedness, including capital appreciation bonds, payable from and secured by the proceeds from the sales taxes authorized by this Ordinance and from the proceeds of the existing Measure TBD sales taxes, in order to finance and refinance the transportation projects identified in the Transportation Expenditure Plan. Bonding indebtedness shall be limited to 35% of net sales measured at the end of the 30-year program. An additional bonds test (ABT) no lower than 1.5x Maximum Annual Debt Service will be measured against projected revenues for any consecutive 12-month period in the prior 18 months.
Should the tax be ended by voter action, the obligation to repay the bond debt remains with the agency, in this case the Authority and its member agencies.
XI. Independent Financial Audits
If the Transportation Measure is approved by the voters, the Authority will conduct independent financial audits of all revenues and expenditures associated with the measure in accordance with Public Utilities Code 180000 et seq. These audits will ensure full transparency and accountability in the use of voter-approved sales tax revenues.
The results of the audits will be presented annually to the Authority Board and made available to the public, reinforcing confidence in the administration of the Transportation Measure. Findings will also be shared with the Citizens’ Oversight Committee to support their independent review of expenditures and compliance with the Expenditure Plan.
XII. Administration Program – 1% of Measure Revenues
To effectively manage and implement the Transportation Measure, the Authority will cap administration costs at no more than 1% of annual sales tax revenues to administrative activities. This allocation supports the necessary planning, oversight, and program development functions required for successful execution of the measure.
Key administrative responsibilities of the Authority include:
A. Annual Work Program and Budget
Prepare and adopt an annual work program and budget outlining planned expenditures, oversight activities, and administrative costs.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 10 B. Allocation Program Requirements and Focused Studies
Develop requirements for each funding program established by the Regional Programs allowed in the Expenditure Plan and undertake specialized studies needed to implement those programs effectively.
C. Biennial Implementation Plan
Prepare and update the Transportation Measure Implementation Plan every two years, aligning it with the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) and State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
D. Regional Project Prioritization
Establish and update priority lists for regional projects and rehabilitation projects, in coordination with member jurisdictions and consistent with Expenditure Plan goals.
E. Independent Annual Audit
Conduct an independent audit of all Transportation Measure funds to ensure compliance, fiscal integrity, and accountability to the public.
F. Public Outreach and Communication
Carry out ongoing outreach and public education efforts to keep residents informed about project progress, financial performance, and planned updates.
G. Bond Issuance for Accelerated Delivery
Issue bonds when appropriate to expedite project delivery, reducing overall project costs by leveraging future revenues for near-term improvements.
H. Revenue Allocation to Local Jurisdictions
Distribute Transportation Measure proceeds to incorporated cities and the county in accordance with the formulas and criteria established in the Expenditure Plan.
I. Support for Oversight Committees and Related Technical Assistance Provide staff support to advisory committees and furnish technical assistance to member jurisdictions to ensure consistent, equitable, and effective program implementation.
XIII. Citizens’ Oversight Committee
Committee Purpose
A. To provide fiscal oversight on the implementation of the Transportation Expenditure Plan ensuring that funds are spent in accordance with the approved Plan.
B. To inform the public and confirm that revenues and expenditures from the Transportation Measure are spent as promised to San Luis Obispo County voters.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 11 Committee Formation
A. The Committee will be formed within six (6) months following voter approval of the Transportation Measure in San Luis Obispo County.
B. The Committee shall be a permanent component of the Expenditure Plan and cannot be eliminated by amendment.
C. Meetings will begin when Transportation Measure revenues are recommended for expenditure, including Implementation Plan updates.
Selection and Duties of Committee Chair and Vice Chair
A. The Committee will select a Chair and Vice Chair from among its members, each serving a one-year term.
B. Chair Duties: Call meetings, set agendas, and preside over meetings.
C. Vice Chair Duties: Perform the Chair’s duties in the Chair’s absence.
Committee Meetings
A. The Committee will hold at least two formal meetings annually, with additional meetings scheduled as needed.
B. All meetings will comply with the Brown Act (open meeting requirements).
C. Meetings will be conducted in accordance with Robert’s Rules of Order.
Subcommittee Requirements
A. The Committee may form subcommittees to address specific tasks or focus areas.
B. All subcommittees will consist of an odd number of members to ensure clear decision-making.
The Committee will reflect the geographic and demographic diversity of San Luis Obispo County and consist of 12 members. Each represented organization will nominate its representative, with final appointments approved by the Authority Board.
Membership Composition:
A. One resident representative appointed by each incorporated city (Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach, San Luis Obispo) and one member from each of San Luis Obispo County’s Supervisorial District’s within the unincorporated areas.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 12 B. The Authority Board will review and appoint these members. If any jurisdiction is unable to appoint a representative, THE AUTHORITY may fill the position through an open application process. Should a new City become incorporated, a representative from that jurisdiction shall be appointed by the City.
Quorum
A. A quorum will consist of no fewer than seven (7) members.
B. Actions may be approved by a simple majority of members present, provided the quorum is met.
Term of Membership
A. Members serve two-year terms, with a maximum of eight consecutive years of service.
B. To establish staggered terms, the initial appointments will be divided so that half serve one-year terms and half serve two-year terms, determined by random selection.
C. Proxy voting is not permitted.
Eligibility
A. Must be a U.S. citizen, 18 years or older, and a resident of San Luis Obispo County.
B. Cannot be an elected official of San Luis Obispo County or its cities.
C. Cannot be an employee of state, county, or city government agencies within San Luis Obispo County (except employees of educational institutions).
Staffing
A. SLOCOG staff will provide technical and administrative support, including preparation of agendas, meeting materials, and public communications.
B. Administrative costs for staffing will be funded through the Transportation Measure’s administrative allocation.
C. Expert staff and consultants may be invited to present information or analyses as needed.
Responsibilities
A. Reviewing and commenting on independent financial and performance audits of Measure funds.
February 5, 2026 SLO County Transportation Expenditure Plan 13 B. Reviewing periodic reports, studies, and plans related to Measure revenues and expenditures.
C. Ensuring that expenditures are consistent with the Expenditure Plan.
D. Conducting an annual review of sales tax revenue use and publicly reporting findings.
E. Presenting recommendations and findings in a formal annual report to the public and Authority Board.
F. Accessing information from the Authority’s independent auditor and requesting additional information as necessary to fulfill oversight responsibilities.
G. Remaining informed of advancements in transportation planning and finance to ensure oversight remains relevant and effective through the duration of the Measure.
XIV. Measure Duration
This Transportation Expenditure Plan shall remain in effect for 30 years as approved by San Luis Obispo County voters.
Item 11.b.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Director of Community Development BY: Andrew Perez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive public comment and provide direction for revisions to the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
The financial and personnel impacts associated with the study session are included in the budget for the Comprehensive General Plan Update.
BACKGROUND:
The State of California requires that every city and county adopt their own General Plan.
The General Plan serves as a community’s blueprint for future growth, development, and land preservation within its jurisdictional boundary. The California Government Code (§65300 et. seq.) requires eight mandatory elements and allows for optional elements.
The mandated elements are Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, Safety, and Environmental Justice. These elements can be combined when appropriate. For example, the City’s current Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space element combines the topics of Conservation and Open Space with Agriculture.
The City last adopted a comprehensive update of its General Plan in 2001. In addition to the required elements, the City’s General Plan includes optional elements and topics such as Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, and Agriculture. Updates to individual elements were adopted intermittently, such as Agriculture, Conservation and Open Space in 2007, Economic Development in 2012, and Housing and Circulation in 2021.
This updated comprehensive General Plan includes the following elements:
Land Use and Community Character
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
Natural and Cultural Resources
Safety
Circulation
Parks, Recreation, and Community Services
Noise
Economic Development; and
Health and Equity
The Housing Element is the lone element not addressed by this update because it is required by State law to be updated on regular intervals. The next update of the Housing Element will need to be adopted in 2028.
General Plan Update Process
On February 23, 20211, the City Council directed staff to initiate a comprehensive update to the City’s General Plan. During that meeting, staff was directed to return to the City Council with a discussion on the scope of work related to the comprehensive General Plan update. On July 26, 20222, the City Council clarified the scope of work and directed staff to initiate a comprehensive update to the General Plan, including an update to all existing elements except for the Housing Element, a consistency review of the Housing Element, creation of an Environmental Justice Element, an update to the Climate Action Plan, the creation of objective design standards, an overlay district providing specific development standards for the East Grand Avenue corridor, zoning ordinance updates, and the inclusion of Healthy Communities strategies throughout.
In November 2022, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the General Plan Update with the City Council’s requested scope of work and budget. The project description included the following core components:
1. Development and implementation of a well-defined, inclusive, and robust public outreach strategy. The strategy shall adhere to policies that promote inclusive outreach to diverse communities contained in the City’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice Policy;
2. Comprehensive update of existing General Plan Elements (except Housing Element);
3. Creation of an Environmental Justice Element;
4. An update to the Climate Action Plan;
5. Development of objective design standards and an overlay district for the East Grand Avenue corridor; and
6. Development Code update.
Staff received one consultant proposal prior to the RFP deadline of December 21, 2022, from Mintier Harnish (the “Consultant”), a Sacramento-based land use firm. At the
1 https://www.arroyogrande.org/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_02232021-1318 2 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=3451
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
February 14, 20233, City Council meeting, staff updated Council on the response to the RFP. Council directed staff to return with a consultant services agreement with the Consultant for the three-year scope of work that includes an update to the Climate Action Plan, an Alternatives Report, Land Use Tasks that include a development standards evaluation, an East Grand Avenue Corridor Overlay District, objective design standards, a comprehensive update to the Development Code, and Economic Development tasks such as the Retail Market Analysis and Market Demand Studies. On March 28, 20234, City Council approved a consultant services agreement with the Consultant to initiate the work effort. The schedule includes all of the projected milestones (public draft, outreach, EIR) with a projected adoption time in Fall 2026. A Vision Statement and Guiding Principles5for the project were adopted by City Council on August 13, 20246. A preferred Land Use Scenario 7was subsequently adopted by City Council on April 8, 20258. The vision, guiding principles, and preferred land use scenarios established the foundation for the comprehensive update.
Public Outreach
Staff and the Consultant implemented an extensive public outreach process from the start of the project that included workshops, pop-up events, public meetings, and community surveys to engage residents, business owners, property owners, and local decisionmakers. Feedback gathered throughout the community engagement process helped identify existing community assets and challenges, and informed the development of the community vision, guiding principles, and the General Plan goals, policies, and implementation programs. There have been three opportunities for the public to provide comments since the release of the Preliminary Public Review Draft (PPRD) on November 19, 2025: a study session with Planning Commission on December 2, 2025; a public workshop on December 3, 2025; and an online survey that was accessible between December 3, 2025, and January 31, 2026. Public comment specific to the PPRD is summarized later in this report.
The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and the Citizen’s Advisory Group (CAG) also provided valuable feedback on the General Plan. The TAC is comprised of department directors and managers from within the City who were tasked with reviewing the administrative draft elements that are directly related to their respective areas of work.
For example, the City Engineer was instrumental in reviewing the technical aspects of the Circulation Element. The TAC reviewed the administrative draft of the elements and conducted another review of the PPRD. The CAG is comprised of one Planning Commissioner, one City Councilmember, and four residents from various professional
3 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=5401 4 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=5977 5https://planarroyogrande.com/images/AGGPU_VGP_V1_ENGLISH%20AND%20SPANISH_2024%2008 %2016%20MG.pdf
6 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=12015 7 https://planarroyogrande.com/land-use-alternatives.html 8 https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=14309
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
backgrounds. Staff met with the CAG on November 24, 2025, and February 12, 2026, to obtain feedback on the PPRD. Their input informed staff’s recommendations included in this report.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
This staff report will summarize the significant changes or notable additions to each of the elements in the General Plan. The summary of each element will include recommendations provided by the Planning Commission during its study session in December.
Land Use and Community Character
The Land Use & Community Character element directs infill, redevelopment, and strategic densification within city boundaries to accommodate the anticipated growth projected over the next 20+ years while preserving historic Village charm, and the City’s small-town identity. It introduces the Corridor Mixed-Use land use designation along E. Grand Avenue to enable infill development by allowing the highest residential density allowed in the City (36 dwelling units per acre) and the most permissive non-residential development standards (floor-area ratio of up to 2.5). Policies encouraging dense mixed-use infill development, active street frontages, and high-quality building design further this vision for the Corridor Mixed Use area.
Three focus areas were identified during the community outreach stage of the project as being most suitable for accommodating future development. The focus areas are:
1) E. Grand Avenue Corridor
2) North Fair Oaks Property
3) Fredericks Property
The E. Grand Avenue Corridor focus area encompasses the parcels along and around E.
Grand Avenue within the city limits. This focus area emphasizes infill and redevelopment through the corridor to create a lively, vibrant, walkable, and safe environment that provides abundant housing and economic opportunities. The North Fair Oaks focus area is the land generally located on the north side of Fair Oaks Avenue from Highway 101 to Arroyo Grande Creek, near Arroyo Grande High School. This area is envisioned as a lowmedium density residential neighborhood that accommodates a mix of uses including starter single-family homes, mixed-use developments, and low-density multi-family residences. Future development of this focus area would only be permitted after the adoption of a specific plan that establishes the type, location, and density of the proposed uses and identifies improvements for utilities, public facilities such as streets, parks, and open space, and other necessary infrastructure. The third focus area is the Frederick focus area, which is located in the eastern portion of the city, southeast of the Village and adjacent to residential neighborhoods and northeast of Highway 101. Community input received during public outreach emphasized the potential for a mixture of residential development density and affordability, and the opportunities for open space preservation
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
and development of recreational facilities. Like the North Fair Oaks focus area, any future development will require the adoption of a specific plan first.
This element also contains policies supporting agricultural uses on parcels that retain an agricultural land use designation, such as those along Branch Mill Road in the Arroyo Grande Valley, and further south to along Valley Road toward Highway 1. These policies include maintaining buffers between urban development and agricultural uses, encouraging visitor-serving uses in these areas such as farm stays, on-site processing and sales of produce and related products, and periodic review of agriculture related policies to ensure they are not a constraint to the viability of the industry in the City.
The Planning Commission was largely supportive of the Land Use Element goals and policies as proposed and suggested that Policies LU-8.3 and LU-8.4 should be revised to not create unnecessary burdens for property owners interested in converting from agricultural to urban uses on parcels with an agriculture land use designation. Staff does not recommend modifying these policies as they merely encourage property owners to sustain agricultural uses on parcels identified for continue agricultural use.
A public comment letter regarding the Frederick focus area was submitted on behalf of the property owner. The letter requests modification to the boundary of the focus area, the allocation of land uses within the focus area, and revisions to policies and implementation programs that apply to these properties. Staff supports the modification to the focus area boundary to accurately capture all of the parcels owned by this entity.
Staff is also supportive of the revising policy LU-10.2 – Housing Focus (pg. LU-36) to reflect the mixture of land uses envisioned for the focus area. Policy LU-10.2 encourages a specific plan to include medium density residential (small lot single family homes) and medium-high density (townhomes and small-scale multifamily residences), whereas the land use percentages on page LU-22 suggest that a specific plan should include low density residential and does not mention medium-high residential uses. The proposed revision from the property owner letter is still reflective of the community’s vision for this focus area based on comments from the public, Planning Commission, and City Council, which contemplated a mix of housing options on the site. The letter also recommends modifying implementation program PRCS-A to remove a reference for the Frederick Focus Area to include sports fields. While sports fields should be explored as part of a larger overall recreation strategy, these may or may not be appropriate in certain areas of the city, including the proposed major expansion areas. Staff concurs that the policy should be revised to be a broader strategy and not specifically name this particular focus area.
In another letter from the majority property owner of the North Fair Oaks Focus Area, there was a similar request with regard to modifying the allocations of land use, specifically the open space allocation, within a future Specific Plan. Similar to the Frederick Focus Area, the proposed modification for the North Fair Oaks Focus Area remains reflective of the community’s vision. The purpose of open space is to maintain
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
and preserve natural resources while providing opportunities for passive recreation, and the proposed modification can still maintain this vision since a significant portion of the focus area is creek habitat and can fulfill the open space percentage. Finally, the letter expresses concern regarding timing of improvements shown in the proposed Circulation Element, such as the future creek trail and extension of Valley Road. Staff concurs that these improvements are anticipated to occur upon future development of the property.
Despite not technically being part of the General Plan update, the Planning Commission encouraged staff to carefully evaluate development standards for mixed-use zones, specifically in the E. Grand Ave focus area, to ensure that they do prevent the envisioned densification of the corridor. For example, there was concern that the maximum density would not be attainable on some parcels due to rigorous parking standards or height restrictions. The evaluation of development standards will take place as part of the upcoming development code update which will follow the General Plan update.
Natural and Cultural Resources
The Natural and Cultural Resources Element replaces the Agriculture, Conservation, and Open Space Element. Similar to the existing element, it focuses on conservation of open space, natural resources such as wildlife habitat, air quality, and water resources. The proposed element also includes policies to protect and conserve tribal, historic, and other cultural resources. This element and the Land Use and Community Character element work in coordination to ensure harmony between conservation and development, balancing community needs with environmental preservation. Policies related to agriculture have been relocated to the Land Use and Community Character element.
The element features goals of conserving water, scenic resources, biological resources, historic and cultural resources, and air quality. The associated policies establish the framework for these conservation efforts while the implementation programs are directives for City staff to achieve these goals. Policies associated with water conservation identify the importance of recharge mandates, water efficient landscaping, and maintaining healthy riparian ecosystems through the thoughtful evaluation of development near waterways. Policies for the preservation of scenic resources establish safeguards of the City’s rural character by minimizing visual impacts associated with development. Preservation of biological resources is proposed through many policies including designating sensitive habitat areas as Conservation/Open Space (C/OS), such as areas adjacent to creeks, wildlife corridors, and deed-restricted open space. These policies also identify opportunities for restoring natural habitat, tree protection, and management of open space for resilience from climate change and wildfire.
Historic and tribal resources are proposed to be conserved through mandated cultural and architectural surveys, tribal monitoring during ground disturbing activities when warranted, and adaptive reuse of historic structures. Policies to maintain or improve air quality include restricting sensitive uses near Highway 101 and other sources of potential sources of air pollutants. Implementation includes fifteen programs led by Community
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
Development and Public Works, such as updating water ordinances every five years, creating an Open Space Preservation Strategic Action Plan, securing grants for creek restoration, maintaining historic inventories, and mandating tribal consultation. With regard to historic structures, the Planning Commission recommends emphasizing the Camp Arroyo Grande and the Tabernacle in this element to encourage greater utilization, and staff is supportive of this recommendation. This can be accomplished by either referencing the Tabernacle, and other historic sites with potential for hosting events, in Policy NCR-4.9.
Safety
The Safety element expands the existing version by adding a dedicated Climate Adaptation goal and associated policies to address extreme heat, increased threats of wildfire and flooding, and poor air quality. The Safety element also addresses natural and human-caused hazards through risk reduction, emergency preparedness, and climate resilience, in accordance with the requirements of several State laws. Key policies emphasize minimizing loss from floods by restricting development in floodplains, improving drainage, reducing fire threats through proactive design review for new developments and ensuring adequate fire services and response times. There is also an emphasis on coordination with county emergency services and public education to promote emergency preparedness.
Implementation measures include adopting an updated Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan and biennial updates to the Emergency Operations Plan and evacuation protocols. The development of a Community Wildfire Protection Plan, annual brush inspections, pursuit of grants for infrastructure upgrades, and enforcement of California Fire Code and Building Code standards will increase preparedness and help mitigate impacts of an emergency event.
The Planning Commission’s recommendations for this element include recognizing highspeed broadband for internet to support emergency preparedness and information sharing during an emergency event. Staff recommends modifying policy SAF-1.6 and Implementation Program SAF-X to reference high-speed broadband for emergency preparedness and communications.
Noise
The Noise Element aims to protect residents, businesses, and visitors from excessive noise; primarily from the transportation network and construction. Goals and policies in this element are mostly unchanged from the existing element. The three goals establish acceptable community-wide noise levels, ensure new development is compatible with existing development in the context of noise generation, and require mitigation of nuisances associated with noise. Implementation focuses on development review, CEQA compliance, Noise Ordinance updates to include specific construction limits, California Building Code enforcement, and mitigation hierarchies.
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
Comments received from the public and Planning Commission encourage policy that would address noise generated at the neighborhood level, such as music, public and household gatherings. These concerns would be addressed by Implementation Program NOI-D, which directs staff to update the City’s Noise Ordinance. Direction on these comments would help inform that update.
Parks, Recreation, and Community Services (PRCS)
The PRCS Element is an optional element and updates the current version which was adopted in 2001. The proposed element expands the current version by integrating essential public services (water, sewer, solid waste, education, public safety), introducing pocket parks, and emphasizing inclusivity for all ages and abilities, climate resilience, and interconnected trails to reduce car reliance.
The PRCS Element guides the maintenance and expansion of the City’s public parkland while promoting equitable recreation programs and essential services. Nine goals drive policy, ranging from establishing a minimum ratio of parkland per resident, promoting inclusive and accessible recreation programs, and maintaining safe and sustainable facilities. Goals and policies to maintain and enhance essential community services such as securing water sources and wastewater capacity, support for educational facilities, fire protection, and law enforcement are also found in this element.
Implementation relies on fourteen programs led by the Recreation Services and Community Development departments, including analysis of park and recreation needs and expansion when viable. Development of a park facilities strategic plan, a Recreational Trail Plan, and annual program evaluations will ensure accessible, safe, and sustainable parks and services that enhance health, equity, and community identity.
The Planning Commission recommends including policy related to encouraging reliable high-speed internet and acknowledging this service as an important utility to be described in the Community Services section of the element. The Planning Commission also recommends that a policy encouraging a new sports complex, through either the conversion of agricultural properties or through annexation, be added to Goal PRCS-1.
The most robust discussions and recommendations highlighted the desire for policy to encourage childcare facilities. The Commission spoke about the documented need for childcare, and encouraging additional childcare facilities will be imperative if the City experiences the growth that is contemplated by the General Plan. This could occur with the addition of policy to Goal PRCS-5 regarding municipal services.
The letter from the property owner that holds a majority of the North Fair Oaks Focus Area questions whether a multi-use trail (as shown in Circulation Element Figure 7-4:
Existing and Proposed Bikeways) would count towards the area’s allocation of parks, recreation, and open space areas. The creek and riparian habitat in the creek setback area would count as open space, which is meant to maintain and preserve natural resources while providing opportunities for passive recreation. The trail would be
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
considered a recreational facility that would count towards a development’s parks and recreation quota. Staff recommends that this be clarified in the General Plan update to ensure that it is consistently applied by future staff and decision-makers.
Circulation
Last updated in 2021, the update to the Circulation element focuses on implementation of the Active Transportation Plan, maintaining consistency with the Land Use element, and compliance with State law. The Circulation element seeks to establish a balanced, multimodal transportation system correlated with the Land Use Element by promoting walking, cycling, transit, and equitable access for all ages and abilities while supporting economic vitality and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Key policies emphasize filling sidewalk and creating a low-stress bike network, especially in areas around schools.
Figure 7-3 conveys the planned improvements to the circulation network to accommodate future development.
Implementation of these policies would occur primarily through development review and imposition of development impact fees to offset impacts to the circulation network associated with that development. It also encourages use of the City’s Capital Improvement Program to fund targeted improvements along key corridors such as E.
Grand Avenue, the Village Core, and school routes for safety and efficiency.
The Planning Commission was generally supportive of the Circulation Element, as proposed. However, the Circulation Element generated the most comments from the general public. The comments touch on a variety of topics, including general concerns about congestion, especially the southbound Fair Oaks offramp. There were specific recommendations to abandon the use of level of service metric, because it only considers the comfort of motorists, and to deemphasize the use of sharrows for Class III bikeways.
Staff supports a recommendation from LMUSD’s Safe Routes to School Coordinator to include Arroyo Grande High School in Policy C-5.9 as a traffic generator when Travel Demand Management should be implemented. As mentioned in the letter regarding the North Fair Oaks Focus Area, staff recommends adding an extension of Valley Road to Table 7-5: Major Circulation Improvements, to be consistent with Figure 7-3: Planned Circulation Improvements. Other additions to Figure 7-3 and Table 7-5 include the following intersection improvements:
Oak Park and El Camino Real
E. Grand Ave. and Halcyon Rd
E. Grand Ave and Elm St.
E. Branch St. and Mason St.
S. Mason St and Nelson St, and
Nelson St and Traffic Way
These improvements are proposed to be included because these locations are either in the City’s 10-Year Capital Improvement Program or in the update to the Regional Transportation Plan currently in progress by the San Luis Obispo Council of
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
Governments. In addition to the intersection improvements, widening of the Mason Street Bridge and an extension of Fair Oaks Ave. to intersect with Valley Road are proposed to be added to Table 7-5.
Economic Development
The Economic Development element is an optional element and was last updated in 2012. This element provides a framework for fostering a resilient economy in Arroyo Grande, emphasizing small and locally owned businesses, job growth, housing access, and preservation of community character. The element is informed by a Retail Market Analysis prepared by the Natelson Dale Group, a subconsultant brought on for assistance preparing this element. The Retail Market Analysis includes employment trends and projections, identifies key job sectors like retail, healthcare, and hospitality, and also growth potential for many industries. This analysis is the basis for many of the element’s goals, policies and implementation programs.
Six goals guide economic development policy. The first goal, and its associated policies, strive to strengthen regional coordination of economic development efforts, and improve the local economy by identifying areas for commercial development and job creation, identifying staff to support prospective businesses and investors, and promote both tourism and local patronage of businesses. This element also includes goals to establish a marketing program to enhance the community’s image in the context of attracting businesses and enhancing the City’s fiscal health. Policies to drive real estate and economic development such proactive zoning, expanding retail and industrial opportunities and overlay districts to encourage development in the specific areas appropriate for the desired uses are included in this element. Finally, the element encourages a diverse housing stock to accommodate the needs of workers at different income levels and across a spectrum of lifestyles and establish partnerships and processes that are business friendly.
Implementation relies on over twenty programs led by Community Development and other departments, including quality-of-life investments linking to economic goals, agricultural coordination, workforce training outreach, business expansion assistance from City staff such as efficient processing of applications to establish or support businesses, and monitoring business trends with partners.
Planning Commission’s recommendations related to the Economic Development Element generally encourage the addition of policies that are more permissive of establishing and expanding various commercial opportunities. Staff is supportive of these recommendations. For example, it was recommended that Policy ED-1.6 specify to encourage commercial spaces for light manufacturing and construction trades because the market analysis indicates that there is a strong demand for industrial space despite its limited availability. The Planning Commission expressed concern that Policy ED-2.6 could be used to deter commercial development. They suggested incorporating metrics in this policy that would be indications of the balanced economic growth that is
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
encouraged. Staff is supportive of the idea but does not recommend modifying Policy ED2.6 because implementation programs ED-F and ED-G specify where nonresidential growth should occur. It was also suggested that additional policy is added under goal ED3 to identify other opportunities for the City to generate revenue beyond grants and loans.
Health and Equity
The Health and Equity element is new to the City’s General Plan. Council directed staff to include an Environmental Justice element in the comprehensive update. State law requires Environmental Justice elements to address the “unique or compounded health risks” in disadvantaged communities by decreasing pollution exposure, increasing community assets, and improving overall health with policies and programs in their General Plan. The State defines a disadvantaged community as “an area that is a lowincome area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation.” There are no areas within the city that meet the definition of a disadvantaged community. While no disadvantaged communities are identified under state or federal criteria, assessments by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments flag areas with vulnerabilities such as disability rates, renter affordability, and limited vehicle/computer access that are addressed in these policies. In addition to addressing the overarching theme of environmental justice, it also includes policies and programs that promote a healthy community, as directed by Council. While environmental justice remains an important component of this element, it was renamed the Health and Equity element to more accurately reflect the scope of the chapter.
This element emphasizes designing inclusive communities that promote equitable access to resources for healthy lifestyles, improving quality of life through better health outcomes, social equity, environmental protection, and economic resilience. It provides an overview of key issues in Arroyo Grande, including high pesticide exposure risks, access to healthy food via grocery stores and farmers markets, physical activity opportunities through parks and pedestrian networks (with gaps in bike infrastructure), mental and physical health services, public facilities like schools and libraries, safe and affordable housing, and civic engagement. Community input highlights strengths in park spaces and priorities for safe streets, mental health, and youth/senior services.
The six goals focus on integrating health into all aspects of life, such as promoting active urban design and transportation, expanding preventive care and mental health access, mitigating pollution (e.g., pesticide education and buffers), enhancing food options through urban agriculture and education, and fostering inclusive civic participation via virtual meetings, translation services, and partnerships. It coordinates with regional plans like the County Health Improvement Plan and references related policies in other General Plan elements for holistic implementation.
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
Public Comment
Since the PPRD was released for public review, several emails and survey responses have been submitted about the plan. These are included as Attachment 2. The Parks, Recreation, and Community Services and Circulation elements garnered the most comments. Comments about the PRCS include requests for additional pickleball courts, recognition of high-speed internet as an essential community service, and desire to see more robust policy encouraging urban forestry. Circulation element-related comments generally express concern about traffic inducing growth and encourage policies to allocate public right of way to multimodal transportation types. In addition to the recommendations described in this report, several technical edits will also be made to the document. These technical edits include correcting grammatical errors, technical data, and clarifying text. A list of these edits is provided as Attachment 3.
Next Steps
The study session will be an opportunity for the City Council to receive public comment and provide direction on the PPRD General Plan and . The Council’s direction will be incorporated in the document to create the Public Draft General Plan. The Public Draft General Plan will be sent to other agencies, such as neighboring jurisdictions, Caltrans, and SLOCOG for review and comments. The Public Draft General Plan will also serve as the basis for the project description to be analyzed by the environmental impact report (EIR). Preparation of the EIR will occur during the Spring and Summer to be certified with in conjunction with the adoption of the General Plan in Fall 2026.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Receive public comment and provide direct to staff regarding revisions to the Preliminary Public Draft General Plan; or
2. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
The study session is an opportunity for the City Council and public to provide input on the goals, policies, and implementation programs proposed for the updated General Plan.
DISADVANTAGES:
The study session includes the need for dedicated staff time and resources.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
No environmental review is required for the study session because it has no potential to result in either a direct, or reasonably foreseeable indirect, physical change in the environment. (State CEQA Guidelines, Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §§ 15060, subd. (c)(2)- (3), 15378.). A program environmental impact report will be prepared to evaluate the impacts associated with the implementation of the General Plan before its adoption.
Item 11.b.
City Council
Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan February 24, 2026
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. Link to the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan9
2. Public Comment
3. Technical Edits
9https://planarroyogrande.com/images/AGGPU_Prelim%20PRD_Full_reduced_2025%2011%2020%20M G.pdf
1415 20TH STREET
Sacramento, California 95811
(916) 446-0522
[email protected]
www.mintierharish.com
1 M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Brian Pedrotti, Director of Community Development, City of Arroyo Grande Andrew Perez, Planning Manager, City of Arroyo Grande
FROM: Michael Gibbons, Project Manager | Mintier Harnish CC: Brent Gibbons, AICP, Project Director | Mintier Harnish Nikki Zanchetta, Planner | Mintier Harnish
DATE: February 17, 2026
RE: Summary of Community Comments on the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan Introduction On November 19, 2025, the City released the Preliminary Public Review Draft of the General Plan for public review and comment. As part of this Preliminary Draft General Plan release, the city held a Planning Commission study session, facilitated a community workshop, and created an online community survey to solicit public comment. Public comments were also accepted through the project website (PlanArroyoGrande.com) and sent directly to City staff. The Planning Commission meeting and community workshop were held in early December 2025, and the community survey was available online from December 4, 2025, through January 31, 2026.
Summary of Respondents Below is a summary breakdown of responses received on the Draft General Plan as of February 9,2026:
• Community Workshop: 10 attendees
• Online Comments (from project website): 4 comments
• Survey Responses: 10 responses
• Emails: 15
Summary of Comments
Below is a summary of the comments received on the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan.
Comments are summarized based on General Plan topic areas. A full list of individual comments and emails can be found in Appendix A.
Introduction
• Overall, respondents had positive feedback on the organization and readability of the document.
ATTACHMENT 2
City of Arroyo Grande Geneal Plan Update
Preliminary PRD General Plan Comment Summary
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
2 • Some comments suggested replacing words like “pride” and “environmental sustainability” which have come to be somewhat divisive and politically charged with more neutral words like “community spirit,” “local culture”, or “conserving natural beauty.” Land Use
• Commenters expressed an overall support for balanced growth that allows future generations to live and work in Arroyo Grande.
• Some commenters want to see more protection of the city’s agricultural land instead of it being developed.
• There is some concern about the impacts increased growth and development will have on water demand and overall water supply.
• There were suggested refinements to the Frederick Focus Area, including adjustments to the Focus Area boundary, clarification of existing property use descriptions, and revisions to the density assumptions and land use percentages analyzed for the focus area. • There were suggested refinements to the North Fair Oaks Focus Area, including revisions to density assumptions and land use percentages, clarification on how the creek and trail would count toward open space requirements, and specification of future road connections and multiuse paths within and adjacent to the focus area. • Technical Edit/Suggestion: Include street names on the land use map.
Circulation
• The topic of circulation received the most public comments. • Some commenters felt the city should maintain adequate vehicle access and parking citywide to accommodate different visitors to the community, whereas other commenters felt alternative transportation infrastructure (e.g., biking, walking, rapid bus transit) should be prioritized to accommodate future growth.
• Most commenters were in support of maintaining and improving safe pedestrian facilities (e.g., signaled crosswalks), especially in the Village.
• Some commenters opposed the installation of a traffic signal or roundabout at the Huasna Road and Corbett Canyon Road intersection and expressed concern that light intrusion and lighting standards were not adequately addressed in the General Plan. • There was expressed concern with the continued use of Level of Service (LOS) as a transportation metric, noting it focuses on driver comfort rather than livability. • Some commenters recommended deemphasizing or removing references to sharrows (Class III bikeways) due to safety concerns, and suggested expanding the Travel Demand Management section to address congestion associated with Arroyo Grande High School drop-off and pickup times.
• Several commenters expressed concern about traffic congestion, especially with the growth proposed in the General Plan. Some specific traffic issues mentioned included:
o Creating another access point to Highway 101 to and from the Mesa Area o Access through the proposed Fredrick Focus Area
City of Arroyo Grande Geneal Plan Update
Preliminary PRD General Plan Comment Summary
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
3 o Fair Oaks and Halcyon Road area
o Halcyon Road and El Camino Real area
o HASLO development at Oak Park Boulevard
• Technical Edit/Suggestion: Make the Element’s icon mode-neutral/inclusive instead of just a bike.
Safety
• Commenters sought clarification on the single access neighborhood assessment and the classification of entrances and exists.
Noise
• Some commenters suggested adding specific policies and programs to address neighborgenerated noise (i.e., music, live bands).
Economic Development
• Overall, commenters like how the General Plan focuses on supporting a balanced local economy that emphasizes small businesses.
Health and Equity
• Commenters generally liked the General Plan’s focus on health and promoting active lifestyles. • Some commenters mentioned that encouraging formal separation (e.g., planters) between active transportation and vehicles could improve health and safety, especially in high traffic areas.
Natural and Cultural Resources
• Overall, commenters liked the goals and policies that emphasize water and air quality and preserving open space and natural areas.
• Some commenters expressed concerns about how future development will impact water supply, especially as droughts are becoming more common.
• There was a recommendation to measure the 500-foot air quality screening setback from the edge of pavement of the nearest travel lane. Project within this distance would be required to prepare a technical air quality study and apply additional measures if impacts to sensitive receptors are identified.
Public Facilities/Utilities
• There is general support for the draft Element, noting its comprehensive approach to environmental protection, parks and public spaces, tree canopy, climate resilience, public health, and community safety.
• Several commenters suggested including a section about telecommunications and high-speed internet in the public infrastructure chapter, noting that fast, reliable, and affordable internet is becoming increasingly important and could use improvement in Arroyo Grande.
City of Arroyo Grande Geneal Plan Update
Preliminary PRD General Plan Comment Summary
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
4 • Some commenters expressed interest in future-proofing utilities, such as incorporating efficient water use in new development.
• Continued investment in parks and open spaces in Arroyo Grande was widely supported by commenters.
• Some commenters emphasized the importance of telecommunications and high-speed internet as essential utilities and noted that Arroyo Grande lags behind neighboring communities in available service levels.
• There is support for including an urban forest initiative in the General Plan, citing benefits such as improved air quality, stormwater management, climate resilience, community health, and long-term quality-of-life enhancements.
• Overall, commenters expressed interest in preserving and expanding upon Arroyo Grande’s parks and open spaces, with some mentioning specific improvements such as:
o Creating a trail from Fair Oaks Boulevard at Earl Grebb Bridge to the Village along the creek with the development of North Fair Oaks
o Expanding/incentivizing community gardens citywide
o Additional pickleball courts at the Soto complex to accommodate tournaments • Technical Edit/Suggestion: Map of city parks needs to more clearly show street names.
City of Arroyo Grande Geneal Plan Update
Preliminary PRD General Plan Comment Summary
Tuesday, February 17, 2026
5 Appendix A
Source Relevant Section(s) Comment
Survey Circulation
I love this section. Transportation and accessibility are a huge part of our community and according to the surveys, the clear majority of people use their personal automobile's to move about. It's clear the plan needs to accommodate this and plan for easy access to the Village, Businesses, and maintain clear access through the village for the many cars, trucks, delivery trucks, cattle trailers, boat trailers, RVs, and other that use our community. This level of movement brings many different customers, travelers, and tourists to our town. People really love buying coffee or goods in the village, then heading out to the lake, or the beach etc.
I'd focus on some good public parking options near the high school or land nearby the village, so we can continue to welcome folks for the Harvest Festival, Christmas Parade, Trick or Treating, etc.
I'd continue to provide good sidewalks and pedestrian walk ways, like the lit crosswalks that help with safety.
Once the bridge is finished the circulation can go back to normal and help local businesses.
I would strongly advise against deleting or moving parking spaces for bike lanes. San Luis is an example of this. It's not serving the public well, and produces much more hassle and tight quarters (more dangerous) for the vehicles on the road.
Continue to serve the interests of the residents, provide well maintained roads, with plenty of access to parking, thus ensuring local businesses can welcome patrons to our town.
Survey Circulation
I think the core statement is impossible to achieve with a small City budget. You should aim for safe and easy travel within and through the City for people. If you prioritize motor vehicles, you will never have enough capacity for the growth this general plan proposes (not to mention surrounding communities). You must prioritize the movement of people and goods, not the modes that transport. This means you have to sacrifice infrastructure for large vehicles in favor of people moving safely. This means separated bike and pedestrian infrastructure, bus rapid transit, carpool priority, and living streets.
The core value of the City’s General Plan Circulation Element is to provide safe and easy travel within and through the city for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motor vehicles in a manner that is correlated with the
Land Use Element
Survey Circulation
1. the Intersections at Halcyon and Grand and Halcyon and El Camino do not show proposed improvements and they need longer staking lanes and better light timing.
2. What about making the proposed collector road extension of Orchard and across the North Fair Oaks Specific Plan Area a 2 lane arterial. And changing Fair Oaks Road to a 2 land arterial from Orchard to Halcyon.
3. The Study Area over Traffic Way, Fair Oaks Road and Hkwy 101 need to be determined in order to support the proposed Land Use Element.
4. The only way this area of town will not be gridlocked with the proposed development would be for the city with the County of SLO to figure another way to Hwy 101 to and from the Mesa Area.
Survey Circulation What are your proposed intersections improvements on each area to vague.
Survey Circulation
It clearly calls out the current traffic routes, and like the potential improvements. (Roundabouts, signals, etc.)
Survey Circulation
1. The Traffic Way, Fair Oaks Rd and Halcycon are still shown as STUDY AREAS. Will you be recommending changes to these areas as part of the General Plan. Since the Land Use and Densities are changed on several acres in these areas, isnt it important to make sure traffic can move when development occurs?
2. the existing signals at Halcyon and Grand Ave and Halcyon and El Camino need upgrades. The staking lanes are too short for one issue.
Website Circulation
Rotary at Halcyon & Dodson???
Otherwise, how will those of us trying to leave the S Alpine neighborhood to turn left (towards Harloe Elementary) will never get a break in the fraffic!!!
Workshop Circulation Like the detailed identification of streets.
Workshop Circulation Like the recognition of traffic issues- most residents could provide even longer lists.
Arroyo Grande Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan - Public Comments
Workshop Circulation
Clarify how neighborhood streets will have a say on impacts from development not directly next to future development, for example, East Grand Project.
Workshop Circulation Make the Element's Icon a “mode neutral” icon instead of a bike Workshop Circulation Clarify how issues will be addressed.
Workshop Circulation
Can you provide how focus area 3 AKA Fredrick Property will be served and it’s unclear how it will be adequately served by access/Fire/Emergency.
Workshop Circulation Ash Street: Elm to Alder misidentified as a “local Street”. It should be at least a “collector street”.
Workshop Circulation
That changes will be needed as homes and businesses are approved but will be put on the back burner, leaving residents to suffer through more traffic issues.
Workshop Circulation
Still would like to see long term planning to have a connection to State Route227 from the U.S. 101 South of Arroyo Grande to alleviate truck traffic to SLO Regional Airport. In other words, by passing the village area where there is a goal for it to be “walkable”, should tie into 50 I on page C-35.
Survey Economic Developmen
Well balanced, looks good, shows the diverse business environment we have. This is a good indicator of the resilience of our community. So many people I know here run or work for a small business. Let's continue to encourage that and help make their lives better and easier to employ our residents! love it.
Survey Economic DevelopmenReally look at it so very poorly done Survey General
Thanks so much for the opportunity to provide feedback! It's a big plan and we appreciate all of you. Thank you for working and serving our town.
Survey General
I worked in the general plan for 1990 and for 2000 and this is so poor. I can’t tell you how poor this was done you can do better.
Survey General
Not sure why this is worded in such a way that it's a review of a handbook as opposed to asking for community input on the actual plans....?
Your handbo9k is fine, comprehensive, and easily understood.
What isn't easy to understand are the pink highlighted areas on the map designated for future development, instead of increasing green areas of nature conservancy or parks. There is already a ridiculous amount of traffic on Fair Oaks. Parks? Athletic fields? Survey General
The current plan is shaping up well, and appreciate the community involvement. I fully support smart growth for our city.
Survey General
On another note… I was driving down Elm St. after dark last night and it is impossible to tell lane distinctions because the line stripes are so old they are Impossible to see. Also, there aren’t Any reflectors down. This is on Elm St. with the worst part being from fair Oaks Avenue to Grande Avenue.. hopefully this can be corrected and maintain soon?
Survey Health and Equity Love the focus on health and encouraging people to be active. We have so much to enjoy here i.e. Bob Survey Health and Equity Now I’m bored you all can do better than this really! Survey Health and Equity Suggestion: It would be nice for a “formal separation “ like a planter or such insuring Safety in busier areas.
Survey Introduction
Clean look, well organized
Terms like Pride and Environmental Sustainability could be replaced with less triggering works i.e.
Preservation of Community Spirit and Local Culture.
Unfortunately "Pride" is too closely related to LGBTQ+ activism and can be very divisive. We need a community working together not highlight buzz works. Plus "pride" is more of a negative sentiment. "He's prideful" "She's too prideful to admit it" etc.
Regarding environmental sustainability, again, sadly there terms have been utilized to mark division and ideology. Science or not, many people disagree on the method of preserving the resources we have. Plus, the windmill is not representative of this community. Maybe use an Oak Tree, showing the desire of local residents to enjoy the James Way walk or new parks, or ocean views we have here.
I'd suggest using "Conserving Our Natural Beauty" or something with "Beauty, Nature, etc." It's really hard to be divided over terms like this.
Survey Introduction
It is very vague to generalize.
After the title you need a description of what you mean.
Survey Introduction I Don’t like Environmental Sustainability being Last as a Guiding Principle.
Survey Land Use
I like the plan and the desire to make a plan. We need to plan for future residences, children, businesses etc. Growth and Change are inevitable, so planning this well is great! Empowering landowners, entrepreneurs, potential 2nd and 3rd generation families to buy/build homes, is essential for the future of our town. If code is too complicated or restrictive, then prices will continue to increase, making our town unaffordable for the residents that live here. Business Friendly is really Resident and People friendly. Let's build that future together and inspire the 2nd & 3rd generations to invest in our town.
Survey Land Use
The map but you need street names again to vaguely. At least you provide what the colors mean. Again to vague. The farm land needs to be more clearly visible.
Survey Land Use
As in previous surveys, I believe the city needs to shelter 90% if not All of our Agricultural land. The soil in Arroyo Grande, as well, as the area on Hwy 1 / Valley road area is extremely Nutrient rich. Arroyo Grande is known for producing beautiful produce that is often shipped nationwide (strawberries, squash, etc).
With recent years hype regarding nutrition, the country is influencing citizens to eat more “plant friendly “ by replacing these and lowering the animal protein consumption it’s Vital that we Retain our Farmland. The water issue is Also Effected by bringing More people in - including their added water consumption.
Arroyo Grande has been in a Drought for over a decade, with water use regulations in effect and Fines were charged. The first time in Years Lopez reached full capacity! What happened?? Water use limits were not changed and a forced water release for a fish in our area was processed.
It’s a mistake to bring more water use by an Overflowing abundance of building that brings more need with a growing population. Has anyone looked at the future of eventually running Out of a Vital Life component Survey Natural & Cultural Res
Plans are good, leadership is necessary, and our future is guided by good plans/leadership.
Again, we can get hung up on air quality, code, and environmental protectionism, loosing site of the "people friendly" reason we have a town. If oak trees need to be trimmed or taken down, then plant some in the open space or elsewhere on a property.
Strike a balance, walk the middle line, farmland, streams, clean air are essential, but shouldn't be an additional tax or burden to meeting the needs of our community through overly burdened code or restrictions. Let's set a pragmatic, fair tone for all.
Survey Natural & Cultural Res
Living in Arroyo Grande for Over 50 years, I have been through the droughts and years of marginal rain totals. There have been water limitations, a water usage schedule on when/if you could water yards, wash car, etc. We had Finally reached a point where Lopez was full and had the ability to fulfill Arroyo Grande’s water supply for years to come, but water has been released Twice. Building More homes and bringing More people into the area which will make a Constant Water Conservation. I have cut back water usage tremendously over many years and adding more homes will only, keep us Natives on water restrictions. It would be nice to have a Thick, Green, Beautiful, Lawn, but…..
Workshop Natural & Cultural Res Like the emphasis on water and air quality.
Workshop Natural & Cultural Res
Need to clarify how H2O and air concerns will be addressed (standards) in specific plans- Will there be worse case analyses?
Survey Noise
This section is borderline invasive. Maybe strike a balance between quiet hours i.e. loud music after 10pm or Midnight, but laying out a Noise Plan sounds too patronizing.
Survey Noise
My neighbor has a MOBILE car detailing business BUT has been detailing cars from his home 2 doors down.
The sound of the Pressure Washer, Vacuum and others makes it Impossible to have windows or doors open. I get headaches almost Daily. This is a FULL RESIDENTIAL AREA! My neighbor and myself complained to the City, And it gave him a Business License! WHAT??? RIDICULOUS!! This Should NOT HAVE HAPPENED!
Survey Noise
I have lived in my home for 32 years. 2 doors down on the corner lives a Mobile Detailing business owner.
Myself and a neighbor contacted the City regarding the All day Noise from him doing the detailing at the home, you can see soapy water running down the Pike. He also has stated prior to 7:00am. The noise is so bad I have to keep windows and doors closed due to the noise - not to mention the lingering Headache.
We filed a complaint, which several notices were issued to the neighbor for NOT Being in Compliance.
What did the City of Arroyo Grande do?? They issued a Business License!! 100% UNACCEPTABLE!!! This is a RESIDENTIAL Neighborhood!!
Survey Public Facilities/Utilitie
Our parks and open space are awesome! So many people and families enjoy them each week. Soto Sports complex brings together our community and encourages healthy competition. Maybe we invest in it more? Focus on public access, openness, clear and easy access to reserve tables, BBQs etc.
Survey Public Facilities/Utilitie
Will there be a trail from Fair Oaks Blvd at Earl Grebb Bridge to The Village Area, along the Arroyo Grande Creek with the development of the North Fair Oaks Specific Area Survey Public Facilities/Utilitie[Map is] To vague more clarion street names regarding the location of parks Website Public Facilities/Utilitie
I don't understand how we cannot consider telecommunications / internet an important utility. (or at lest have it in the utility section and don't say it is important).. Having fast affordable high-speed internet over multiple mediums is critical to have in the community. AG is significantly behind what is available today in Grover Beach and SLO.
Website Public Facilities/Utilitie
We have attended several meetings - nice job on engagement and listening to the public Is there a place in this plan for utilities such as water, electricity, and high speed internet? Would we encourage self generated electricity, native plantings, and lowered water use development? What plans can we make so Arroyo Grande has leading high speed internet/ data access now and in the future? We really only have one wired solution now and it is well behind the state of the market. Planning and developing with this in mind could lead us to maintain and attract the businesses and residents we seek
Website Public Facilities/Utilitie
with four more Pickleball courts at Soto, you will bring back all the Arroyo Grandy players that are playing in tournaments in Templeton.
Four more courts and Soto will be ready to host regional tournaments with all the revenue that tournaments can provide.
We would also promote sponsoring of new courts with banners on the new court, fences to advertise the sponsors services in the community, yearly sponsoring fees Workshop Public Facilities/UtilitiePolicy 4-1: to encourage partnership w/ LMUSD to share/utilize its facilities for recreation.
Workshop Public Facilities/Utilitie
Community garden PRCS-3.5 Can we promote more everywhere? Add to policy a stated priority for gardens and to be developed more opportunistically- anytime a suitable parcel is available.
Workshop Public Facilities/Utilitie
Need to clarify/include more info on shared use of facilities- such as drainage basins for parks (compatible uses- no extra fill etc.) – Partnerships with schools for grounds/fields Workshop Public Facilities/UtilitieHow about City administration? Need for a civic center.
Survey Safety
Keep it professional and inspiring, avoid the tendency to raise alarm i.e. temperature scares. Just communicate where people can go if overheated or in need of warmth.
Survey Safety
Why are 'single access neighborhoods' identified in the Safety chapter? What are the implications for 'single access neighborhoods' from being in the Safety chapter of the General Plan update? What, if any, plan is there or might there be for modifying 'single access neighborhoods' as a result of being in the Safety chapter of the General Plan update?
Survey Safety To vague hard to understand I know you can do better.
Survey Safety Drought Should be moved higher up the list.
Land Use Element
Comments
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: General Plan
Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2025 2:49:46 PM
The specific plan tag for the Fredericks property. Is safe to assume that through the EIR process impacts to the wildlife corridor that currently exists, the traffic circulation issue that will and already exists, the construction in a High-Very High Fire Severity Zone, and the lack of increased water storage/ sourcing capacity to support development. Will rezoning of this property be required for the current zoning? Thank you for the opportunity to comment unfortunately due to my work commitments I am unable to come to the workshop. This project poses a significant impact to my neighborhood and I am interested in how this project potentially moves. Can it be written into the General plan to consider open space similar to Pismo Preserve? This would be a great opportunity for a park where hiking/ biking, and wildlife viewing could take place.
Paul Provence
Paul Provence
To: City of Arroyo Grande - Community Development Department From: MFI Limited/Arroyo Linda Crossroads LLC
Re: General Plan Update - Land Use Element
Property: The Frederick Property
Date: 02/02/2026
RE: Comments Regarding Proposed Specific Plan Focus Area #3 Deficiencies Dear Bill Robeson and Planning Staff,
This letter is submitted on behalf of the property owner of The Frederick Property to formally comment on the proposed designation of the subject property as a Specific Plan Area (SPA) in the City of Arroyo Grande General Plan Update. These comments are intended to preserve the administrative record and address material legal deficiencies in the proposed Land Use Element.
Frederick Focus Area #3 Boundary
The Focus Area Boundary is identified with a Blue Line on Page LU-23 of the Proposed General Plan, however, additional area identified as Specific Plan (Pink) is not included in the Focus Area Boundary (see exhibit A). Is this an oversight? Are the areas to be treated differently for development? In addition, on Page LU-22, the document describes the property as existing agricultural and open space, it is not agricultural, and has not been designated as open space, a better description is undeveloped land to avoid confusion or implication that this property is currently open space.
Proposed Focus Area Language
The draft General Plan identifies the following percentage-based land use framework for the Specific Plan Area but does not include a maximum number of units:
• 40% Low-Medium Density Residential
• 25% Open Space
• 15% Low Density Residential
• 10% Parks and Recreation
• 10% Medium Density Residential
This mix of designations would require approximately ten acres of the area to be Low Density Residential or one unit per acre based on the proposed General Plan. This contradicts proposed policy LU 10.2 which states that the Focus Area should include a range of housing types including small lot homes, townhomes, and small-scale multi-family development. We would request that the framework for density be modified to eliminate the Low Density as follows:
• 50% Low-Medium Density Residential (4 DU/Acre)
• 02% High Density Residential (16 DU/Acre)
• 30% Open Space
• 10% Parks and Recreation
• 08% Medium Density Residential (8 DU/Acre)
Based on areas identified as Specific Plan, approximately 105 acres, this would accommodate up to 300 units. We suggest the city include a maximum density to be allowed in the Specific Plan Area (see exhibit B).
Sports Field PRCS-A Implementation Plan
PRCS-A. Recreation Facility Needs:
• Sports Fields as a component of any major expansion projects for the city, such as development of the Arroyo Linda Crossroads area (PRCS pg. 23) (Frederick Property).
The Frederick property is committed to provide approximately a culminative 10 acres of neighborhood and pocket parks. The parks provided for this property will be for the residences of the (SPA). Current traffic and circulation analysis cannot support additional traffic associated with a community sport park. Furthermore, the terrain/topography will only allow for several smaller neighborhood parks approximately totaling 10 acres. We believe a sport field is better suited along fair Oaks where the terrain is level and can accommodate larger facilities.
Conclusion
The Frederick Property supports the preparation of a Specific Plan. However, the current General Plan language governing the proposed Specific Plan Area is insufficient and must be revised prior to adoption along with removing the sport park designation. We respectfully request that the city correct these inconsistencies before advancing the General Plan Update.
Please include this letter in the administrative record for the General Plan Update.
Sincerely,
Andy Mangano
MFI Limited
Representing Arroyo Linda Crossroads LLC
EXHIBIT A - Revised Limits for Frederick Focus Area Page 89 of 179
EXHIBIT B - Arroyo Linda Crossroads Land Use Map Page 91 of 179
From: Adam Saruwatari
Sent: Saturday, February 7, 2026 1:07 PM
To: Matt Downing <[email protected]>
Subject: General Plan Update Draft
Hello Mayor and Council Members,
Thank you for working so hard to complete the General Plan Update draft. We have come across a few concerns that we were wondering if you would consider?
Land Use section
1. Would it be possible to reduce the 20% open space requirement for the North Fair Oaks Focus Area? Should we move forward with development in the future, we would like to use the creek area to satisfy the open space requirement if possible, however it is uncertain if the area will meet the 20% specification. A reduction in the open space criteria would allow more flexibility to work on what we believe would be more beneficial for the City, Community, and the Saruwatari Family.
Natural and Cultural Resources
1. We understand that a possible creek trail on the North Fair Oaks Focus Area may be good for the City, Community, and the Saruwatari Legacy under the parks and recreation classification. We would request to clarify that a creek trail count towards the open space requirement and parks recreation requirement? It is our interpretation that the creek trail would technically serve the purposes for parks, recreation, and open space? If possible, we would appreciate that the creek trail be identified as an option if the properties are developed due to the incompatibly with any remaining commercial agriculture. Fumigation, pesticides, heavy machinery, food safety, and liability are only a few of the complications that would arise.
Circulation
1. Conversations that we have had in the past with the City regarding a connector road from Valley Road to Grand Ave. have identified the option as being a possibility when and if
the family’s properties are developed. Would it be possible to make this clear in the General Plan Update?
2. Would it be possible to specify that the Class I Multi-Use Path along the creek South of Fair Oaks Ave. is an option that will be looked at if those properties are developed? We own multiple properties that are currently in commercial agricultural that encompass the proposed Class I Multi-Use Path. The properties that we own are APN#s 075-011-023, 075- 011-028, and 075-011-022. The properties would have the same complications with fumigation, pesticides, heavy machinery, food safety, liability, and so forth.
Thank you,
Adam Saruwatari
Natural and Cultural Resources
Element
Comments
1 MEMORANDUM
To: City of Arroyo Grande Project Number: 2502-0301
Andrew Perez, Planning Manager
Bill Robeson, Assistant City Manager
Brian Pedrotti, Community Development Director
Matt Downing, City Manager
From: Robert Vander Weele P.G.
Date: February 11, 2026
Subject: Air Quality Technical Memorandum Regarding the General Plan, Preliminary Public Review Draft, Arroyo Grande, San Luis Obispo County, California Padre Associates (Padre) on behalf of Arroyo Linda Crossroads LLC/MFI Limited (ALC/MFI) has prepared this memorandum to provide technical background and recommendations regarding the proposed policy to implement a 500-foot setback from Highway 101 as suggested in the Natural and Cultural Resources chapter of the City of Arroyo Grande’s (City) General Plan, Preliminary Public Review Draft dated November 2025 (City, 2025).
ALC/MFI is currently proposing the 105-acre Arroyo Grande Heights Development Project (Project) (refer to Exhibit A).
Response to Proposed 500-Foot Setback for Residential Receptors California Air Resources Control Board (CARB) Air Quality and Land Use Handbook (CARB, 2005) cite a 500-foot setback between freeways1 and sensitive receptors2 to reduce cancer risk based on traffic studies indicating a 70% drop in particulate matter (PM) pollution levels such as diesel particulate matter (DMP) at 500 feet from freeways. CARB uses this setback as a screening distance and does not recommend or require a set distance. Regarding mitigation for environmental impacts, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines allow site specific analysis and alternative mitigation to reduce impacts to sensitive receptors. In addition, many municipalities in California allow reduced setbacks with enhanced design and/or operational mitigations.
There are currently no standard locations from which a setback should be measured, as neither CARB, the San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD), nor the City has provided guidance specific to air quality considerations. Based on current research, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) uses the edge of pavement of the nearest travel lane for emissions modeling and health risk assessments (HRA) (CAPCOA, 2009). As an illustrative case, the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) recommends utilizing the edge of pavement of the nearest travel lane as the point of analysis when preparing emissions estimates and conducting emission-related HRAs for projects within Sacramento County (SMAQMD, 2011).
Based on the above references Padre recommends using the edge of pavement of the nearest travel lane to a freeway as the starting point of the 500-feet setback as an initial air quality screening distance. Projects that are located within the 500-foot buffer should complete a technical study of the potential air quality impacts to public health. If the project-specific 1 Defined by CARB as a roadway with traffic volumes exceeding 100,000 vehicles/day. 2 Residences, schools, daycare centers, playgrounds, or medical facilities.
2 technical study finds that there would be significant air quality impacts to sensitive receptors, then alternative effects reduction measures could be implemented, as outlined below. Refer to Exhibit A below for an example of the 500-foot setback for the proposed Project.
Alternative Air Quality Impact Reduction Measures
Administrative, design and engineering measures should be based on the results of a technical study of air quality impacts and/or an HRA. Below are some measures that could be implemented to reduce or avoid air quality impacts and inform the public of potential air quality impacts.
Building Designs and Systems
o Minimum Efficiency Reporting Value (MERV) filters with ratings of 11 through 16 in heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. o HAVC systems designed to maintain positive pressure.
o Sealed building envelopes.
Site Design and Layout:
o Increased building setbacks within individual parcels. o Placement of parking, landscaping, or non-habitable uses closest to the roadway.
Disclosure:
o Buyer/Tenant receives a disclosure regarding air quality due to proximity to the freeway prior to occupation.
Recommended Language for Draft General Plan
Residential development projects located within 500 feet of the edge of pavement of the nearest travel lane of U.S. Highway 101 shall be subject to project level evaluation of potential air quality impacts.
Where development is proposed within this area, the project proponent shall demonstrate, through screening or technical analysis, that potential impacts to public health are adequately addressed. Such screening and analysis may support reduced setbacks or the use of alternative design-based measures, including but not limited to enhanced air filtration systems, building construction, or placement of habitable structures, provided that these measures achieve an equivalent or greater level of protection for public health compared to standard setback requirements.
The City may approve projects within this area upon a determination that:
1. Impact reduction measures are not necessary based on the results of the project-level analysis; or
2. All necessary and feasible mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design to the satisfaction of the City.
3 References
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. 2009. Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects. Dated July.
California Air Resources Control Board. 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook. dated April.
City of Arroyo Grande. 2025. General Plan, Preliminary Public Review Draft. Dated November.
Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District. 2011. Recommended Protocol for Evaluating the Location of Sensitive Land Uses Adjacent to Major Roadways. Dated March
EXHIBIT A
Arroyo Linda Crossroads Land Use Map
Safety Element
Comments
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: Trillium on Grand Community Association - 36 Homes - Single Entrance/Exit Date: Thursday, November 20, 2025 3:45:39 PM
Hi Andrew,
I am currently reviewing the several hundred pages of the Draft General Plan Update and Appendices as well as additional links such as the Housing Element Plan and Berry Gardens Specific Area Plan.
Pages 105-6 of 339 of the General Plan Update Preliminary Public Review Draft and Appendix A listed 10 neighborhoods having more than 30 dwelling units with a single entrance/exit.
Trillium on Grand Community Association was not listed and yet we have 36 dwelling units and a single entrance/exit.
FYI - There is an "emergency" gate at the SW back corner; however, it has a Knox Lock on it for fire and police use only. Additionally, it is not a real entrance/exit since it simply allows access between our community and the neighboring community to our south.
Is there something specific in the California Fire Code Appendix D107.1 that excludes Trillium on Grand Community Association?
Mike P. Harris
Noise Element
Comments
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: Comments for Chapter 5 - Noise
Date: Monday, December 1, 2025 8:02:54 PM
Hi Andrew,
While the current noise chapter of the General Plan effectively addresses development and traffic noise, it has a significant gap concerning neighbor-generated noise, particularly music and live bands. Including targeted policies for mitigating excessive noise disturbances will enhance community quality of life, ensure equitable enforcement of noise regulations, and promote harmonious living environments.
1. Community Well-Being
Enhancing Quality of Life: Noise pollution, especially from music, can be a source of distress for residents, affecting their peace and well-being. By including provisions for neighbor noise mitigation, the City acknowledges the importance of a peaceful living environment as a fundamental aspect of community health.
Building Stronger Community Relationships: Engaging residents in the process of developing these provisions fosters a sense of community ownership and trust. By addressing their concerns, the City demonstrates that it values residents’ voices and prioritizes their wellbeing.
2. Equitable Enforcement of Regulations
Providing Clear Guidelines: Explicitly defining allowable noise levels for music and establishing procedures for handling complaints will make enforcement more straightforward for law enforcement personnel. Clear guidelines reduce ambiguity and ensure that residents understand the standards that govern noise.
Empowering Law Enforcement: Equipping police personnel with the tools and training to manage noise complaints effectively encourages more proactive responses. Tools such as decibel meters can objectively measure noise levels, making it easier to resolve violations fairly and consistently.
3. Promoting a Balanced Neighborhood Dynamic
Supporting Local Business While Protecting Residents: By creating a framework that
manages music noise, the city can support local venues and businesses while simultaneously protecting residents from disturbances. Agreements with businesses regarding operation hours and noise limits can facilitate a vibrant community culture without infringing upon residents' rights to peace and quiet.
Encouraging Responsible Use of Space: Incorporating policies for neighbor noise will help instill a sense of shared responsibility among residents and businesses. This collaborative approach can foster community spirit and encourage responsible behavior regarding noise generation.
4. Addressing Future Growth and Density
Anticipating Urban Development: As the city grows and densifies, noise from neighbor activities will likely increase. Proactively addressing noise in the General Plan allows for better management of potential conflicts and noise disturbances, helping to maintain a high quality of life for residents in more populated areas.
Preventing Conflicts: By addressing neighbor noise in advance, the city can help avoid complaints and disputes that can arise from noise issues, leading to community tensions and potential legal disputes. Setting clear expectations now will mitigate problems as development progresses.
Conclusion
Incorporating provisions for neighbor noise mitigation into the General Plan is essential for fostering a thriving, harmonious community. By addressing this area, Arroyo Grande can enhance the quality of life for its residents, support local businesses, and ensure that growth remains sustainable and equitable. The inclusion of targeted policies will provide a blueprint for managing noise effectively, thereby strengthening community ties and benefiting all stakeholders involved.
Thank you for including this critical factor into Chapter 5.
Kind Regards,
Peter Williamson
Arroyo Grande Resident
Parks, Recreation, and Community
Services Element
Comments
From: Arroyo Grande General Plan Update
To: [email protected]; Andrew Perez; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Comment from PlanArroyoGrande.com Home
Date: Sunday, November 23, 2025 10:59:20 AM
Name: Ben Horton
E-mail:
Comments:
I don't understand how we cannot consider telecommunications / internet an important utility. (or at lest have it in the utility section and don't say it is important).. Having fast affordable high-speed internet over multiple mediums is critical to have in the community. AG is significantly behind what is available today in Grover Beach and SLO.
Page title: Home
From: Arroyo Grande General Plan Update
To: [email protected]; Andrew Perez; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Comment from PlanArroyoGrande.com Home
Date: Thursday, January 8, 2026 8:27:15 PM
Name: Carlton Way
E-mail:
Comments:
with four more Pickleball courts at Soto, you will bring back all the Arroyo Grandy players that are playing in tournaments in Templeton.
Four more courts and Soto will be ready to host regional tournaments with all the revenue that tournaments can provide.
We would also promote sponsoring of new courts with banners on the new court, fences to advertise the sponsors services in the community, yearly sponsoring fees Page title: Home
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: Comments in Support of Draft General Plan Update Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 12:45:13 PM
Dear Andrew,
On behalf of the Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo (ECOSLO), we submit the following comments in support of the City of Arroyo Grande’s Draft General Plan Update.
ECOSLO acknowledges the scope and structure of the Draft General Plan and its inclusion of policies addressing natural resource protection, parks and public spaces, climate resilience, and community health and safety. The Plan establishes a long-range framework that incorporates environmental systems as integral components of community planning.
We support the Draft General Plan’s existing goals and policies related to the protection and enhancement of natural and cultural resources, including parks, open space, and the urban landscape. The Plan’s treatment of trees and vegetation as environmental assets is consistent with widely accepted principles of sustainable land use and resource management.
The Draft General Plan identifies multiple functions of trees in public spaces, including shade provision, air quality benefits, habitat value, and contributions to neighborhood character. In park and recreation areas, the Plan’s focus on accessibility, comfort, and usability is supported by the inclusion and maintenance of tree canopy, which contributes to user comfort and extended use of public spaces.
We also note the Plan’s incorporation of climate adaptation and public safety considerations across multiple elements. Policies addressing urban heat, stormwater management, and environmental hazards are complemented by measures that preserve and enhance tree canopy, which can contribute to heat reduction, runoff management, and overall landscape resilience.
Overall, the Draft General Plan Update reflects an integrated approach to environmental management, public health, and community wellbeing. ECOSLO supports the Plan’s direction and its inclusion of policies related to environmental resources, parks, and public safety.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft General Plan Update.
These comments are submitted for the City’s consideration as part of the public review process.
Sincerely,
Kendra Paulding
Kendra Paulding (she/her), Executive Director
ECOSLO - Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo
www.ECOSLO.org |
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: Inclusion of Urban Forest in General Plan
Date: Monday, February 2, 2026 9:35:08 PM
Hi Andrew,
I am writing another comment to advocate for the inclusion of an urban forest initiative in the Arroyo Grande General Plan. Notably, the City of San Luis Obispo has effectively integrated urban forestry into its plan to enhance community health, improve air quality, and support climate resilience. Urban forests can significantly enhance air quality and manage stormwater runoff. Increased tree canopy can also elevate property values and attract visitors.
Leaving urban forestry out may stem from budget constraints or prioritizing immediate infrastructural needs. However, incorporating it into our plan offers long-term benefits that greatly enhance our community’s quality of life. I'm curious to hear if this addition is feasible at this stage in the effort.
Thank you for considering this crucial addition. I look forward to your response.
Best,
Peter Williamson
Arroyo Grande Resident
From: Amy Kueffler
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 1:28 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Downing <[email protected]>; Jessica Matson <[email protected]>; Bill Robeson <[email protected]>
Subject: Keep the city tennis courts
Dear City Council,
Thank you for taking time to hear from the public. I appreciate your time.
I am an advocate for all physical activities for people of all ages. I am particularly concerned that more and more of the tennis courts are being turned into pickleball courts or other activities. Please know that there are many tennis players that enjoy our sport and want to keep these for our community league play and very important to have at least 4 courts in each area for our teams to play for our competition. A number of our teams use community park courts for these to take place. They are also needed for other tournaments thru the years.
Thank you for considering keeping these tennis courts as they are currently. We have given up on many courts for pickleball already in all areas of our community. my Kueffler
Avila Bay Athletic Club & Spa
cell
From: Carol Hall
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 2:01 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Downing <[email protected]>; Jessica Matson <[email protected]>; Bill Robeson <[email protected]>
Subject: Tennis courts .
Dear Mayor and City Council , The Arroyo Grande tennis courts play an important role in our Central Coast Women's tennis league , as well as USTA matches and our social tennis matches .
There are pickleball courts popping up everywhere , but for those of us who still enjoy tennis the public tennis courts are becoming more scarce .
Please allow Arroyo Grande to keep their four tennis courts in tact .
Thank you for your consideration .
Sincerely , Carol Hall
a tennis player
From: Katy Kuras
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 12:37 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>; Sheridan Bohlken <[email protected]>; Shannon Sweeney <[email protected]>; Andrew Perez <[email protected]>; Matt Downing <[email protected]>; Jessica Matson <[email protected]>; Bill Robeson <[email protected]> Subject: Soto tennis courts
To whom it may concern,
My name is Katy Park, I have been a member at the Arroyo grande women’s Tennis league for two years now. I joined after a painful time in my life when I lost both of my parents unexpectedly. I needed a grief outlet. I am still rather young, and when I joined the team, so many of the older ladies took me under their wing knowing I no longer had a mom and dad.
They give me advice and are wonderful mentors, as well as giving me tips on tennis. It has been so healing for me and I look forward to playing every week. So many of the ladies have grief stories of their own. The Tennis community has been wonderful. It brings together those who are passionate about tennis from all over the county. Many beautiful friendships have been made this way.
We love our home court, and we take good care of it, we have work days where we come out and pull weeds and blow up the courts clear off cobwebs fix things that are broken. It broke my heart to hear that some of the courts may be taken away, and there would no longer be able to be a league team without four tennis courts. Please take consideration the Tennis community and how would be heartbroken. Pickleball is fairly new and I know it’s a big fad right now, but Tennis has been around hundreds of years. Some ways that Tennis has helped not only me but the whole Tennis ������������community.
Here is how tennis helps heal:
• Emotional Release and Control:The intense, physical nature of tennis allows for the release of bottled-up emotions like anger or sadness. It provides a sense of control on the court when life feels chaotic, helping to manage "the pressure cooker" of emotional pain.
• Structure and Purpose: Following a loss, the routine of training and competing provides structure. This helps individuals move forward, offering a goal-oriented focus that can channel energy into personal growth, such as training for a match or improving skills.
• Mental Escape and Focus: The game requires intense concentration, which provides a mental break from grief. It forces players to be in the present moment, offering a "sanctuary" where they can focus on the game rather than the loss. • Connection and Community:Tennis fosters social connections, whether through playing doubles, joining a league, or participating in tournaments. This social interaction helps combat isolation.
• Resilience and Perspective: The game teaches that mistakes (or lost points) are not the end of the world, helping players build resilience and perspective on handling adversity.
• Physical Health Benefits: Exercise releases endorphins, which can improve mood, reduce symptoms of depression, and alleviate stress, contributing to overall better mental health.
For many, tennis serves as a way to honor a lost loved one by continuing to play and channel their memory into the sport.
Thank you so much for your time and understanding, please reach out for any questions you may have. Sincerely,
Katy Park
From: Jen Haskell
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 12:50 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Downing <[email protected]>; Jessica Matson <[email protected]>; Bill Robeson <[email protected]>
Subject: Soto tennis courts
Good afternoon!
I am writing today because I have been told that the city of Arroyo Grande is considering repurposing some of the tennis courts at Soto Park to use as pickleball courts.
As an enthusiastic player of both pickleball and tennis, I beg you to reconsider.
The tennis courts at Soto are used by local women who play on teams in the Central Coast Women’s Tennis League. The CCWTL is a well known and respected league where adult women can compete in tennis at several different ability levels. There are teams that play out of several locations throughout the county, from Paso Robles to Santa Maria.
The Soto park location is special, not only because it is the only location being used to represent the five cities community, but also because their teams are available to women who don’t belong to a country club, and would otherwise not be able to compete without club membership.
The CCWTL has been promoting athleticism and sportsmanship and a spirit of friendly competition for women in our community since the 1970s! Countless lifelong friendships have been made through this organization, as well as providing an opportunity for women to participate in a healthy lifestyle.
The CCWTL matches are played several times a week throughout the year. They require 4 courts for each match. If any of the courts at Soto were permanently changed to pickleball courts the park would no longer be eligible for playing these matches, and this time honored tradition would become financially unattainable for the talented ladies who depend on the sport of tennis for fitness, friendship, and preservation of their mental health.
Please consider building some new courts that are specifically for the growing pickleball community to enjoy. I’m sure they would be very popular, without fueling resentment between the two sports.
Thank you so much for your time and consideration,
Jen Haskell
From: Francie Kelley
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2026 1:13 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Downing <[email protected]>; Jessica Matson <[email protected]>; Bill Robeson <[email protected]>
Subject: Arroyo Grande Tennis Courts!
Dear Arroyo Grande City Council,
As a fairly new transplant to the Central Coast, (5 years ago), I was thrilled to find a wonderful tennis community here. As an avid and regular player, I didn’t know what I was going to find, but so pleased to report that I found the Central Coast Women’s Tennis League, and along with it, a fine and large group of women committed to our sport.
One of the best things of all is the availability of tennis courts at local city parks, including Arroyo Grande’s Soto Sports Complex. Knowing that AG is working on the draft for its current General Plan, I am writing to urge that NO changes be made to the tennis courts at Soto.
Having 4 tennis courts and 4 pickle ball courts is the best and most fair option for Soto Sports Complex. Please support the active tennis community on the Central Coast for women, men and kids by keeping the 4 courts as tennis courts (only) at Soto.
Thank you in advance for supporting tennis on the Central Coast and at Soto by keeping four tennis courts as tennis courts!
Regards,
Francie H. Kelley
Circulation Element
Comments
From:
To: Andrew Perez; Brian Pedrotti
Subject: Proposed Circulation Element Map
Date: Monday, November 24, 2025 4:26:40 PM
Hi Andrew and Brian,
Just looked at the map again and saw the proposed collector for the extension of Valley Road to Grand Ave and Hwy101. I guess my eyes are not sharp yet.
As you know Fair Oaks and the Halcyon intersection is already a mess. At 11:30am the other day traffic was backed up from Grand to AG Hospital.
Just a thought --- what if the Valley Road proposed extension was designated an Arterial, and Fair Oaks Road from Valley to Halcyon was designated a 2 lane arterial which it is to the west?
Also, the proposed map doesn't seem to indicate any proposed improvements to the signalization at Halcyon and Grand, and the intersection at Halcyon and El Camino Real.
These intersections continue to get worse and worse.
The real solution to avoiding a gridlock scenario in the Halcyon/Fair Oaks Road areas of AG, is for SLO County to provide more direct access/egress to Hwy 101 from the Mesa Area.
Without County improvements Halcyon/ Fair Oaks will be gridlocked even after a roundabout. I realize it is difficult to coordinate with the County, but perhaps Jimmy Paulding can assist since he has represented AG and now represents the Mesa/Nipomo area as Supervisor. Two Woodland Neighborhood residents currently work for SLO County Public Works so they might have ideas since they are familiar with all the issues.
Thanks for your consideration and I hope the meetings give you good feedback. Residents of Woodland may not be attending because they were very disappointed that their concerns were not acknowledged at the last Council Meeting meeting.
Please give a copy of this email to the Consultants and the City Council at December 2nd and 3rd, 2025 meetings.
Thank you,
Marsha Lee
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: circulation element
Date: Wednesday, December 3, 2025 5:17:20 PM
I am not great at reading maps but there certainly needs new traffic signals where the huge new HASLO development on a small side street (or is that Camino real) intersects Oak Park Blvd. I couldn't tell from the map if that was designated a site for improvement or change but with the large number of residents and cars who will be in that housing development within a year, hopefully a traffic signal change is being planned. I can't imagine t here is enough space for road widening though.
Many people wish we could return to the former way of handling traffic near the Halcyon and Camino Real area near TJ's as it gets so backed up after 4 pm. You may get comments on that. Luckily i avoid that backup by chosing a different time.
Overall, a beautiful Plan; very readable and detailed.
Judith Bernstein, MA in Urban Planning, UCLA
From:
Sent: Sunday, February 8, 2026 9:04 PM
To: Andrew Perez <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Inclusion of Urban Forest in General Plan
Hi Andrew,
As a transportation planner, resident of the Halcyon Triangle, father of a family that bikes and walks, and bus rider (that owns cars and pays the related taxes), my final comments are regarding the Circulation Element.
1. Fiscal Commitment: The 20% Multimodal Mandate
I recommend the City adopt a formal funding policy that aligns the budget with desired modal splits, similar to San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara. • The Mandate: Commit 20% of the City’s transportation budget—specifically leveraging Measure E-24 sales tax revenues—exclusively to active transportation. • The Precedent: Santa Barbara’s use of Measure C/A as a 20% local match has successfully secured tens of millions in state grants. Arroyo Grande should replicate this to ensure Measure E-24 acts as a force multiplier. • Universal Design: Unlike some squeezed implementations in SLO that create friction between e-bikes and pedestrians, a dedicated 20% fund allows for Integrated Universal Design (e.g., raised crossings, refuge islands) that protects seniors and families with strollers.
2. Addressing the "Island": US 101 Barrier Mitigation
The Halcyon Triangle is "islanded" by two high-stress crossings that fail the LTS 3 goals in Goal C-9. I request that the following project descriptions be formally incorporated into Table C-1 (Planned Improvements):
• Brisco Road Underpass (Retail/Library Access): I recommend Table C-1 be updated to include a standalone Road Diet within the Brisco underpass. By reallocating one vehicle lane to a protected Class IV cycle track and widened ADA walkway, the City can fulfill Policy C-1.15 without waiting decades for a $20M+ interchange reconstruction.
o Data Justification: The City’s 2015-2016 Pilot Program proved that closing the Brisco ramps significantly reduced vehicle conflict points and subsided traffic volumes in the immediate area without impacting regional circulation.
• East Grand Avenue Overpass (Village Access): As the gateway to the Village, this overpass prioritizes vehicle throughput over pedestrian and bicyclist comfort. I recommend adding a project to Table C-1 for "Quick-Build" safety enhancements, including high-visibility conflict zone markings and physical separation for the sidewalk. This ensures the upcoming Halcyon Complete Streets project provides a low-stress connection to the Village.
3. Operational Safety and Transit Integration
• East Grand Pedestrian Signal: Currently, Table C-1 does not address the operational failure at this location. Because this is a pedestrian-actuated signal, motorists frequently treat this stretch as a continuous high-speed corridor. I request it be added to Table C-1 as a Geometric Safety Project, mandating Curb Extensions (Bulb-outs) and Advanced Stop Bars. Physically narrowing the intersection is the only way to create the "visual friction" necessary to force 35 mph compliance and ensure drivers can actually stop when the signal is triggered. • Transit Catchment Priority: I recommend the Circulation Element include a new policy designating a "Transit Access Priority Zone" for all blocks within a 500-foot catchment radius of regional bus stops. This policy should mandate that these zones be prioritized for Tier 1 ADA remediation in the ADA Transition Plan. This creates a data-driven trigger ensuring that residents have a viable, accessible path to the regional transit network.
• Ocean View Elementary Connectivity: To fulfill Goal C-11 (Safe Routes to School), the General Plan’s Circulation Map (Figure C-1) must be updated to identify a "Priority Pedestrian Crossing" on Halcyon Road near the cemetery. Specifically, this should be listed in Table C-1 as a Pedestrian Refuge Island or HAWK Signal.
4. California Alignment
I recommend referencing bicycle level of comfort as not to plan into a corner. Caltrans has funded an AI-powered bicycle comfort project for Santa Barbara County that could have statewide impacts. Referencing "Level of Comfort" metrics now will ensure we are ahead for upcoming state and federal grants.
By prioritizing a "people-first" allocation of our public right-of-way, Arroyo Grande can transition into a model for safe, coastal multimodal living.
Sincerely,
Peter Williamson
Arroyo Grande Resident
ATTACHMENT 3
Preliminary Public Draft General Plan - Technical Edits Comment Element/Page # Source
Clarify that Ag policies only apply to parcels with Ag land use designation
LU-14 and/or LU33CAG
Reconsider a 0.5 FAR for the CF. Don’t create
unnecessary constraints for City projects
LU-4, LU-15 CAG
Change land use designation of 077-192-076 through -
080, and -083 to SF Med Density. CF designation was
determined to be a staff error from many years ago
LU-5 CAG
Change name of Woodside Park to Woodland Park PRCS-5, PRCS-6 Staff Include Valley Road and Coach Road extension in Table
7-5
C-19 Staff
Combine 4-lane and 2-lane arterials into one
classification in Table 7-2
C-11 Staff
Verify max street classifications/speed limits where
sharrows are appropriate. SB 1216 prohibits use of
sharrows on streets w/ speed limits greater than 30 mph C-22 Staff
Update references to 2025 Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard
Mitigation Plan. Adopted by CC on 2/10
SAF-4 Staff
Fully incorporate Mills Act into NCR-D NCR-23 Staff
Typo – Policy C-6.12 Change debit to debt C-46 Staff
Revise Policy C-3.4 regarding number of trips that
triggers traffic analysis for consistency with existing traffic impact guidelines.
C-40 Staff
Include implementation of SRTS section of ATP C-58 Staff Figure 8-2 in ED element is missing Pismo Beach, Santa
Maria, and SLO in legend
ED-11 Staff
LU-C: revised awkward wording to “buffering and
appropriate setbacks between dissimilar uses”
LU-39 CAG
Rework language of paragraphs 1 and 2 describing the
element
NCR-3 CAG
Insert “for” in second sentence under Climate Hazards.
Should read: “have been occurring for millions…
SAF-3 CAG
Bullet points on SAF-6 should coordinate with numbered
areas on the map on SAF-7
SAF-6, 7 CAG
Rework first sentence in Groundshaking Hazards section
for clarity and grammar.
SAF-21 CAG
Rework first sentence on page SAF-22 for clarity and
grammar.
SAF-22 CAG
Rework SAF-1.3 for clarity and grammar. SAF-30 CAG
Delete “shall” from SAF-4.6 SAF-35 CAG
Delete “that” and add “to” in first sentence of SAF-5.6 SAF-38 CAG Rework first sentence of SAF-JJ for clarity and grammar. SAF-55 CAG
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Director of Community Development BY: Andrew Perez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Supplemental Memo for February 24, 2026 Item 11.b - Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
DATE: February 23, 2026
Staff has received comment letters from property owners of two of the focus areas (Fredericks and North Fair Oaks) identified in the General Plan Update, which were included in the City Council packet as Attachment 2 of the above referenced item.
Due to the significant role of these focus areas in the consideration of the Preliminary Public Review Draft, staff has included a specific response table below for each letter:
Item Comment Staff Response
Letter from
Andy Mangano
(Fredericks
Focus Area)
Focus Area Boundary
does not include all
areas of the property.
The focus area boundary should
capture each of the parcels that
have the Specific Plan land use
designation. Figure 2-7 will be
revised to reflect the inclusion of
these parcels so it is understood
each of these parcels is subject to
the policies listed under Goal LU10.
The document
describes the property
as existing agricultural
and open space, it is
not agricultural, and
has not been
designated as open
space, a better
description is
undeveloped land to
avoid confusion or
The description of the properties
on LU-22 will also be revised to
accurately reflect the existing land
use and its current zoning and
land use designations.
City Council
Supplemental Memo for Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
February 23, 2026
implication that this
property is currently
open space
Letter from
Andy Mangano
(Fredericks
Focus Area)
Requests that the
density be modified to
eliminate Low Density
Residential and include
a different percentage
mix of uses
The proposed revision is still
reflective of the community’s
vision for this focus area based
on comments and staff is
supportive of the revised land use
allocations. Policy LU-10.2 will be
revised to accurately reflect the
housing types that are associated
with the revised percentages.
The Frederick property
is committed to provide
approximately a
culminative 10 acres of
neighborhood and
pocket parks. The
parks provided for this
property will be for the
residences of the
(SPA). Current traffic
and circulation analysis
cannot support
additional traffic
associated with a
community sport park.
Furthermore, the
terrain/topography will
only allow for several
smaller neighborhood
parks approximately
totaling 10 acres. We
believe a sport field is
better suited along fair
Oaks where the terrain
is level and can
accommodate larger
facilities traffic
associated with
community sport park,
Staff recommends revising this
implementation program to be a
broader strategy and not
specifically name this particular
focus area.
City Council
Supplemental Memo for Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
February 23, 2026
Letter from
Adam
Saruwatari
(North Fair
Oaks Focus
Area)
Would it be possible to
reduce the 20% open
space requirement for
the North Fair Oaks
Focus Area? Should
we move forward with
development in the
future, we would like to
use the creek area to
satisfy the open space
requirement if possible,
however it is uncertain
if the area will meet the
20% specification. A
reduction in the open
space criteria would
allow more flexibility to
work on what we
believe would be more
beneficial for the City,
Community, and the
Saruwatari Family.
The land use percentages from
page LU-20 are flexible and
changes are allowable and
expected since these represent a
starting point for the preparation
of the specific plan. The creek
area is captured within the
boundaries of the focus area, so
the creek and adjacent riparian
areas that are unbuildable
because they fall within the
required creek setback areas
would count towards the open
space requirement.
We would request to
clarify that a creek trail
count towards the open
space requirement and
parks recreation
requirement? It is our
interpretation that the
creek trail would
technically serve the
purposes for parks,
recreation, and open
space? If possible, we
would appreciate that
the creek trail be
identified as an option
if the properties are
developed due to the
incompatibly with any
remaining commercial
agriculture.
Fumigation, pesticides,
Staff agrees with the
interpretation that a creekside trail
meets the intent of the parks,
recreation, and open space
designations. For example, the
purpose of open space is to
maintain and preserve natural
resources while providing
opportunities for passive
recreation. A creekside trail
accomplishes each of these
purposes. There is no plan to
develop a creek trail while active
commercial agriculture is
occurring.
City Council
Supplemental Memo for Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
February 23, 2026
heavy machinery, food
safety, and liability are
only a few of the
complications that
would arise.
Letter from
Adam
Saruwatari
(North Fair
Oaks Focus
Area)
Conversations that we
have had in the past
with the City regarding
a connector road from
Valley Road to Grand
Ave. have identified the
option as being a
possibility when and if
the family’s properties
are developed. Would
it be possible to make
this clear in the
General Plan Update?
Figure 7-3 in the Circulation
Element show the extension of
Valley Road as a planned
circulation improvement. Staff
recommends revising Table 7-5 to
convey this extension as a
planned improvement also. It is
anticipated that this extension
would be included in a specific
plan for the focus area
constructed with the buildout of
the specific plan.
Would it be possible to
specify that the Class I
Multi-Use Path along
the creek south of Fair
Oaks Ave is an option
that will be looked at if
those properties are
developed? We own
multiple properties that
are currently in
commercial agriculture
that encompass the
proposed Class I MultiUse Path. The
properties that we own
are APN#s 075-011-
023, 075-011-028, and
075-011-022. The
properties would have
the same complications
with fumigation,
pesticides, heavy
machinery, food safety,
liability, and so forth.
The description of the focus area
on pg LU-20 speaks to the
inclusion of a multi-use trail in the
specific plan, consistent with the
City’s Active Transportation Plan
(ATP), if the properties are
developed and therefore, this is
an amenity that should be
considered. Implementation
programs C-E and C-H prioritize
implementation of the ATP to
buildout the pedestrian and
bicycle network. There is no plan
to develop Valley Road while
active commercial agriculture is
occurring.
City Council
Supplemental Memo for Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
February 23, 2026
Cc: City Manager
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website and Public Review Binder
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Jessica Matson, Director of Legislative & Information Services/ City Clerk
SUBJECT: Supplemental Information
Agenda Item 11.b - February 24, 2026 City Council Meeting Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
DATE: February 24, 2026
Attached is correspondence received for the above referenced item.
Cc: City Manager
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director
Community Development Director
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website and Public Review Binder
Enc
From: Heidi Gill
To: City Council; Sheridan Bohlken; Shannon Sweeney; Andrew Perez; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: SAVE SOTO Tennis Courts!!!
Date: Thursday, February 19, 2026 4:26:16 PM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
Hello,
I am writing to express my concern regarding the current situation with the Soto tennis courts. I have played in the local tennis league (CCWTL) for 20 years and it would be a shame to see the Soto tennis courts be taken away. Soto is one of the few public courts on the central coast left that allows the CCWTL and USTA league non-private club members to play at. If Soto tennis is taken away, many will lose their tennis team and not be able to play competitive tennis on the central coast.
As someone who plays both tennis and pickleball, I truly appreciate and enjoy both sports. I love that pickleball is accessible and easy to join casually, often for little to no cost. However, the same is no longer true for competitive tennis. The current trajectory prioritizes one sport at the expense of another, and I believe our community deserves access to both—without one crowding out the other.
Thank you for your time and for your commitment to supporting recreation in our community.
Sincerely,
Heidi Gill
CCWTL/USTA SLO County Player
From: Joan Jordan
To: City Council; [email protected]; Shannon Sweeney; Andrew Perez; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson
Cc:
Subject: Save Soto Courts
Date: Thursday, February 19, 2026 6:56:26 PM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
To Whom It May Concern,
As a dedicated member of the Central Coast Women’s Tennis League and an active player in our local tennis community, I am writing to express deep concern regarding any proposal that would result in the loss of existing tennis courts in our area. I play regularly at Soto Park in league play, and have for 20 years.
Tennis has a long-standing history in our community and continues to thrive, especially among women and junior players. The courts we currently have are not only in constant use, but they are essential for league play, coaching, tournaments, and recreational use. Simply put, if we lose any of the courts we currently rely on, they will not be replaced — and once they’re gone, they’re gone for good. This is not just about convenience; it’s about preserving a vital part of our community’s athletic and social fabric.
We understand that pickleball is growing in popularity, and we support the expansion of recreational opportunities for everyone. However, the solution to the growing demand for pickleball should not come at the expense of tennis. These are two entirely different sports, with different court requirements, rules, and player communities. Tennis should not be replaced by pickleball. The growth of one sport should not mean the decline of another. Currently we have 6 American players in the top ten of professional tennis and tennis is a thriving sport.
Pickleball deserves its own dedicated facilities, just as tennis has had for decades.
Repurposing existing tennis courts is a short-sighted fix that disregards the needs of a thriving tennis community. Rather than pitting one sport against another, we urge city planners and decision-makers to treat the need for pickleball courts as a new and separate infrastructure need — not as a reason to eliminate established tennis courts.
Please consider the lasting impact of your decisions. Tennis is a lifelong sport with deep roots in our community, and it must be protected and preserved for current and future generations.
Please look to follow the communities of Atascadero, Paso Robles, and Cambria to name a fre that have constructed new Pickleball facilities..
Sincerely,
Joan Jordan
Member, Women’s Tennis League
Atascadero, CA 93422
From:
To: Andrew Perez
Subject: Re: Inclusion of Urban Forest in General Plan
Date: Thursday, February 19, 2026 9:53:30 PM
Attachments: image001.png
emaillogo_190eb98f-3dbf-4ac8-a0d6-5f778ed0ba4d1111111111111111111111111111111111111.png Hi Andrew,
Thank you for your response regarding the tree canopy. To ensure that Program HE-A transitions from a mere study to robust implementation, I recommend the following refinements for the February 24th discussion:
1. Accelerate the Timeline: Move the canopy assessment from the 2030-2034 window to 2027-2029. This allows the city to leverage current state grant cycles and coordinate with upcoming Measure E-24 road projects.
2. Prioritize Pedestrian Corridors: Amend the language to emphasize "high-volume pedestrian corridors and transit stops" (e.g., East Grand and Halcyon). Providing shade in these areas is not only a matter of health equity but also enhances transit usability.
3. Establish a Canopy Coverage Goal: Create specific targets for canopy coverage to guide urban forestry efforts. This would ensure a proactive approach to expanding our tree canopy, like successful initiatives in other cities.
4. Development Mandates: Update the program to require all new developments (residential and commercial) to meet a minimum "Canopy Coverage Percentage" at maturity. This ensures that as the city grows, the urban forest expands through private investment.
5. Implement a Street Tree Master Plan: Initiate the development of a Street Tree Master Plan to identify areas needing canopy coverage, standardize planting species, and establish maintenance protocols.
Thanks for your consideration of these suggestions.
Sincerely,
Peter Williamson
Arroyo Grande Resident
From: Andrew Perez <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2026 4:14 PM
To:
Subject: RE: Inclusion of Urban Forest in General Plan
Good afternoon, Peter:
Thank you for the additional comment. We have a study session scheduled with City Council on 2/24, so your timing is perfect. Your comments will be forwarded to City Council for consideration during that discussion. The Health and Equity element includes an implementation measure to assess and potentially expand the existing tree canopy. If you have any suggestions regarding the language of this implementation program or supporting policy, please send those thoughts my way. Thanks.
From: Cindy Kullman
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Tennis Court In Arroyo Grande
Date: Friday, February 20, 2026 7:17:14 AM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
To Whom it May Concern:
I am writing this letter not just to speak for myself but to stand with hundreds of other tennis players that I have been connected with for many many years.
My name is Cindy Kullman and I have lived in Arroyo Grande for almost 30 years. I have been playing tennis competitively since I was a teenager. I ran multiple tennis camps and match play classes through the Arroyo Grande Parks and Recreation for approximately ten years and absolutely loved teaching kids how to compete in tennis. Many of the kids I taught went straight onto the varsity team High School Tennis Team at Arroyo Grande High School, my son being one of them. It is crucial to have multiple courts to foster and make that competition available for both doubles and singles. These 4 public courts are so important to have, otherwise people have to pay very high prices to join clubs that some cannot afford to join. The only other public courts that have multiple courts is in San Luis Obispo which is a total inconvenience and hardship for people to drive to on a regular basis and even those courts are usually full and people have to wait to get on them.
I have not only been active in youth tennis and bringing joy and love in competing, but I have personally been a part of the Central Coast Women's Tennis League for 20 plus years. We have 5 sons and we lost a child a few years ago. Competing and connecting with the tennis community has saved me emotionally, physically and mentally. Many who are avid tennis players also consider tennis a huge physical, social, and emotional outlet. My heart was broken when I heard about the possibility of tennis courts being taken. The Central Coast Women's Tennis League has been around for many years and these Soto Courts are necessary for Arroyo Grande to even have teams. There are not enough public courts in San Luis Obispo to sustain the amount of courts needed because of the large number of tennis players in the area. I can't speak for everyone, but I personally do not have the finances to join a club which would take me out of competing in our area. The other issue is the USTA Teams. We need multiple courts for competition for these teams as well. Most tennis clubs will not allow nonmembers to play on their teams which again takes many of us out of competing on a local team.
We, as tennis players, would love to be part of a solution to be able to keep all four courts to possibly pay yearly dues that might help build other pickleball courts in the future, but I hope you will consider the things presented in this letter.
Sincerely,
Cindy Kullman
From: Claudia Westrum
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Urgent: Proposed Multiuse Conversion Will Terminate Local League Play Date: Friday, February 20, 2026 1:52:37 PM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
Dear City Council,
I am writing on behalf of the Arroryo Grande Central Coast League to formally oppose the proposal to convert two of our four existing tennis courts into multiuse spaces.
While we support the growth of all sports, this specific plan will unintentionally eliminate competitive league tennis in our community.
1. The "Three-Court Minimum" for League Play
Most USTA and local regional leagues require a minimum of three dedicated tennis courts to host a sanctioned match. By reducing our facility from four courts to two, Arroyo Grande will be disqualified from hosting home matches. This forces our local teams to travel elsewhere, effectively dissolving the league presence that has served our residents for years.
2. Incompatibility of Multiuse Lines
In many regions, sanctioned competition is only permitted on courts with "authorized markings". Adding pickleball or other lines to tennis courts can render them ineligible for tournament or league use in certain sections, such as the USTA Southern Section.
3. Data-Driven Management & Sustainability
Our Association is currently undergoing a restructuring to implement 5 Cities Tennis Association. This initiative will allow us to:
Track Participation: Generate precise data on the number of unique tennis players to inform future city planning.
Self-Sustain: Use fees to contribute directly to court maintenance and resurfacing, reducing the financial burden on the city.
Organized Growth: Since pickleball already has four dedicated courts, we propose a "separate but equal" growth strategy that preserves the viability of both sports.
We urge the Council to maintain all four dedicated tennis courts to preserve our eligibility for competitive play. We are ready.
Work on the framework to restart the 5 Cities Tennis Association.Sincerely, Claudia Westrum
AG-CC WTL League Tennis Player
From: Libby
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Soto tennis courts
Date: Saturday, February 21, 2026 2:54:40 PM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
Please save the Soto tennis courts! They have been and should continue to be part of AG community recreation. These courts are a place to enjoy healthful exercise and camaraderie. I have played in the Central Coast Women’s Tennis League for 25+ years with some of the matches being played on these courts.I know CCWTL organization is behind keeping the local teams active at this location.
Thank you for voting to keep Soto tennis courts part of an active tennis community + Libby Kerr
From: Colleen Thompson
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Soto Park Plan
Date: Sunday, February 22, 2026 4:53:28 PM
Dear City Council,
I am writing on behalf of Central Coast Tennis League to formally oppose the proposal to convert two of our four existing courts into multi use spaces . While I support the growth of any sport , I do not support taking away access to the citizens of a long time sport already in existence. Also by taking away 2 of our courts this plan will unintentionally eliminate competitive league tennis in our community.
Most USTA local regional leagues require three dedicated tennis courts to host a match.
Arroyo Grande will be disqualified to host matches . Central Coast Women’s Tennis League requires four designed tennis courts for each home match . Pickleball or other lines to tennis courts can render them ineligible .
As of now tennis players are in the process of restructuring and implementing the 5 Cities Tennis Association . This league had been run for many years in the past and was very successful. This association initiative will allow us to:
Track participation , organize growth and use fees to contribute directly to court maintenance and resurfacing . As part of the AG Central Coast Tennis League Team , we already clean the courts , recycle trash and added ball holders to each court.
I currently play tennis at Soto Park every Wednesday and Friday at 8:30 - 11:00. At that time most , if not all the tennis courts , are full . I have noticed that pickleball courts are not full or at least don’t have any players waiting. When I left the courts last week , there was a lesson going on on one court and two high school or college age boys playing singles on another court . Where will the young citizens of AG play tennis ? Also where is the data that the pickleball courts are full at all times and the need for more ? Tennis should not require a membership at a club to play competitively. We are proud to play other country clubs at our city park.
Lastly, tennis is recognized by science as one of the healthiest, longest- living sports, with studies indicating that it can increase life expectancy by nearly 10 years and reduce the risk of mortality from cardiovascular disease by 56%.
Thank you for listening,
Sincerely,
Colleen Thompson
AG -CCWTL Tennis Player
From: Lynn Scott
To: City Council; Shannon Sweeney; Sheridan Bohlken; Andrew Perez; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Soto Tennis Courts
Date: Sunday, February 22, 2026 10:05:51 AM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
I am writing on behalf of the Arroyo Grande team of the Central Coast Women's Tennis League (CCWTL with website ccwtl.org) to formally oppose the proposal to convert one or two of our four existing tennis courts into multiuse spaces. While we support the growth of all sports, this specific plan will unintentionally eliminate competitive league tennis in our community.
1. The "Three-Court Minimum" for League Play
Most USTA and local regional leagues require a minimum of three dedicated tennis courts to host a sanctioned match. By reducing our facility from four courts to two, Arroyo Grande will be disqualified from hosting home matches. This forces our local teams to travel elsewhere, effectively dissolving the league presence that has served our residents for nearly 40 years.
2. Incompatibility of Multiuse Lines
In many regions, sanctioned competition is only permitted on courts with "authorized markings". Adding pickleball or other lines to tennis courts can render them ineligible for tournament or league use in certain sections, such as the USTA Southern Section.
3. Data-Driven Management & Sustainability
Our Association is currently undergoing a restructuring to re-implement 5 Cities Tennis Association. This initiative will allow us to:
Track Participation: Generate precise data on the number of unique tennis players to inform future city planning.
Self-Sustain: Use fees to contribute directly to court maintenance and resurfacing, reducing the financial burden on the city.
Organized Growth: Since pickleball already has four dedicated courts, we propose a "separate but equal" growth strategy that preserves the viability of both sports.
We urge the Council to continue to maintain all four dedicated tennis courts to preserve our eligibility for competitive play and keep the 2 sports separated. .
Thank you for reading.
Sincerely,
Lynn Scott
AG resident for 23 years
Former Captain (10 years) and current player Arroyo Grande A Division CCWTL
From: Lauren Sligh
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: General Plan Request- Organic Land Management
Date: Monday, February 23, 2026 12:01:23 AM
Attachments: image.png
bpmodelpublicpolicy (1).pdf
ntc_sampleresolution_organiclandcare.pdf
ntc_benefits_of_organic.pdf
General Plan Request- Organic Land Management - Google Docs.pdf IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
Dear City Council Members,
I want to start by saying thank you, for taking the time to read my request and proposed solutions. It was important to me to provide all documents and resources with this intention, for you to have answers to questions that may come up.
Recently, I had the pleasure of speaking with Aileen about my concerns with pesticide use on public land, and I greatly appreciate the compassion and interest she showed for my concerns.
She recommended I share an email as well as attend the meeting on Tuesday with my proposal.
I am presenting to you a proposal to add into the general plan, to adopt Organic Land Management Practices on public Arroyo Grande land.
Here is a quick list of why Organic Land Management will benefit our city:
Healthy soil retains water more efficiently, thus less irrigation needed, saving water Less run off from top soil, refilling groundwater reservoirs Cost savings- Organic practices save money in the long run, an investment for the future Community involvement- Help "pull weeds" or pick up trash when people visit to take ownership in caring for our parks (fun sign at each park explaining the mission and education piece)
Opportunities to beautify landscapes, planting native species, supporting pollinators, etc Eliminates contributing to pollution of streams and creeks with toxic fertilizers and chemicals, further protecting steelhead trout, but all wildlife in general and the ocean Cleaner groundwater, watershed, leading to more efficiency at water treatment plants Factoring in environmental impact, public health considerations, and long-term maintenance—organic practices represent both a fiscally responsible and ethically sound path forward
This community of young children and their parents want to be involved! They want to help with positive solutions and take action for the environment. There are hundreds of ways we can enrich the lives of everyone by making these positive changes. While educating children on how to protect this land for generations to come.
I am very passionate about collaborating to make this change for our community, and would love to help in any way- many ideas for community involvement and how positive of a change this would be for all. It is important I demonstrate to my children, adn all children, that change is possible and to continue being a voice in your community for what is right.
Across the country, municipalities and institutions have already made this transition.
Organic land management practices are cost-effective and increasingly implemented in communities throughout the United States. Examples include Harvard and Yale Universities; Irvine, California; Springfield, Massachusetts; Montgomery County, Maryland; Yellow Springs, Ohio; and many others. These communities demonstrate that safer alternatives are not theoretical—they are practical and achievable.
My formal letter and attached documents on policy verbiage resources are from www.nontoxiccommunities.com . A non-profit that has assisted hundreds of counties and cities all over the states, to make organic land policy changes as smooth and effective as possible.
Choosing safer practices is not just an environmental decision—it is a statement about what we value as a community and how seriously we take our responsibility to protect children.
Thank you for your time, consideration, and attention to this matter, Sincerely,
Lauren Sligh
2/22/2026
Dear Arroyo Grande City Council Members:
Caren Ray Russom, Jamie Maraviglia, Kate Secrest, Aileen Loe, and Jim Guthrie, I am writing in regard to my concerns about pesticide use in Arroyo Grande, specifically at parks, playgrounds, schools, libraries, and other public spaces. I am taking this step to formally raise these concerns and advocate for stronger protections for our community—beginning with our children, their caretakers, and the land we all share.
I am a homeschooling mother of two young children and a resident of Arroyo Grande for ten years. My awareness about chemical use on playgrounds began when my son was three years old and my daughter a newborn. At Rancho Grande Park, they were playing around the base of a tree, picking up dirt and enjoying the benefits of a hands-on experience with nature. Then I realized the tree in the grass had a perfect yellow circle of dead grass around it. I looked around and all the trees had been sprayed to keep a perfectly maintained look. I noticed the clear evidence of pesticide all around, in the same space that many children played in on a regular basis, the playground and park.
For a parent, this realization is deeply unsettling. Our children are meant to explore parks and playgrounds with their hands and feet—touching, climbing, running freely. Seeing visible signs of chemical spraying in those same spaces forces families to question whether the very places designed for childhood are safe for children.
This experience two years ago made myself and other mothers in our community more aware of parks throughout the City and surrounding areas, noticing how landscaping staff manage them.
We are choosing to limit exposure at playgrounds to protect our children from chemicals. This should never be the case. Parents should not have to calculate risk with chemical exposure or playing at parks. Playgrounds exist so children can develop physically, socially, and emotionally without fear of preventable man-made harm. We have a close local family friend whose son is 5 years old and battling leukemia, likely caused by pesticides from living near agricultural land.
I am coming to you today, Council Members, to bring awareness to this simple need for change—one that can have significant positive systemic impacts within our community and environment as a whole. Currently, cancer-causing pesticides are sprayed at parks, schools, and other public land, and there is no clear transparency regarding when spraying will occur or when it has taken place. Families are left uninformed about exposures in areas intended for “safe” daily use. It is time for our beautiful city to adopt Organic Land Management Standards or an Earth Friendly Management Policy (EFMP).
Please amend the General Plan to adopt the already established policy of other counties and cities, for EFMP or Organic Land Care Management Standards. These standards are designated by the Northeast Organic Farming Association (NOFA) involving only least toxic pesticides be utilized in maintaining city owned property and that these practices be shared and promoted for use by the public in encouraging maintaining private property throughout the
community. The Non-Profit group called Non Toxic Communities, has assisted over 40 states, 300 municipalities with policy changes to adopt an EFMP.
As you are vital decision makers, it is imperative that you become aware of the growing body of scientific literature showing that pesticide exposure can adversely affect the endocrine, neurological, immune, and respiratory systems in humans—even at very low levels—and especially the danger and risk this poses for children.
Pesticides are designed to be toxic. The suffix “-cide” is derived from Latin and means “to kill.” Of the most commonly used pesticides, nineteen are linked with cancer, twenty-one with reproductive effects, thirteen with birth defects, twenty-six with liver or kidney damage, fifteen with neurotoxicity, and eleven with disruption of the endocrine (hormonal) system. Research has also demonstrated associations between certain pesticide exposures and increased risks of developmental delays and childhood cancers. The cumulative impact of repeated low-level exposure remains an area of serious public health concern.
Children are especially sensitive to pesticide exposure. They absorb more chemicals relative to their body weight, are more physically engaged with their environment—running, touching, and playing outdoors—and their bodies and brains are still developing. Acute and chronic exposures, both high and low level, may cause damage during periods of critical developmental vulnerability. Studies show that early-life exposure to certain pesticides is associated with measurable impacts on cognitive development and behavioral regulation. When we expose children to unnecessary environmental toxins, we assume risks on their behalf—risks they cannot understand or consent to.
The American Academy of Pediatrics has stated, “Children’s exposure to pesticides should be limited as much as possible.” In two thousand sixteen, dozens of public health experts stated in a scientific consensus statement about children’s brain development that “the current system in the United States for evaluating scientific evidence and making health-based decisions about environmental chemicals is fundamentally broken. To help reduce the unacceptably high prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in our children, we must eliminate or significantly reduce exposures to chemicals that contribute to these conditions.” You have the authority to act where families cannot. You can play a key role in protecting those most vulnerable and preventing diseases linked to pesticide exposure. There are proven alternatives to using toxic pesticides in our public spaces, schools, and common areas.
Choosing safer practices is not just an environmental decision—it is a statement about what we value as a community and how seriously we take our responsibility to protect children.
Across the country, municipalities and institutions have already made this transition. Organic land management practices are cost-effective and increasingly implemented in communities throughout the United States. Examples include Harvard and Yale Universities; Irvine, California; Springfield, Massachusetts; Montgomery County, Maryland; Yellow Springs, Ohio; and many others. These communities demonstrate that safer alternatives are not theoretical—they are practical and achievable.
A cost comparison report between natural organic turf management and conventional management further supports this shift. Organic management often saves money in the long term due to reduced inputs, including decreased need for fertilizer and irrigation. When evaluated holistically—factoring in environmental impact, public health considerations, and long-term maintenance—organic practices represent both a fiscally responsible and ethically sound path forward.
Preventing chemical use in public spaces will help reduce contamination in our water, reduce chemical runoff into streams and the ocean, and result in a healthier city and community overall.
This is an achievable shift in product choices and management, combined with education and research-based practices. Additionally, local landscapers and stores such as Miner’s are already selling organic spray options as alternatives to chemical pesticides, demonstrating that our community supports continued momentum toward cleaner choices.
Sincerely,
Lauren Sligh
References
Pesticide-Induced Diseases Database http://www.beyondpesticides.org/resources/ pesticide-induced-diseases-database/overview
Health effects of 30 commonly used pesticides http://www.beyondpesticides.org/ assets/media/documents/lawn/factsheets/30health.pdf
Children and Pesticides Don’t Mix http://www.beyondpesticides.org/assets/media/ documents/lawn/factsheets/Pesticide.children.dontmix.pdf “Pesticide exposure in children.” Roberts, James R., and Catherine J. Karr. Pediatrics 130.6 (2012): e1765-e1788.
Children’s Exposure to Pesticides and Childhood Cancers https://www.aap.org/en-us/ about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/Children’s-Exposure-to-Pesticide-andChildhood-C ancers.aspx
Children and chemicals, World Health Organization http://www.who.int/ceh/capacity/ chemicals.pdf
Project TENDR: Targeting Environmental Neuro-Developmental Risks The TENDR Consensus Statement https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP358 Map of US Pesticide Reform Policies - pesticide policies adopted by local communities https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1VLpVWvifO2JOrgxf1- d1DLyDruE&ll=29.015963011806722%2C-76.59037817578127&z=4 Resources
A Cost Comparison of Conventional (Chemical) Turf Management and Natural (Organic) Turf Management for School Athletic Fields http://www.grassrootsinfo.org/pdf/ turfcomparisonreport.pdf
Beyond Pesticides list of products compatible with organic landscape management https://beyondpesticides.org/programs/lawns-and-landscapes/tools-for-change/ products-compatible-with-organic-landscape-management
1 Model Public Pesticide-Free Policy/Ordinance
Section 1. Purpose.
The [enacting entity] hereby finds and declares that it shall be the policy of the [locality name] to eliminate toxic pesticide use in and on public and private property in order to promote a healthy environment and protect the public from the hazards of pesticides, and for implementation of sustainable land and building management practices on all public and private property.
Section 2. Findings.
WHEREAS, scientific studies associate exposure to pesticides with asthma, cancer, developmental and learning disabilities, nerve and immune system damage, liver or kidney damage, reproductive impairment, birth defects, and disruption of the endocrine system; WHEREAS, infants, children, pregnant women, the elderly, people with compromised immune systems and chemical sensitivities are especially vulnerable to pesticide effects and exposure;
WHEREAS, pesticides are harmful to pets, wildlife including threatened and endangered species, soil microbiology, plants, and natural ecosystems; WHEREAS, toxic runoff from chemical fertilizers and pesticides pollute streams and lakes and drinking water sources;
WHEREAS, the use of hazardous pesticides is not necessary to create and maintain green lawns and landscapes given the availability of viable alternatives practices and products; WHEREAS, people have a right not to be involuntarily exposed to pesticides in the air, water or soil that inevitably result from chemical drift and contaminated runoff; WHEREAS, recognizing that if an emergency public health situation warrants the use of pesticides, which would otherwise not be permitted under this policy, the Sustainability Coordinator shall have the authority to grant a temporary waiver on a case by case basis after an evaluation of all alternative methods and materials.
2 WHEREAS, sustainable land and building management practices that emphasize nonchemical methods of pest prevention and management and least-toxic pesticide use as a last resort will eliminate the use of and exposure to pesticides while controlling pest populations;
WHEREAS, sustainable land and building management practices complements other important goals of [locality name] maintenance and administration, such as energy conservation and security; and
WHEREAS, [locality name] embraces a precautionary approach to the use of toxic pesticides in order to adequately protect people and the environment from pesticides' harmful effects.
Section 3. Definitions.
Allowed Materials List. The Executive must include in the regulations adopted under this section a list of acceptable pesticides, known as the Allowed Materials List. The list is limited to:
(A) All nonsynthetic (natural) materials, with the exception of prohibited nonsynthetic materials under 7 CFR 205.602;
(B) Any synthetic material listed at 7 CFR 205.601 that is labeled for turf uses, subject to discretionary authority to require disclosure of inert ingredients; and (C) 25b listed pesticides under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
Agricultural Land – means land that lies in an agricultural zoning district.
Crack and Crevice Treatment — means the application of small quantities of a pesticide into openings in a building such as those commonly found at expansion joints, between levels of construction, and between equipment and floors.
Emergency – means an urgent need to mitigate or eliminate a pest that threatens public health or safety.
Garden – means a plot of land, except agricultural land, consisting of a majority of annual plants.
Grounds – means the area outside of a building, including lawns, playgrounds, sports fields, and any other property or facility controlled, managed, leased or owned by [locality name].
3 Inert ingredient – Any substance (or group of substances with similar chemical structures if designated by the Environmental Protection Agency) (EPA) other than an active ingredient which is intentionally included in any pesticide product (40 CFR 152.3(m)) [7 CFR 205.2 Terms defined.], and are not classified by the Administrator of EPA as inerts of toxicological concern. [7 U.S.C. 6502(21) Definitions] Lawn – means an area of land, except agricultural land, that is: (i) mostly covered by grass, grass, other similar herbaceous plants, shrubs, or trees; and (ii) kept trim by mowing or cutting.
Nonsynthetic (natural) materials – A substance that is derived from mineral, plant, or animal matter and does not undergo a synthetic process as defined in section 6502(21) of the Organic Foods Production Act (7 U.S.C. 6502(21)). For the purposes of this part, nonsynthetic is used as a synonym for natural as the term is used in the ordinance. [7 CFR 205.2 Terms defined.]
Pesticide – any substance or mixture of substances intended for—(i) preventing, destroying, repelling, or mitigating any pest; (ii) use as a plant regulator, defoliant, or desiccant; or (iii) use as a spray adjuvant such as a wetting agent or adhesive. The term ‘pesticide’ does not include cleaning products, other than those that contain pesticidal agents.
Sustainability Coordinator – means an individual who is designated by the City of [locality name] to oversee implementation of the sustainable land and building management practices for the City.
Sustainable Land and Building Management Practices – means a managed pest control program that:
(A) eliminates or mitigates economic and health damage caused by pests; (B) uses— (i) integrated methods; (ii) site or pest inspections; (iii) pest population monitoring and prevention strategies; (iv) an evaluation of the need for pest control; and, (v) 1 or more pest prevention and management methods, such as habitat modifications, sanitation practices, entryway closures, structural repair, mechanical and biological controls, effective mowing, watering and fertilizing practices that provide a healthy soil, other nonchemical methods, and if nontoxic options are unreasonable or have been exhausted, a pesticide on the allowed materials list; and
(C) minimizes— (i) the use of pesticides; and (ii) the hazards to human health and the environment associated with pesticide applications.
4 Synthetic materials – The term “synthetic” means a substance that is formulated or manufactured by a chemical process or by a process that chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral sources, except that such term shall not apply to substances created by naturally occurring biological processes. [7 U.S.C. 6502(21) Definitions]
Universal Notification – means notice provided by the Sustainability Coordinator to all employees working at the facility where the pesticide will be applied.
Sec. 4. Sustainable Land and Building Management Practices Components. (1) In General.—Each City department shall implement sustainable land and building management practices, that at a minimum—
(A) Applies to [locality name] controlled, managed, or owned buildings and grounds;
(B) Establishes a Sustainability Coordinator within the [City Department] responsible for carrying out sustainable land and building management practices; and
(C) Follows sustainable land and building management practices for addressing pest problems.
(2) Duties of the Sustainability Coordinator.—The Sustainability Coordinator shall— (A) Oversee the implementation of sustainable land and building management practices;
(B) Act as a contact for inquiries about the sustainable land and building management practices;
(C) Maintain and make publicly available material safety data sheets, labels, and fact sheets or other official health and safety information for all pesticides on the allowed materials list;
(D) Maintain a make publicly available the allowed materials list of pesticides that may be used in emergencies that are not classified as allowed under this law;
(D) Have the authority to determine whether to add or remove a pesticide from a designation on the allowed materials list, based on essentiality in pest control or harm to human health or the environmental which is not captured by the current allowed materials list.
5 (E) Be informed of Federal and State chemical health and safety information and contact information;
(F) Maintain scheduling of all pesticide use by [locality name]; (G) Maintain contact with Federal and State sustainable land and building management experts;
(H) Obtain periodic updates and training from State sustainable land and building management experts;
(I) Pre-approve any public health emergency pesticide applications; (J) Maintain all pesticide use data for each pesticide used at City buildings and grounds for at least 3 years after the date on which the pesticide is applied; and, (K) Oversee the implementation of a public outreach and education campaign before and during implementation of the provisions of this Article. This campaign should include:
(i) informational mailers to [locality name] households; (ii) distribution of information through [locality name] internet and webbased resources; (iii) radio and television public service announcements (iv) news releases and news events;
(v) information translated into Spanish, French, Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other languages, as needed;
(vi) extensive use of local public access channels funded by the [locality name]; and,
(vii) posters and brochures made available at [locality name] events, publicly owned transportation, libraries, recreation facilities, senior centers, public schools, colleges, health care providers, hospitals, clinics, and other venues. (3) Property Owners and Tenants.
(A) Property owners and tenants are encouraged to follow sustainable land and building management practices and employ pesticides on the allowed materials list only as a last resort.
(4) Use of Pesticides. — [Name of locality] shall only use pesticides on the allowed materials list as part of sustainable land and building management practices. A pesticide on the allowed materials list may only be used as a last resort and only if the area or room treated is unoccupied or not in use by an employee or the public. Pesticides are only to be applied by certified commercial applicators.
6 (5) Use of Fertilizers.— [Name of locality] shall only use natural organic fertilizers. The use of a synthetic fertilizer is prohibited.
(6) Public Health Emergency.—
(A) In General.—If the Sustainability Coordinator determines that a pest in a [jurisdiction] building or on the grounds cannot be controlled after having used sustainable land and building management practices and least toxic pesticides and it is a public health emergency, [locality name] may use a pesticide in accordance with this subsection.
(B) Sustainability Coordinator Approval Required.—The Sustainability Coordinator shall approve, after identifying the pesticide product ingredients and acute and chronic adverse health effects, the pesticide product before any public health emergency application can be made.
(C) Area Use Limitation.—The use of an area or room treated by an emergency pesticide, other than an allowed materials list, shall not be occupied or used at the time of application or during the 24-hour period beginning at the end of the application.
(D) Authorized Applicator.—The pesticide application shall only be made by a State certified pesticide applicator.
(E) Notification of Occupants and Users.—The Sustainability Coordinator shall provide to each employee of the facility/grounds where the application is to take place a notice of the application of the pesticide for emergency pest control. Notification will be provided at least 24 hours prior to the application.
The notification shall include—
(i) the common name, trade name, and Environmental Protection Agency registration number of the pesticide;
(ii) a description of the location of the application of the pesticide; (iii) a description of the date and time of application; (iv) the statement ‘The EPA cannot guarantee that registered pesticides do not pose risks, and unnecessary exposure to pesticides should be avoided’; (v) a description of potential adverse effects of the pesticide based on the material safety data sheet of the pesticide any additional warning information related to the pesticide;
(vi) the name and telephone number of the Sustainability Coordinator; (vii) a description of the problem and the factors that qualified the problem as an emergency that threatened public health; and
(viii) a description of the steps the [jurisdiction] will take in the future to avoid emergency application of a pesticide under this paragraph.
7 (F) Method Of Universal Notification.— The Sustainability Coordinator shall provide the notice by— (i) written notice provided to each employee; (ii) a notice delivered electronically (such as through electronic mail or facsimile); (iii) a telephone call; or (iv) direct contact.
(G) Posting Of Signs.— If applying a pesticide under this paragraph, the Sustainability Coordinator shall post a sign warning of the application of the pesticide —in a prominent place that is in or adjacent to the location to be treated; and at each entrance to the building or ground to be treated. A sign required for the application of a pesticide shall remain posted for at least 72 hours after the end of the treatment; be at least 81⁄2 inches by 11 inches; and state the same information as that required for prior notification of the application under subparagraph (E).
(H) Modification Of Sustainable Land and Building Management Practices. — If the [Locality name] applies a pesticide under this paragraph, the Sustainability Coordinator shall modify the sustainable land and building management practices to minimize the future applications of pesticides under this paragraph.
Section 5. Grounds Management Implementation Guidelines.
It is the policy of the City of [name of locality] to take the following preventive measures to eliminate pest-conducive conditions on public and private land:
(A) To maintain healthy soil, soil sampling and analysis will be conducted to evaluate and assess the level of care needed for the facility’s turf and landscape. (B) Well-adapted, pest-resistant grass varieties that are more suitable for [ [locality name’s] climate will be planted.
(C) Lawn aeration will be scheduled twice a year.
(D) De-thatching practices must keep the thatch layers less than ½” in order to keep the grass less susceptible to insects, disease and weather stress. (E) A proper pH for the soils will be maintained.
The soil should be tested in order to adjust the pH if needed. (F) Annual fall fertilizer applications will be scheduled and carried out. Only slowrelease fertilizer formulations will be used. (G) Approved soil amendments will be applied as necessitated by soil test results.
Following, but not limited to, the recommendations of the Northeast Organic Farmers’ Association and/or the Organic Material Review Institute. (H) Outdoor management practices will be modified to comply with organic horticultural science, including scouting, monitoring, watering, pruning, proper spacing and mulching.
(I) Practices will include the use of physical controls, including handweeding and over-seeding.
8 (J) Practices will also include the use of biological controls, including the introduction of natural predators, and enhancement of a favorable environment for a pest’s natural enemies.
Section 6. Enforcement.
(A) [Locality name] shall be responsible for the enforcement of this act and its agents shall be authorized to issue statements of offense; (B) Officials of [locality name] may visit and examine any property to ascertain whether there has been compliance with the provisions of this act. (C) The City can take any legal action before the appropriate court in order to obtain compliance with this act.
(D) Any citizen may commence a civil action on his own behalf— (i) against any person who is alleged to be in violation of (a) a standard or limitation under this chapter or (b) an order issued by the [local jurisdiction] with respect to such a standard or limitation, or (ii ) against the State where there is alleged a failure of the State to perform any act or duty under this chapter which is not discretionary with the State in accordance with the deadlines established by this chapter. (E) Each application of a pesticide violates the restrictions of this code shall be considered a municipal infraction, with penalties determined by the City.
Section 7. And Be It Further Enacted that this Act shall take effect as of the date of the [insert number] months from its passage.
Why are so many Cities
across the Country adopting
Organic Land Care Practices?
www.NonToxicCommunities.com
Because of the Benefits!
The NOFA Standards for Organic Land Care provide the information needed to base local policy and pilot programs on.
Non Toxic Communities is experienced and accredited to provide the assistance you need to take these proven methods and get them implemented in your community. Don’t go it alone, we can help!
Every community deserves healthy public spaces for all residents. ● Organic Land Care eliminates exposure
to toxic materials in our landscapes for
children, workers and all others using
public spaces.
● Fits into climate action plans by
improving soil health to store and
draw down more carbon from the
atmosphere.
● Prevents nutrient pollution from
synthetic fertilizers that cause algae
blooms in our watersheds.
● Avoids potential liability and lawsuits
over toxic product usage.
● Protects pollinators, song birds and
other wildlife.
● Healthy soil holds more water and
reduces the need for irrigation and
assists in managing storm water
run off.
● Sets a positive example for landowners
in the community to follow, enhances
educational opportunities and
public image.
● Provides respite to those who may
be disproportionately affected by
environmental exposures.
● Saves money over the long term due to
a reduced need for irrigation, fertilizer,
and other inputs.
WHEREAS: The City of ______________ is committed to eliminating the exposure of our citizens, both children and adults, to chemicals that are known, or suspected to be, toxins or carcinogens, while striving to lead our community by example and by promotion of policies, regulations and practices that eliminate exposure to toxic compounds; and WHEREAS: Organic land care practices using only non-toxic methods is a proven practice that establishes an approach to managing with a focus on soil health, cultural practices and mechanical and/or physical controls to eliminate the need for using toxic pesticides; and WHEREAS: Organic land care requires accurate pest identification, frequent monitoring for pest presence, determining appropriate action levels, and properly combining biological, cultural, physical, and, only when deemed necessary, use of least toxic pesticides in a way that minimizes health, environmental, and economic risks; and WHEREAS: Organic land care will reduce both the presence of toxics from synthetic pesticides in the environment of our City, but will also reduce the introduction of unnecessary nutrients from synthetic fertilizer into the watershed of ______________.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
It shall be the policy of the City of ___________ to commit to utilize organic land care practices, and the use of least toxic compounds only when necessary, in the maintenance and protection of City property, as such taking a precautionary approach and thereby minimizing, if not eliminating, exposure to toxic pesticides on the part of our citizens and the environment; AND, FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED;
The City ______________ shall seek assistance from organic land care expert(s) to develop and execute a multi-year plan to eliminate the use of synthetic fertilizers and toxic pesticides on City property and ensure that municipal workers receive appropriate training in organic land care practices.
Sample Resolution:
ORGANIC LAND CARE
www.NonToxicCommunities.com
Background Information
This resolution requires that organic land management practices, according to Organic Land Care Standards as designated by the Northeast Organic
Farming Association (NOFA) involving only least
toxic pesticides be utilized in maintaining City
owned property and that these practices be shared
and promoted for use by the public in maintaining
private property throughout the community.
There are numerous resources that tabulate lists
of least toxic products, (e.g., the United States
Environmental Protection Agency’s minimum
risk products list or materials listed as organic
by non-profit organizations such as the Organic
Materials Review Institute (OMRI) and NOFA
Standards) to facilitate the choice of materials
that are preferred, allowed and prohibited.
Organic land care is an effective and environmentally
sensitive approach to pest and turf management
that relies on a combination of common-sense
best management practices without the use of
toxic pesticides.
Toxic pesticides are harmful to human health, pets
and the environment. Organic land care protects
public health and our watershed from degradation
and contamination. For purposes of example, the
widely used neonicotinoid class of systemic insecticides (neonics) are persistent in the environment, harm pollinator health, move into surface waters
and up the food chain affecting songbirds and
mammals. Emerging evidence shows harm to the
developing brain and hormone disrupting activity
by some neonics.
Organic land care uses current, comprehensive
information on the life cycles of pests and their
interaction with the environment. This information,
in combination with a variety of pest control methods, is used to manage pest damage by economical means, and with minimal hazard to people, property,
and the environment.
Synthetic fertilizers harm soil biology, and contribute to greenhouse gas emissions as well as inhibiting the
carbon storing ability of the soil. In light of climate change, organic land care is a necessary step forward in addressing this crisis. Organic land care plays a key role in a municipality’s climate change action
plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
More careful application of organic fertilizers as
part of an organic land care program by the City
will decrease our contribution of excess nutrients to
the watershed that contribute to the proliferation
of toxic algae blooms to adjacent bodies of water.
In addition, organic land care also helps mitigate
stormwater runoff.
Organic land care standards emphasize the use
of native plants, thereby helping to reduce risk of
wildfire, store more carbon, support biodiversity,
and conserve water for irrigation.
Promotion of this policy of organic land management protects the safety of municipal workers, limits the potential for claims against negligence,
litigation and financial liability, and also demonstrates to the community at large that the City is a leader in the stewardship of our natural resources.
Precautionary Principle: When an activity
raises threats of harm to human health or the
environment, precautionary measures should
be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.
In this context the proponent of an activity,
rather than the public, should bear the burden
of proof.
The process of applying the Precautionary Principle must be open, informed and democratic and must include potentially affected parties.
It must also involve an examination of the full
range of alternatives, including no action.
www.NonToxicCommunities.com
Resources
NOFA Standards for Organic Land Care
http://organiclandcare.net/sites/default/files/nofa_organic_land_care_standards_6thedition_2017_opt.pdf OMRI Lists
https://www.omri.org/omri-lists
Active Ingredients Eligible for Minimum Risk Pesticide Products https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-12/documents/minrisk-active-ingredients-tolerances-2015-12-15.pdf Inert Ingredients Eligible for FIFRA 25(b) Pesticide Products https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/documents/minrisk_inert_ingredients_w_tolerances_2016-11-16.pdf Beyond Pesticides Products Compatible With Organic Landscape Management https://www.beyondpesticides.org/programs/lawns-and-landscapes/tools-for-change/products-compatible-with-organic-landscape-management NTC Facts About Neonicotinoid Insecticides
http://www.nontoxiccommunities.com/uploads/7/0/8/2/7082006/factsaboutneonicotinoid_insecticides_.pdf NTC Facts about Fertilizers
http://www.nontoxiccommunities.com/uploads/7/0/8/2/7082006/fertilizersfactsheetntc.pdf California Native Plant Society Native Plant Landscaping to Reduce Wildfire Risk https://interwork.sdsu.edu/fire/curricula/documents/NativePlantstoReduceFireRisk.pdf Exotic plants reduce carbon sequestration
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/368/6494/967
National Audubon Society Why Native Plants Matter
https://www.audubon.org/content/why-native-plants-matter www.NonToxicCommunities.com
From: Maggie Browning
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Soto Tennis Courts
Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 7:41:49 AM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
My name is Maggie Browning and I am the current president of the Central Coast Women’s Tennis League. Our league currently supports 443 players across 27 teams played at 7 central coast venues.One of the venues supporting a thriving CCWTL team is Soto Sports Park.Our league matches require four courts to be available which is exactly what Soto currently provides.Should we lose any of the current courts, Soto would no longer be able to support a CCWTL team.Of the venues utilized by CCWTL, Soto is one of only two public courts, the other being Sinsheimer in San Luis Obispo. All other tennis venues are private clubs.Should we lose Soto, it would provide a barrier to women who are interested in league tennis competition without a paid club membership.
I am an avid tennis player.I also love playing pickleball.I ask that courts at Soto be preserved for tennis to allow current members and future tennis players the opportunity for public court league play.May tennis and pickleball continue to support one another with new courts provided for pickleball as demand requires instead of taking exisiting courts away from tennis players who utilize them regularly.
Thanks for your consideration of our tennis community.
Maggie Browning
President - CCWTL
From: Diane Braun
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Subject: Item 11d - Tennis Courts at Soto
Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 10:41:49 AM
IRONSCALES couldn't recognize this email as this is the first time you received an email from this sender
Hello all, and thank you for your consideration of public points of view as it relates to the General Plan for Soto Sports Complex.
My name is Diane Braun and I am the Captain of the Arroyo Grande "A" Team for the Central Coast Women's Tennis League (CCWTL) based out of Soto Sports Complex. This local team is one of only two teams in the league where players can participate in competitive tennis without having to pay for a Club membership! (The other is at Sinsheimer Park up in SLO, about 30 minutes north of AG.) It is invaluable to many who absolutely LOVE tennis and want to compete on a regular basis. And all ages are welcome, as our team members range from 21 to 80 years old!!
Our team regularly plays twice a week (on Wednesday and Friday mornings) for about 3 hours at a time. I think I can speak for all 20+ members that we were shocked to find out that we may be losing one or two of our courts to pickleball!! The ramification of that would be heartbreaking!
1) We could no longer play competitive matches in the
CCWTL because 4 dedicated tennis courts are required
for each match.
2) If we cannot offer 4 courts for Home Matches (of which we host anywhere from 6-8 per season), then we cannot have a team!
3) This would disenfranchise MANY women in the area who LIVE AND BREATHE tennis but would no longer have a
home base with which to play from.
Many of our tennis players also play pickleball and love both! But I think the bottom line is that we need to find a solution that doesn't expand one sport at the detriment of the other.
Multi-use lines may seem like a simple solution, but it will not work for competition, and that is the lifeblood that keeps us invigorated both physically and mentally. For many in my circle, tennis is a salvation!!
I truly hope you all consider the tennis player point of view as you make your decisions. I implore you to preserve the 4 tennis courts at Soto to allow current members and future tennis players the opportunity for public court league play. We are all willing to help find and implement a solution that allows for ALL to flourish.
Thank you again for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Diane Braun
Captain, CCWTL AG "A" Team
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Jessica Matson, Director of Legislative & Information Services/ City Clerk
SUBJECT: Supplemental Information
Agenda Item 11.b - February 24, 2026 City Council Meeting Study Session to Consider the Preliminary Public Review Draft General Plan
DATE: February 24, 2026
Attached is additional correspondence received before 2 p.m. for the above referenced item.
Cc: City Manager
Assistant City Manager/Public Works Director
Community Development Director
City Attorney
City Clerk
City Website and Public Review Binder
Enc
From: Trish Wilson (via Google Docs)
To: City Council; Matt Downing; Jessica Matson; Bill Robeson Cc: Andrew Perez; Sheridan Bohlken; Shannon Sweeney
Subject: Document shared with you: "Arroyo Grande General Plan" Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 1:36:31 PM
Trish Wilson shared a document
Trish Wilson ( has invited you to edit
the following document:
Please see attached document regarding the meeting tonight concerning the general plan. Thank you for your time, Trish Wilson
Arroyo Grande General Plan
This email grants access to this item without logging in. Only forward it to people you trust.
Open
Google LLC, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, USA
You have received this email because shared a
document with you from Google Docs.
Item 11.c.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Brian Pedrotti, Director of Community Development BY: Andrew Perez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Study Session on Efforts to Redevelop East Grand Avenue DATE: February 24, 2026
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive public comment and provide direction to staff regarding next steps for the project.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
The FY 2025-27 Biennial Budget allocates $250,000 to the development of an East Grand Economic Development Plan. These funds may be used for an economic development consultant to assist Community Development staff with the project.
BACKGROUND:
On February 10, 20251, the City Council held a Goal Setting Workshop focused on priorities for the FY 2025-27 Budget. The City Council established five (5) major City goals for staff to prioritize for the FY 2025-27 budget cycle. One of the major goals is the redevelopment of E. Grand Avenue, specifically between Halcyon Road and Elm Street.
The E. Grand Avenue (Halcyon to Elm) Economic Development Plan (EDP) was identified as a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project in the adopted budget, and a preliminary work plan was provided to Council on May 27, 20252 and is shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Economic Development Plan Work Tasks
Task Action Target to Complete
Scope of Work & RFP Define scope through research of
other communities
1Q FY 2025-26
Kick-off & Public Outreach Project initiation
Public outreach
1Q FY 2025-26
Ongoing
1https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=019b4a74-6804-43bb-aca8- 3dea71b7bd11&lang=English&Agenda=Agenda&Item=8&Tab=attachments 2https://pub-arroyogrande.escribemeetings.com/Meeting.aspx?Id=2ab110a5-a61e-423b-9c39- 5cd101fa6826&lang=English&Agenda=Agenda&Item=60&Tab=attachments
Item 11.c.
City Council
Study Session on Efforts to Redevelop East Grand Avenue February 24, 2026
Task Action Target to Complete
CEQA Environmental review 3Q FY 2025-26
Draft Plan Administrative Draft Plan 4Q FY 2025-26
Final Draft & Hearings Final Draft
Planning Commission Hearing
City Council Hearing
1Q FY 2026-27
2Q FY 2026-27
2Q FY 2026-27
A Request for Proposals (RFP) to retain a consultant has been developed to allow the City Council to weigh in and provide direction on the objectives and vision for the corridor.
The RFP is attached as Attachment 1 for reference. The dates are removed, and it is watermarked “draft” to make it clear that this RFP is being provided for discussion purposes during the study session.
Previous Efforts
The E. Grand Avenue corridor has been the focus of previous planning efforts. Most recently, an effort called the “East Grand Avenue Master Plan” was initiated in 2017 and include some initial research, evaluation, and studies, and was essentially a conceptual parking and streetscape plan heavily focused on parking supply and demand. This effort stalled around 2019/2020 due to a number of factors, including staff turnover, differing opinions on how to address parking, as well as the onset of the COVID pandemic. The current effort to enhance and revitalize the corridor is intended to partially revive that original stalled effort, but go much further as a transformational tool that ties together land use, zoning, streetscape strategies, and economic development programs.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
The EDP is one of several projects aimed at enhancing and revitalizing the corridor. Each of the projects has specific objectives, and when combined, further the Council’s goal of a revitalized E. Grand Avenue. While the three components below present a broader strategy for the whole corridor from Oak Park Boulevard to Highway 101, the EDP was highlighted by the Council’s priorities as being focused on the stretch of corridor between Halcyon and Elm Streets. Each component is described below:
General Plan Update and Development Code Update
The General Plan lays the groundwork for the redevelopment of the corridor by establishing a vision for development of private property. The General Plan update identifies the E. Grand Avenue corridor, between the western city border and US 101, as a focus area emphasizing infill and redevelopment that provides abundant housing and economic opportunities. A new land use designation is proposed to allow for residential density up to 36 dwelling units per acre (from 25 dwelling units per acre) and also additional allowances for more intense non-residential development. After the adoption of the General Plan, the development standards will be updated to implement the policies and implementation programs that affect the scale and massing of the built environment within the corridor.
Item 11.c.
City Council
Study Session on Efforts to Redevelop East Grand Avenue February 24, 2026
E. Grand Overlay District and Objective Design Standards The City’s General Plan consultant is also contracted to develop an E. Grand Avenue Corridor Overlay District. Overlay districts are a zoning tool for implementing targeted regulations to achieve a particular objective, such as historic preservation, natural resource protection, or, in this case, economic development. The regulations for the overlay district will establish a purpose and intent statement for the area, identify preferred land uses and corresponding permit requirements, development standards, and objective design standards. Objective design standards are clear, measurable, verifiable, and quantifiable regulations that govern the physical appearance, architectural features, site layout, and other design elements of development projects. These standards are intended to facilitate high-quality site planning and building design and accelerate mixed-use and multi-family housing production through the clear communication of design objectives and efficient permitting process for qualifying residential and mixed-use development projects.
While this remains scoped within the General Plan update, the EDP is an opportunity to accelerate the timeline for implementation of this overlay district with design standards.
E. Grand Streetscape Project
The E. Grand Avenue Streetscape Project is another CIP identified in the FY 2025-27 biennial budget. This portion of the overall vision continues and implements the previous 2017 efforts, as it is primarily focused on the physical improvements to the corridor. The project’s purpose is to provide for safe mobility and accessibility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists, consistent with the Active Transportation Plan and in conjunction with the EDP. In addition to safety, the streetscape project will enhance the public right-of-way through physical improvements, including landscaping, lighting, hardscape, street furnishings, and public art. Making E. Grand Avenue more attractive and safer for all forms of transportation, especially pedestrians and bicyclists, will incentivize development and increase economic vitality by increasing foot traffic to existing and new businesses.
Collectively, the General Plan update, E. Grand Overlay District, and E. Grand Streetscape Project will allow for a revitalized built environment within the mixed-use corridor.
E. Grand Avenue EDP
The primary goal of EDP is to make recommendations that prioritize a cohesive vision for economic development, including multi-modal transportation and higher density development, and identify commercial opportunities for under-utilized and vacant mixeduse properties. The contents of the EDP will include an evaluation of the corridor’s economic potential, identify market challenges, and responsibly seek to encourage and incentivize the type of development that will support existing businesses, improve the City’s economic resiliency, and seek growth that has a holistic economic benefit.
Compared to the previous effort in 2017, which primarily focused on operational efficiency with regard to parking demand and supply, this is an economic development plan that is focused on corridor and market transformation.
Item 11.c.
City Council
Study Session on Efforts to Redevelop East Grand Avenue February 24, 2026
At the heart of the EDP will be comprised of three components:
1) A focused market analysis that builds on the citywide market analysis that was completed as a part of the General Plan update;
2) Stakeholder and community engagement; and
3) Recommendations for attaining the vision for the corridor Market Analysis
The market analysis prepared for the General Plan identifies the City’s strengths and competitiveness within the region in various economic sectors. The refined analysis would build off that by focusing on the corridor and its growth opportunities. The analysis will examine undervalued community assets that quantitative data may miss, such as community coalitions, networks, and other civic structures; arts and culture, community history and collective memory; social ties; entrepreneurial spirit; and community aspirations that may influence the economic potential of the corridor. The analysis would also evaluate the economic impacts of existing, proposed, and reduced parking, pedestrian accessibility, bicycle and rolling accessibility, landscaping, public art, and other streetscape improvements.
Public and Stakeholder Outreach
In addition to the data ascertained from the market analysis, feedback from stakeholders and the general public will largely inform the EDP’s recommendations. Staff anticipates that the stakeholder and community engagement plan including various methods and formats to solicit thoughtful participation and input from various individuals and groups including business owners, business development organizations (small business development centers, chamber of commerce, district management associations, community development financial institutions, foundations, other nonprofits), anchor institutions, real estate brokers, developers, and property owners. This engagement effort would identify the stakeholders’ vision and aspirations for the area, challenges businesses and property owners are currently facing in this area, and be designed to better understand the unique needs of businesses and property owners. Public input would be compared to the consultant team’s findings, identify areas that may require further study, and invite ideas on the vision plan process and potential strategies for revitalization.
Recommendations and Implementation Strategies
The market analysis and public engagement components of the project will identify strategies and recommendations to attain the vision for the project area. The plan must include a clear definition of the corridor’s economic identify. Recommendations will include those related to small business and entrepreneurship ecosystems, placebased/neighborhood commercial revitalization, parking requirements, special projects, night-time culture and arts/culture/entertainment opportunities, marketing and communications, real estate development and reuse, strategic partnerships, and placemaking as tools for economic development. The strategies and action items will include short, medium-, and long-term time horizons, feasibility, and cost assessments,
Item 11.c.
City Council
Study Session on Efforts to Redevelop East Grand Avenue February 24, 2026
as well as an assessment of resources required for implementation, including data, software, tools, memberships, policies, partnerships, and funding.
For instance, the EDP should be a guidance document that helps answer questions such as:
What type of business are desired? Any uses the City wants to discourage? Does the City prioritize local/independent business, national/regional tenants, a mix of both?
What is the City’s role? Formation of a business district, expedite processing, facilitate land conglomeration, street closures for community events? What type of street can this be? Neighborhood-serving commercial, regional destination, mixed-use corridor, employment hub?
What programs are desirable and feasible? For example:
o Wayfinding and signage
o Outdoor dining
o Entertainment venues
o Shop/buy local programs
o Façade improvement program
o Road diet conversions
o Public plaza creation
o Public art strategy specific to corridor
o Storefront activation program (filling vacant, ground-floor spaces with temporary, pop-up, or permanent businesses, art installations, or community services)
Staff envisions the EDP to be a catalyst for redevelopment that has a multi-year action plan for implementation of some of these suggested programs, as well as a specific role in the City’s CIP. As stated earlier, the EDP is also an opportunity to accelerate the E.
Grand Overlay Corridor and objective design standards that are currently part of the General Plan update.
Council Questions
Staff has included as series of questions/prompts for the City Council to consider as part of this study session, and to guide the discussion:
1. Are the stated goals/objectives reflective of the City Council’s vision for the corridor? Should any goals/objectives be added?
Redevelopment of the E. Grand Avenue corridor
Improve economic and civic vibrancy
A focus on attracting mixed-use commercial and multi-family residential Investing in streetscape improvements
Establishing a unique sense of place