CITY OF GROVER BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 10
Placement: Business
Meeting Date: March 23, 2026
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Matthew Bronson, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Kyle Bell, Senior Planner
Megan Martin, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: General Plan Circulation Element Update
RECOMMENDATION
Receive an update on the status of the Circulation Element Update process and the results of the existing traffic analysis and provide policy direction on transportation priorities and objectives.
BACKGROUND
The Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan establishes the policy framework that guides the planning, design, and improvement of the City’s transportation system. The Circulation Element addresses how people and goods move throughout the community by establishing goals, policies, and programs related to vehicular travel, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, transit, and other mobility options. The Circulation Element helps the City plan a transportation network that keeps pace with development and meets the needs of a growing community over time.
The City’s current Circulation Element was last updated in 2005. Since that time, the City has adopted several planning documents and policies that influence transportation planning, including the 2011 Bicycle Master Plan, the 2011 West Grand Avenue Master Plan, the 2014 Climate Action Plan, and the comprehensive updates to the City’s Housing Element and Land Use Element adopted in 2020, as well as updates to the Development Code completed in 2022-2025. The Circulation Element Update will ensure that the City’s transportation policies remain consistent with these more recent planning efforts and support the land use patterns and housing goals identified in the General Plan.
Several State laws adopted since the last update have significantly changed the way transportation is planned and evaluated. Assembly Bill 1358, the Complete Streets Act, requires local jurisdictions to plan for balanced, multimodal transportation networks that serve all users.
Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) shifted transportation impact analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) from congestion-based Level of Service (LOS) to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT), which better reflects travel behavior, greenhouse gas emissions, and land use patterns.
State law also requires that General Plans address Environmental Justice considerations.
Government Code Section 65302(h) requires jurisdictions to identify policies that improve health and mobility outcomes for disadvantaged communities by promoting equitable access to transportation options, reducing exposure to pollution, and improving connectivity to essential services such as employment centers, schools, parks, and healthcare facilities. The Circulation Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 2 March 23, 2026
Element Update will incorporate these considerations to ensure that transportation improvements support safe and accessible mobility for all residents.
Update Process Overview
In June 2023, the City Council received a presentation regarding the need to update the Circulation Element and the proposed approach for completing the update (Council Agenda Report – June 26, 2023). Following initiation of the project, staff began coordinating with transportation consultants and regional partners to begin technical analysis and early outreach.
In May 2025, the City Council received an initial progress update on the Circulation Element Update process that summarized early data collection efforts and outlined the upcoming technical studies and community engagement process (Council Agenda Report – May 27, 2025).
Since the initiation of the project, the City partnered with Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers (LLG) to conduct technical transportation analysis and with California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) to assist with early community outreach and data collection. Traffic counts were conducted in September 2025 and January 2026 following completion of the West Grand Avenue streetscape improvements in June 2025 to ensure that the analysis reflects current roadway conditions. The data was used to prepare a series of technical studies evaluating existing transportation conditions within the City, including an Existing Conditions Report, LOS analysis, and VMT analysis.
This staff report provides an updated status of the Circulation Element Update process and an overview of the technical findings related to existing transportation conditions in the city. Staff is also seeking Council direction to help guide development of the Draft Circulation Element document that would be brought to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation and subsequently the Council for approval.
Project Strategy
The Circulation Element (“Project”) is guided by a strategic, goal-oriented framework that evaluates existing transportation conditions, forecasts future mobility needs, and identifies improvements that support a safe, efficient, and sustainable circulation system. The following objectives summarize the overall approach used to guide the technical analysis and policy development for the project:
A. Evaluate Existing Circulation System: The Project will identify any deficiencies of the City’s circulation system, including areas of congestion or inadequate infrastructure.
B. Analyze the Circulation System: The Project will assess the City’s capacity to handle projected growth generated by General Plan build-out and accommodate future needs by evaluating the City’s existing circulation system and planned improvements.
C. Strategize Improvement Opportunities: The Project will identify opportunities to address improvements to the City’s circulation system and develop strategies that will help prioritize improvements that provide the greatest circulation benefit to the City.
D. Consistency with SLOCOG Regional Transportation Plan: The Project shall be fully compatible with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2023 Regional Transportation Plan. The transportation technical analysis and modeling must be consistent with SLOCOG’s Countywide Transportation Demand Model and reconciled with the land use assumptions utilized by SLOCOG and current land uses of the City of Grover Beach.
E. VMT and LOS Analysis: The Project will address the requirement of SB 743 that calls for utilizing VMT as a metric to address the impacts of new development as it relates to environmental review. The City will continue utilizing the LOS metric as a tool to measure the extent of traffic impacts for development projects.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 3 March 23, 2026
Existing Conditions Summary
Cal Poly City and Regional Planning students helped document transportation conditions throughout the community, compiling an Existing Conditions Report that evaluates roadway conditions, traffic safety trends, pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, transit services, and parking availability (Attachment 1). This work provided valuable data and insights to inform the broader technical analyses prepared by the City’s consultant.
The report highlights several key aspects of the City’s transportation system, including collision trends between 2019 and 2024 to identify potential high-collision locations, the pedestrian, bicycle, and roadway network, transit service provided by the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority, and regional rail access through the Grover Beach Amtrak station. Students also conducted a residential parking study in eight neighborhoods. While the report was prepared as part of an academic studio course, it provides a helpful snapshot of current transportation conditions within the city. The report also includes several policy and planning recommendations developed by students as part of the course curriculum. The City is not obligated to consider these recommendations, and the goals, policies, and programs for the Circulation Element will be developed through the ongoing public outreach process and Council direction.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis
As noted previously, SB 743 requires that transportation impacts under CEQA be evaluated using VMT, which measures regional travel patterns rather than intersection congestion. VMT measures the amount of driving across the regional transportation systems and is not limited to congestion on local streets. The analysis provides information to guide policy decisions and will help identify strategies to support multimodal transportation, reduce vehicle dependence, and align with CEQA requirements.
LLG conducted a VMT analysis using SLOCOG’s Regional Travel Demand Model (RTDM) (Attachment 2). The model includes approved and permitted development projects currently active in the community. The methodology and thresholds used in the analysis are consistent with the SLO County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (June 2021) and the County VMT Thresholds Study (March 2021). The analysis evaluated three primary VMT metrics:
• VMT per Capita for residential development
• VMT per Employee for employment-generating uses
• Citywide Boundary VMT
Under regional guidance, residential and employment-related development is considered to have a significant transportation impact if VMT does not achieve a reduction of at least 15% below the countywide baseline average. For retail and certain other land uses, the threshold focuses on whether development would result in a net increase in Citywide Boundary VMT, which measures regional vehicle travel entering and leaving the city.
Residential Development (VMT per Capita)
Residential development, such as single-family homes, townhomes, apartments, or mixed-use projects with a majority residential component, are projected to generate VMT that is well below the regional significance threshold (21.6% lower), at approximately 33% below the countywide baseline. This means that new housing and resulting population growth consistent with the General Plan is not expected to result in significant transportation impacts.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 4 March 23, 2026
Employment Uses (VMT per Employee)
Employment-generating projects, such as offices, professional services, or light industrial facilities, are projected to generate slightly below the regional significance threshold (0.98% lower), at approximately 16% below the countywide baseline. These uses are also not expected to have a significant VMT impact under the cumulative development scenario.
Retail and Other Uses (Citywide Boundary VMT)
Retail and other non-residential uses, such as grocery stores, restaurants, hotels, or larger commercial centers, are projected to exceed the regional VMT significance threshold, resulting in additional vehicle travel entering and leaving the city. As a result, these types of projects may have a significant transportation impact under CEQA. Future development projects will be required to assess VMT impacts on a project-specific basis and implement appropriate reduction strategies in accordance with State guidance.
Potential VMT Reduction Strategies
Because the Circulation Element Update evaluates long-term planning conditions rather than specific projects, the VMT analysis identified a range of strategies that could help reduce vehicle travel, support walking, biking, transit, and other multimodal options, and improve overall mobility.
Depending on the type of project, different strategies may be more relevant, allowing the City to tailor approaches to the unique impacts of each land use.
Examples of project-level strategies include:
• Increasing residential or employment density in appropriate locations • Encouraging transit-oriented development
• Integrating affordable housing near employment centers • Implementing commute trip reduction programs and ridesharing initiatives • Providing employer-sponsored vanpools or transit subsidies • Providing bicycle end-of-trip facilities
• Managing parking supply
Examples of community-scale strategies include:
• Improving street connectivity
• Expanding pedestrian and bicycle networks
• Implementing carshare, bikeshare, or micromobility programs • Expanding transit service coverage or frequency
• Providing transit-supportive roadway improvements
• Implementing community-based travel planning programs State guidance notes that the effectiveness of VMT reduction strategies varies depending on the type of project and the mix of strategies used. Reductions from different approaches are evaluated carefully to ensure realistic outcomes and are not simply combined.
VMT Summary
Many of the strategies identified in the VMT analysis align with broader transportation goals being explored as part of the Project, such as supporting walking, biking, and transit, encouraging compact and infill development, and improving connections throughout the City. The findings from the VMT analysis will help guide the development of policies and programs in the updated Circulation Element, ensuring a balanced, multimodal transportation system while meeting State CEQA requirements.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 5 March 23, 2026
Level of Service (LOS) Analysis
The City also evaluates LOS at key intersections and roadway segments as a planning tool to understand current traffic conditions and identify opportunities to maintain efficient travel. LOS findings help inform potential policy and infrastructure strategies. LOS measures the efficiency of traffic flow at intersections and along roadway segments, with ratings ranging from LOS A (freeflowing conditions) to LOS F (significant congestion and delay). LLG evaluated traffic conditions at 15 key intersections and 10 roadway segments that provide primary regional and local access throughout the city (Attachment 3). These locations were identified through public outreach and in coordination with staff.
Existing Traffic Conditions
The analysis found that most intersections within the study area currently operate at acceptable levels of service during typical weekday conditions. Three intersections currently experience congestion during peak travel periods:
• N. 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue
• N. Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue
• Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue
The analysis evaluated 10 roadway segments along key corridors in the city. All segments were found to operate at acceptable levels of service under existing conditions, indicating that the roadway network generally functions efficiently.
General Plan Buildout Conditions
The LOS study evaluated conditions under a General Plan Buildout scenario, which assumes development of the remaining larger undeveloped areas identified in the City’s 2022 Land Use Element, including:
• Northeast Grover Beach
• 13th Street Corridor
• Strawberry Field area
This analysis also incorporates approved and permitted development projects within the City, which were included in the land use assumptions used in the RTDM. Under a General Plan buildout scenario, intersections and roadway segments in the city are projected to continue operating at acceptable levels of service. One intersection, Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue, may experience additional peak-hour delay; however, the study found that this can be addressed through minor signal timing adjustments. No major roadway infrastructure improvements are required to maintain efficient operations through this General Plan Buildout scenario.
Traffic Signal and Stop Control Evaluation
The study also looked at whether additional traffic controls (i.e. signals or multi-way stops) might be needed at key intersections in the city. A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted for N. 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue and N. Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue. This analysis assesses traffic data along with estimating potential impacts and the results indicate that current traffic volumes do not justify new traffic controls at these locations. Staff will continue to monitor conditions over time as the city grows to ensure safety and efficiency are maintained.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 6 March 23, 2026
The analysis also examined whether all-way stop control would be appropriate at three intersections: N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue, N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue, and N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue. Based on traffic patterns, pedestrian activity, and roadway design, none of these intersections met the criteria for multi-way stop control at this time.
LOS Summary
Overall, the LOS analysis indicates that the City’s roadway network currently operates efficiently and is expected to continue functioning at acceptable levels under General Plan buildout conditions, with only limited improvements required at specific locations. While the existing network can accommodate anticipated growth, individual development projects that generate a significant increase in the number of peak-hour trips require a project-specific traffic study. These studies identify any recommended improvements to ensure that new development does not create unacceptable delays or LOS impacts at intersections or along key roadway segments.
Phase 1 Community Outreach and Engagement
The City has conducted several outreach efforts during the early phases of the Circulation Element Update to gather community and stakeholder input. These efforts included creating a dedicated project webpage, establishing a Technical Advisory Group with regional agencies and stakeholders, and issuing a public news release announcing the Project. Cal Poly students conducted community engagement activities such as public tabling, workshops, and participation in local events to collect feedback on transportation conditions and priorities. The City also conducted an online community survey between October 2024 and February 2025 that received 76 responses, identifying concerns related to pavement conditions, limited pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and vehicle speeds, while also indicating interest in improving options for walking, bicycling, and transit (Attachment 4 – Public Outreach Summary).
To inform policy development, staff will draw from multiple sources of information, including the findings of the VMT and LOS technical studies, the Existing Conditions Report, and the public feedback collected through community outreach. Staff will also review the Circulation Elements and transportation policies of other jurisdictions in SLO County, as well as regional priorities identified in SLOCOG’s RTP. By combining these sources, staff can identify best practices and strategies that are tailored to the unique context of Grover Beach.
Council Policy Direction
The Circulation Element Update will establish goals, policies, and programs to guide the City’s transportation planning over the coming decades. While all of the policy themes listed in this section will be addressed as part of the update, understanding the Council’s priorities will help staff focus additional efforts and public outreach on the policies and programs that matter most to the Council. The Council has been asked to review the following policy themes and identify which themes should take precedence to help shape the direction of the Circulation Element:
1. Regional Connectivity: Policies to improve access to regional transit, employment centers, schools, and recreational destinations, aligning Grover Beach with countywide transportation priorities.
2. Multimodal Network Connectivity: Policies to enhance walking, biking, transit, and other non-vehicular travel within the community while maintaining safe and convenient neighborhood access.
3. Land Use and Transportation Coordination: Policies to encourage development patterns and transportation strategies that reduce vehicle miles traveled and support more sustainable travel options.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 7 March 23, 2026
4. Safety and Collision Reduction: Policies focused on reducing collisions and enhancing safety for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists.
5. Street Maintenance and Infrastructure: Policies to maintain and improve the condition, functionality, and longevity of the City’s streets, including pavement repairs, striping, signage, and traffic signal operations, to ensure a safe and reliable transportation network.
6. Parking and Curb Management: Policies addressing the supply and management of parking in residential and commercial areas.
Phase 2 Community Outreach and Engagement
The next phase of community outreach will build on the feedback during the initial outreach effort and focus on gathering input on transportation priorities and potential policies. This phase will give residents, businesses, and other stakeholders an opportunity to review potential strategies and provide feedback on how the City should prioritize future transportation improvements.
To support this discussion, the City will present policy concepts and examples that illustrate how different approaches could affect mobility, safety, and connectivity within the community. These examples will help participants better understand the potential benefits and trade-offs associated with different policy options. Outreach activities will be conducted this spring and summer and include a community survey, public workshop, and continued engagement with the Technical Advisory Group. Feedback collected through these efforts will help staff refine policy priorities and develop the goals, policies, and programs that will be included in the Draft Circulation Element.
Next Steps
With the completion of the technical studies and early outreach efforts, the Circulation Element Update will move into the next phase of community engagement and policy development. The following milestones outline the remaining steps leading to preparation of the Draft Circulation Element and formal consideration by the Planning Commission and the Council:
• Technical Advisory Group (Technical Review): The technical studies will be shared with the Technical Advisory Group for review and feedback to help ensure consistency with regional transportation priorities and broader planning efforts. • Community Survey: Staff will conduct a community survey to gather additional input on transportation priorities and potential policy directions for the Circulation Element. • Community Workshop: Following the survey, the City will host a community workshop to share the results and present potential policy concepts and transportation strategies. • Technical Advisory Group (Policy Review): The Technical Advisory Group will reconvene to review public feedback and provide input on potential circulation policies, programs, and improvement strategies.
• Draft Policy Development: Staff will use feedback from the Technical Advisory Group, community outreach, and City Council direction to develop draft Circulation Element goals, policies, and programs.
• Environmental Review: Staff will prepare an Initial Study to evaluate potential environmental impacts in accordance with CEQA.
• Public Review Period: The Draft Circulation Element and associated environmental document will be released for public review and comment. • Technical Advisory Group (Draft Review): During the public review period, the Technical Advisory Group will review the Draft Circulation Element and provide technical feedback. • Planning Commission Review: A public hearing before the Planning Commission is anticipated in fall 2026 to review the Draft Circulation Element and consider public comments. The Commission will provide recommendations to the City Council.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 8 March 23, 2026
• City Council Adoption: The updated Circulation Element is anticipated to be presented to the Council in fall 2026 for adoption, along with the environmental review determination. • LCP Certification: Depending on the final policy direction adopted by the City Council, amendments to the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) may be required for certification by the California Coastal Commission.
Staff will continue to engage residents, stakeholders, and regional partners throughout the process to ensure the updated Circulation Element reflects community priorities and provides a clear framework for improving mobility, safety, and connectivity throughout Grover Beach.
Local Coastal Program
As the project study area includes properties and roadways within the Coastal Zone, updating the Circulation Element will trigger the need for an amendment to the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP). In particular, circulation-related policies that affect coastal access, public transportation infrastructure, or other coastal resources must remain consistent with the California Coastal Act and are subject to review by the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission).
Staff will continue to coordinate with Coastal Commission staff throughout the update process, which will ensure that the proposed circulation policies and improvements within the Coastal Zone comply with Coastal Act requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This update is not considered a “Project” as defined in Section 15378 under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore does not require an environmental determination.
The City will complete the necessary environmental review in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws at the appropriate stage of the Circulation Element update process.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Circulation Element Update is included in the Community Development department’s operating budget, with a total of $60,000 allocated. This amount covers consultant services provided by Linscott, Law & Greenspan Engineers and related project expenses. Implementation of future circulation improvements identified in the updated Element may require additional capital funding, which could come from grants, regional funding sources, the City’s Capital Improvement Program, or the City’s Transportation Development Impact Fees (DIF).
ALTERNATIVES
No alternatives are being presented for consideration at this time. The recommendation reflects the next logical steps in the Circulation Element update process based on completed technical studies, existing conditions analysis, and prior community input.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
The agenda was posted in accordance with the Brown Act.
Staff Report: General Plan Circulation Element Update Page 9 March 23, 2026
ATTACHMENTS
1. Existing Conditions Report
2. VMT Analysis Study
3. LOS Analysis Study
4. Public Engagement Summary
Multi-Year Goals
☐ Public Safety and Community Services ☒ Economic Development and Housing ☒ Community Infrastructure ☐ Financial and Organization Sustainability Council Priorities
☐ Water & Wastewater Infrastructure ☒ Community Engagement ☒ Street Improvements and Maintenance
City of
Grover Beach
2050 Circulation Element
March 2025
2 Credits:
Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Community Planning Lab
Instructor:
Dave Amos
Students:
Kylie Preciado
Jessica Chen
Ethan Crabbe
Haley Duran
Emily Fischer
Jennifer Hugo
Katherine Ivanjack
Brian Lau
Emma Meyer
Mitchell Moore
Alaina Ortiz
Aaron Posternack
Nevia Stickney
Enrique Torres
Valentina Valverde
Natalie Venable
Elena Wilkinson
Miriam Sullivan
Mia Woomer
Joel Petry
Ryan Rodas
Lee Ackerman
Grover Beach City Staff
Mayor:
Kassi Dee
City Manager:
Matthew Bronson
City Council:
Robert Robert, District 1
Jules Tuggle, District 2
Kathy McCorry-Driscoll, District 3
Clint Weirick, District 4
Planning Staff:
Kyle Bell, Senior Planner
Janet Reese, Associate Planner
Cassandra Mesa, Assistant Planner
Megan Martin, Community Development
Director
3 Land Acknowledgement:
The City of Grover Beach and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo lands, work, and activities take place on the traditional lands of the Northern Chumash and Salinan tribes who have inhabited the Central Coast of California for more than 10,000 years. We recognize that much of the Central Coast as we know it today was founded on historical exclusions and erasures of indigenous peoples.
Acknowledgements:
We, students and instructor, extend our deepest gratitude to the City of Grover Beach staff and greater community; without their participation, guidance, and support, this community planning studio could not have been possible. Thank you to both Kyle Bell, Senior Planner, and Megan Martin, Community Development Director, for helping in the coordination of multiple dynamic community outreach events which allowed us to interact with Grover Beach residents and employ the Cal Poly principle of learn by doing.
Thank you to those of the greater Grover Beach community who shared their time and insights with our studio. These experiences are invaluable not just for the enrichment of our education, but for creating strong and informed policy.
4 5
Table of Contents
Table of Contents:
Part I: Background
1. Purpose
2. Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
3. Regulatory Setting
I. State
II. Regional
III. Local
4. Network Performance and Safety
I. Pedestrian Infrastructure
II. Bicycle Infrastructure
5. Roadway System
I. Parking Study
II. Public Transit and Rail Connections
III. South Country Transit (SCT) Routes
6. Public Participation
I. Existing Conditions Tabling
II. Trunk or Treat
III. Visioning Workshop
IV. Open House
V. Bike Tour
VI. Survey
8. Transportation Vision
I. Mode Share Goals
II. Bicycle Plan
December 2024
7 8
8 9
4 4
4 11
4 4
14 4
4 4
23 4
4 4 4
4 4 4
4 37
6 Part II: Goals Policies & Programs
1. Goal I
2. Goal 2
3. Goal 3
4. Goal 4
5. Goal 5
6. Goal 6
7. Goal 7
8. Goal 8
4. Tables and Figures
5. Table of Tables
6. Appendix
41 42
44 45
47 48
50 54
55 7
Part I: Background
8 Part I: Background December 2024
Background:
Purpose
The Circulation Element is a required chapter of the City of Grover Beach General Plan. The Circulation Element outlines the goals, policies, and programs which guide the development of Grover Beach’s transportation system. State law mandates that this element is consistent with the Land Use Element, addresses environmental justice considerations that are associated with circulation, and complies with The California Complete Streets Act. This Circulation Element describes how the City plans to provide for the transportation of people and goods within Grover Beach with connections within the county and beyond.
The intent of the Element is to coordinate the expansion of the City’s circulation system with the land use changes and growth of the community through 2050 while meeting City goals as provided in the General Plan.
Recent policy, trends, and technology have shifted the role of circulation in the contemporary city. The Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element has not been updated since 2005 and needs an update to better serve the Grover Beach of today. This plan will connect Grover Beach with current State law and help the City meet transportation opportunities and challenges in the future.
Relationship to Other General Plan Elements
Land Use and Circulation are closely related concepts; while the Land Use Element describes the city’s desired character and size, the Circulation Element describes how transportation will be provided to the uses envisioned by the Land Use Element. The vision of Grover Beach described by the Land Use Element is influenced by the layout and capacity of streets and the location of other transportation facilities described in the Circulation Element. Transportation facilities and programs influence the character of neighborhoods, the location of specific land uses, and the overall form of the city. Roadway improvements should match any land use changes prescribed in the Land Use element.
In addition to the Land Use Element, the Circulation Element relates to other Elements of the Grover Beach General Plan. The Circulation Element is related to the Noise Element. As transportation is a significant generator of urban noise, there are circulation-related policies within the Noise Element. The Safety 9 Part I: Background December 2024
Element of the General Plan is also related. Circulation infrastructure must be built in a safe, seismically sound way. Finally, the Circulation Element is related to the overall social and economic health of the city. Everyone, including businesses and residents, needs access to all parts of the city, and they need to be able to make those trips safely and efficiently, with a choice of modes.
Regulatory Setting
These are the state, regional, and local laws and programs that relate to The City of Grover Beach Circulation Element.
State
The California Complete Streets Act (2008) requires cities and counties to design streets that accommodate all users, including cyclists, pedestrians, and motorists. In Grover Beach, this could involve adding bike lanes, widening sidewalks, and improving pedestrian crosswalks.
Senate Bill 288 (2020) accelerates transit-related projects by exempting them from full CEQA reviews. This allows bus lanes, bike paths, and pedestrian walkways to be fast-tracked, particularly those aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions or improving public transportation.
Senate Bill 743 (2013) shifts transportation planning from reducing traffic congestion to promoting sustainable modes like walking, biking, and public transit. Cities now evaluate projects based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT), encouraging strategies that reduce driving and support walkable communities.
Regional
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) 2023 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) is a blueprint for San Luis Obispo County’s transportation system through 2045. It aims to reduce travel time, improve mobility, and promote equitable access to transportation. The plan prioritizes maintaining efficient roadways, enhancing transit services, and improving safety. Public engagement plays a key role, with community participation influencing planning decisions.
10 Part I: Background December 2024
The Beach Cities Multi-Purpose Trail Feasibility Study (2010) evaluates potential routes for a pedestrian and bicycle trail system connecting Grover Beach to Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Oceano. The study identifies Class I (separated paths) and Class II (bike lanes) trails as priorities. It also examines environmental, regulatory, jurisdictional, and financial feasibility, including cost estimates for design and construction.
Local
The City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element (2005) establishes policies for coordinating transportation with land use and community growth.
The plan’s main goals include ensuring safe and efficient vehicular movement, integrating alternative travel modes (transit, biking, walking, and rail), and coordinating transportation planning with other government agencies and community stakeholders. It also addresses traffic calming measures and neighborhood livability concerns.
The City of Grover Beach Bicycle Master Plan (2011) provides a framework for improving the city’s bikeway system. It focuses on route development, support facilities, maintenance, enforcement, education, and funding. The plan identifies major cycling destinations and gaps in bike infrastructure while proposing new bike lanes, racks, and signage. However, the plan is outdated and requires an update to meet current standards and remain eligible for state funding.
Another local plan is the West Grand Avenue Master Plan. West Grand Avenue is the city’s primary commercial and transit corridor but lacks pedestrian and bike-friendly features. The key goals of the West Grand Avenue Master Plan are to enhance pedestrian connectivity with crosswalks and sidewalks. The bike infrastructure will be improved with dedicated lanes. There will be lane reductions between Eighth and Eleventh Streets to slow traffic and improve safety. Iconic gateways at key intersections will be developed. A parking reduction strategy will be introduced to optimize land use. Public spaces and landscaping will be improved to make downtown more inviting.
West Grand Avenue is the city’s primary commercial and transit corridor but lacks pedestrian and bike-friendly features. The key goals of the West Grand Avenue Master Plan are to enhance pedestrian connectivity with crosswalks and 11 Part I: Background December 2024
sidewalks. The bike infrastructure will be improved with dedicated lanes. There will be lane reductions between Eighth and Eleventh Streets to slow traffic and improve safety. Iconic gateways at key intersections will be developed. A parking reduction strategy will be introduced to optimize land use. Public spaces and landscaping will be improved to make downtown more inviting and engaging for its residents.
Network Performance and Safety
Network performance directly impacts safety; ensuring comfortable and secure travel for all transportation modes is a priority. Level of service (LOS) measures roadway performance using a scale from A (free-flowing traffic) to F (severe congestion). The 2005 Grover Beach Circulation Element sets a policy to maintain a minimum LOS of “C” on all city roads. Additionally, residential streets should not exceed 4,000 average daily trips (ADT), and if they do, the city should implement traffic calming strategies as resources allow.
For state highways managed by Caltrans, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition guides LOS standards. Caltrans targets LOS “C” to “D” on state highways but acknowledges that maintaining these levels may not always be feasible.
Under Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), LOS is no longer used in environmental reviews for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Instead, Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is the required metric statewide to assess transportation impacts.
Between 2019 and 2024, 103 collisions occurred in Grover Beach, the majority on West Grand Avenue, North Oak Park Boulevard, and North Fourth Street.
Most crashes happened at intersections, where conflicting vehicle movements increase risks. The most common collision type was broadside crashes (39%), in which one vehicle hits the side of another at a perpendicular angle. Speeding and automobile right-of-way violations were the leading causes of collisions. The victims of traffic collisions in Grover Beach included drivers (54%), passengers (18%), and both pedestrians and cyclists (13%) each.
12 Part I: Background December 2024
Pedestrian Infastructure
Pedestrian infrastructure is important to ensure the safety and convenience of residents who walk. Existing sidewalk conditions vary depending on location.
Some streets offer continuous sidewalk coverage, while others have gaps, dirt paths and obstacles that interrupt the pedestrian walkway. In early 2021, the City completed a sidewalk inventory of 1,241 blocks and concluded that 59% of blocks have complete sidewalks, 9% are close to completion, 26% have limited sidewalks, and 6% have no sidewalk. Some examples of heavily trafficked arterial roads with no consistent sidewalk coverage include State Highway 1 and Farroll Road.
Bicycle Infastructure
Bicycling makes up a relatively small part of Grover Beach’s mode share, with
0.2% of people using bicycles as a main mode of transportation for commuting.
The City aims to increase its overall bike trips by 30 times the current rate, raising the mode share from 0.2% to 6% by 2050.
Figure 1: Number of Victims by Role
13 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 2: Grover Beach Sidewalk Conditions
14 Part I: Background December 2024
Roadway System
Grover Beach has 45 miles of roadways and 10 million square feet of pavement within its city limits. Grover Beach streets are laid out in a grid system comprised of primarily local roads between State Highway 1 and US Highway 101. The city’s only major arterial, Grand Avenue, bisects the city, moving traffic from the Highway towards downtown and into the heart of Grover Beach. All streets in Grover Beach can be classified into five categories: State Highways, Major Arterials, Minor Arterials, Collector, and local streets. These are shown in Figure
3. Most freight is transported in and out of Grover Beach by truck. The City of Grover has designated several truck routes (Figure 4). These routes are restricted to primarily arterial streets and streets in industrial zones. Restricting truck traffic to only certain routes protects residential areas from unnecessary traffic.
Trucks enter Grover Beach via US Highway 101 or State Highway 1. US Highway 101, the primary freight vehicle route along the central coast, runs east to west along the northern border of Grover Beach. The freeway connects to nearby cities Santa Maria and San Luis Obispo.
15 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 3: Street Classification Map
16 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 4: Truck Routes Map
17 Part I: Background December 2024
Parking Study Introduction:
On January 28th of 2025, the Cal Poly Community Planning Studio conducted a parking study in Grover Beach. The parking study intended to assess residential parking capacity in Grover Beach. Community members have noted concerns about the possible decreased parking capacity after increased density and development in and around some neighborhoods.
Students chose eight neighborhoods to assess in this study. The neighborhoods chosen were a mix of “R-1”, “R-2”, “R-3”, Coastal Low Density and Coastal Medium Density Zones in Grover Beach. Students were tasked with counting the number of available parking spaces, both on-street and off-street. On-street parking included cars parked in the public right-of-way and off-street parking included cars parked in driveways and in garages. The team calculated the approximate number of available parking spaces in residential neighborhoods before the parking studies were conducted. The approximate parking availability was determined by the length of the street segment subtracted by the number of driveways, multiplied by the average driveway size (18 feet) and an additional factor of 1.25 to account for leftover space that does not leave adequate room for a car and “no parking” zones.
Students were tasked with counting the actual number of cars parked in onstreet and off-street spaces within the designated neighborhoods. The studies were conducted at 6 AM and at 9 PM on Tuesday, January 28th. These times were selected for data collection when residents are most likely to be at home.
Two groups counted at 6am; one group surveyed neighborhoods 1-4 and the other group surveyed neighborhoods 5-8 (See Figure 3). The other two groups followed the same structure at 9pm. The
data was compared to the maximum
parking capacity of the neighborhoods
to determine the vacancy rate for each
street. Table 1 summarizes the onstreet and off-street vacancy rates per neighborhood and provides a comparison
to the total parking spaces available in
each neighborhood.
Off-Street: Cars parked in driveways and garages
On-street: Cars parked on the street
Vacancy Rate: Percent parking available
Definitions:
18 Part I: Background December 2024
Table 1: Vacancy Rate and total parking spaces for each neighborhood Figure 5: Parking Study Neighborhoods
1 2 3 4
5 6
7 8
)Ҋ/- / !!Ҋ/- / )Ҋ/- / !!Ҋ/- /
р *)
-
#-*1 фтڿ урڿ счп стр
с *-/#2 ./ хпڿ фрڿ уцх тсх
т *-/# )/-
' фхڿ фхڿ хшф сцц
у *-/#
./ ушڿ уфڿ утр урс
ф *0/#-
) $"#
*-#** цпڿ фшڿ ушч упт
х *0/#2 ./ усڿ ухڿ утх рчц
ц *0/#
./ учڿ фпڿ хфт счу
ч *0/# фчڿ ушڿ чцф суу
)
4
/
+
ҿ $"#
*-#** */
'
-&$)"+
.
19 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 6: On-Street Vacancy Rate in Grover Beach
20 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 7: Off-Street Vacancy in Grover Beach
21 Part I: Background December 2024
Parking Study Conclusion:
The study concluded that most neighborhoods in Grover Beach have an adequate parking supply. The average vacancy rate in each neighborhood was never lower than 40%. The Monarch Grove, Northeast, Southwest, and Southeast neighborhoods (Neighborhoods 1,6, and 7, respectively) had the lowest average vacancy rates both on-street and off-street. Those neighborhoods have more than half of their parking capacity in use during the early morning and late evening. Overall, the Northwest, North Central, and South Grand Neighborhoods (neighborhoods 2, 3, and 5, respectively) had the highest vacancy rates, indicating the most available parking both on and off the street.
On average, off-street parking vacancy rates were lower than on-street vacancy rates. This correlation can likely be attributed to the fact that Grover Beach residents are accustomed to crowding multiple parked vehicles on their properties. The number of these vehicles often exceeds the maximum amount of parking our study assigned to each driveway, making the vacancy rate very low or negative for some street segments (See Figure 4). Additionally, residents are more likely to park in their own driveways as opposed to on the street out of convenience and accessibility.
The off-street vacancy rates were significantly higher, with fewer cars parked on the streets included in the study. Only four neighborhoods, Northwest, Northeast, Southeast, and South neighborhoods (neighborhoods 2,4,7, and 8, respectively) were surveyed to have at least one segment with an on-street vacancy rate lower than 20%. It is important to note that no street segment had a 0 percent on-street vacancy rate.
Overall, the study concludes that on-street parking has a high vacancy rate, while off-street parking is closer to capacity. Most properties have at least one car, often filling off-street parking and sometimes exceeding available driveway and garage space. As a result, on-street parking remains available citywide.
According to our data, the recorded neighborhoods should have no issues accommodating parking needs, even with small to medium-scale development.
Additionally, street modifications that reduce on-street parking such as protected bike lanes, medians, trees, bulb-outs, and bioswales, will not lead to parking overflow.
22 Part I: Background December 2024
Public Transit and Rail Connections
Public transit in Grover Beach is provided by South County Transit and the San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (SLORTA). SLORTA provides bus services throughout San Luis Obispo County, including within the Five Cities region.
The Five Cities are comprised of Grover Beach, Arroyo Grande, Oceano, Pismo Beach, and Shell Beach.
South County Transit (SCT) Routes
SLORTA oversees the South County Transit (SCT) bus routes. There are four SCT bus routes that run in Grover Beach: SCT Route 21, 24, 27 and 28. All four routes run hourly Monday through Friday, from 6:30 AM to 7:30 PM. SCT Route 21, 24, and 28 also run hourly on Saturdays from 7:30 AM to 7:30 PM, and hourly on Sundays from 7:30 AM to 6:30 PM. SCT Route 27 does not run on Saturdays and Sundays.
The City of Grover Beach also has a multimodal transportation station that serves as a stop for Amtrak trains. Located at the corner of Highway 1 and West Grand Avenue, the train station offers bike racks, bike lockers, electrical vehicle charging stations, and free long-term (14-day max) parking for Amtrak customers. Amtrak currently serves the City of Grover Beach with The Pacific Surfliner route, which operates between San Luis Obispo and San Diego, it stops in Grover Beach twice daily. Trains depart Grover Beach station at 6:30 AM and 4:35 PM each day in the southbound direction and arrive at the Grover Beach station at 7:55 PM in the northbound direction. Amtrak also offers bus service at the station to locations in the Central Valley and Southern California. 23 Part I: Background December 2024
Public Participation:
The City of Grover Beach Circulation Element Update process had a robust community engagement component including tabling, a visioning workshop, participation in community events, an open house, and a bike tour. The community engagement events were organized and led by the Cal Poly Community Planning Studio in collaboration with the City of Grover Beach and local partners including Bike SLO County. Public participation was essential to creating a vision and guiding the development of policies and programs for the Circulation Element.
Figure 8: Outreach Timeline
Outreach Timeline
Project StartOutreach Wrap Up
October
14, 2024
October
25, 2024
November
15, 2024
February
12, 2025
March 1,
2025
Trunk or Treat
Tabling Visioning Workshop
Open House
Bike Tour
24 Part I: Background December 2024
Existing Conditions Tabling:
On October 14, 2024, the Studio set up tables to conduct intercept outreach at four locations: Grover Heights Park, 16th Street Park, Vons, and Julie’s Juice Bar. At each site, the Studio employed two interactive activities to engage the community: a dot activity and a map activity. These exercises were designed to encourage participants to share their experiences, highlighting both enjoyable and challenging aspects of getting around Grover Beach. The feedback collected from this outreach effort will be instrumental in shaping future improvements to the city’s circulation system.
Figure 9: Images from the Existing Conditions Tabling in Grover Beach The dot activity poster displayed eight
destinations within or near Grover
Beach. Alongside each destination, four
transportation modes were listed: Driving,
Public Transportation, Biking, and Walking.
The students provided participants with
three dots, which they used to indicate their
top three most frequented destinations and
the corresponding modes of transport they
used to reach them. This interactive element
allowed the community to visually express
their preferences and habits, offering valuable
insights into travel patterns within the city. All
of the counts from the four tabling locations
were condensed into one poster (see Figure
12).
Figure 10: Tabling Poster
25 Part I: Background December 2024
Vons, the beach, and city parks were the most popular choices. Furthermore, participants indicated that driving was their most popular transportation mode to and from the top destinations. Walking is the second-most popular travel method, biking the third-most popular, with transit being the least popular mode of transport.
The students also featured a large
map of Grover Beach at each table.
Participants were encouraged to mark
areas of concern and provide specific
comments related to circulation. Using
sticky notes, markers, and stickers,
they could highlight problematic
locations or share suggestions for
improvements. This interactive map
activity created an opportunity for
casual dialogue between participants
and the Cal Poly students, fostering a
collaborative environment to gather
detailed, location-specific feedback.
All comments and notes made on the
four tabling maps were condensed
into one map (see Figure 13).
Figure 11: Tabling Map
Participants agreed that the major arterial streets in Grover Beach require significant improvements. Key streets identified include West Grand Avenue, Oak Park Boulevard, and 4th Street, which are high-traffic corridors posing risks to pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers alike. One intersection of concern is where US Highway 101 offramp meets Oak Park Boulevard. Participants noted that this area not only faces safety challenges due to traffic but is also impacted by homeless encampments and litter near areas of low visibility, making it a location many avoid at night.
Participants shared concern for the lack of sidewalks throughout the city. Even where sidewalks do exist, they are often shared by pedestrians and cyclists due to the perceived danger of biking on the streets. The existing bike lanes, 26 Part I: Background December 2024
when present, are not protected, leading many cyclists to use the sidewalks and roadways.
Although Grover Beach is less crowded than nearby cities, participants expressed a desire for safer crosswalks and bike lanes. In addition to finishing ongoing construction projects, participants called for more sidewalks to be built and for existing infrastructure to be improved for better safety and accessibility.
One participant shared that there is inadequate stormwater drainage on Oak Park Boulevard, causing frequent flooding during heavy rains. 27 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 12: Results of Dot Activity
Where do you go? How do you get there?
Downtown/Grand Ave Businesses
Beach
Place a dot by your top 3 destinations and use a sticky note for additional comments.
City Parks
Vons Soto Sports Complex
AG High School
A donde vas? Como llegas allí?
Pon un punto en sus 3 destinos principales y use una nota adhesiva para comentarios adicionales.
Vons, 16th Street Park, Grover Heights Park, & Julia’s Juice Bar Centro/Negocios de Grand Avenue
Playa Parques de la ciudad
Centro de deportes
Dignity Health Escuela secundaria de AG
Cal Poly City and Regional Planning
Regional
Regional
Regional
Grover Beach Elementary Schools
Escuelas primarias de Grover Beach
19 1
3 11
24 6
0 7 8
33 4
2 11
14 0
3 0
1 3
0 6
6 0
2 12
0 0
4 12
0 0
3 28
Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 13: Combined Activity Map 4TH STREET
8TH STREET
13TH STREET
OAK PARK BOULEVARD
WEST GRAND AVENUE
FARROLL ROAD
ATLANTIC CITY AVENUE
NEWPORT AVENUE
Too many dips
and bad road
conditions
Steep dips
where cars
“bottom out”
Reported
flooding with
heavy rain
Reported
encampments
where residents
feel unsafe walking
Vehicles drive
too fast and do
not stop for
pedestrians.
29 Part I: Background December 2024
Trunk or Treat:
The Grover Beach Annual Trunk or Treat, in collaboration with Grover Beach Rotary Club, brings together residents, local businesses, organizations, and City Staff with decorated trunks, costumes, games, and more. The Studio attended the event with a transportation-themed decorated trunk, handing out candy to attendees. Studio members facilitated a game which prompted children to toss rings in the direction of the bottle labeled with the mode of transportation they use most to travel to and from school. In addition to the ring toss activity, studio members distributed handouts with a QR code linked to a survey with further commute-related questions.
Figure 14: Trunk or Treat Event
30 Part I: Background December 2024
Visioning Workshop:
On November 19, 2024, the Studio hosted a workshop at Ramona Garden Park Community Center to gain community insight on the visioning process. The workshop began with a presentation explaining the purpose and scope of the project. Participants sat at four tables with student facilitators who guided the workshop activities. Grover Beach planning staff was present to answer specific questions about the community. This workshop provided valuable insights into the community’s priorities and aspirations for the city’s transportation and The facilitators at each table guided three activities. The first activity had participants create visioning statements using a Mad Libs-style template. Participants filled in the blanks with words that reflected what they wish to see for future transportation development in the city. Participants expressed their desire for improved connectivity and better maintained roads throughout the city. They also emphasized accessibility, safety, and economic growth as major priorities for the future transportation system. The second activity was a facilitated Figure 15: Participants Giving Feedback
31 Part I: Background December 2024
discussion on alternative transportation focused on gathering the participants’ thoughts on walking and biking around the city and the ideal transportation mode split. Participants expressed their frustration with sidewalk gaps, lack of pedestrian crossings, and insufficient street lighting in the city. They also agreed that alternative modes of transportation should be utilized more, but that this would require infrastructure improvements. The third activity was a facilitated discussion about current parking and driving conditions in Grover Beach.
Participants identified traffic calming measures such as flashing lights and more speed limit enforcement as actions the City could take to improve roadway safety. These activities provided valuable insights into the community’s priorities and aspirations for the city’s transportation and circulation system.
Open House:
On February 12, 2025, the Studio hosted
an open house event at Ramona Garden
Park Community Center. The open
house featured seven posters with policy
and program proposals related to: Safe
Streets, Pedestrian Infrastructure, Safe
Routes to School, Bike Infrastructure,
Roadway Systems, Green Infrastructure,
and Micromobility. Participants were
given “passports” with seven sections
corresponding to the poster topics.
Participants visited each poster and
spoke with students to discuss each
policy and program proposal. After
each discussion, participants were
encouraged to express their opinion on
each issue by circling a rose for topics
they liked, a thorn for a topic they did
not like, and a rose bud for topics that
Figure 16: Worksheet Given to Participants
at Open House
they have mixed feelings about. Participants could also write comments on each topic on the worksheet. Students would then put a stamp on the participants’ sheet next to their topic. After visiting each poster and receiving all seven stamps, participants could receive candy by turning in their “passport.” 32 Part I: Background December 2024
Additionally, participants filled out Valentine cards corresponding to the mode of transportation they loved and were encouraged to write a comment based on the prompts on the cards. Phrases on cards included: “There should be a speed limit for how fast I’m falling for you,” “You’re the one I wheelie love,” “You give me a lift,” “I’d cross the construction on Grand Ave. for you,” and “I choo choo choose you.” Participants were encouraged to write a comment based on the prompts noted on the cards. These included: “I love driving in Grover Beach because...”, “I love micromobility in Grover Beach because...”, “I love carpooling in Grover Beach because...”, “I love walking in Grover Beach because...”, and “I love the Amtrak because...”. Participants taped their Valentine card to a “Show your love for Grover Beach” poster.
Participants showed an appreciation for the train Valentine’s card, “I choo choo choose you.” The card had four responses, with participants noting ease of access to Downtown San Luis Obispo, lack of stress, and comfortable seating.
The rest of the prompts got one response each. For example, one participant described how difficult school pickup lines were.
Figure 17: Transportation Themed Valentines by Community Members 33 Part I: Background December 2024
Those who attended the open house could freely walk to different stations, share their thoughts, and ask questions to students. Grover Beach planning staff were there to assist students and answer questions. In addition to the comments written by participants on their handouts, students also wrote verbal comments on sticky notes and added these to their posters. One-on-one discussions helped the Studio better understand participants’ perspectives on the city’s transportation system.
34 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 18: One of the Posters Displayed at the Open House Event Biking in Grover Beach
Proposed bike infrastructure
improvments in Grover Beach
To reach its climate goals, the City must
reduce car use and encourage alternative
forms of transport. Grover Beach
currently has a mode share of 0.2% for
bike commuting, yet the city’s temperate
climate and flat landscape provide optimal
biking conditions. Bike lanes are needed
to provide a safe transportation option for
cyclists. Future policies should enable the
community to reach destinations using active
transportation.
Bike Parking: Bike racks are
needed to lock and store bikes in
public areas.
Bike Priority Traffic Signals: Bike
signals allow bikers to cross
intersections in any direction while
avoiding conflicts with cars and
pedestrians.
Bike Box: Painted bike boxes allow
cyclists to wait at intersections,
then safely turn left.
Other forms of infrastructure
Better Biking in Grover
Beach
Policy: The city shall develop complete networks of bike lanes throughout the city.
Program: The city shall provide bike parking in
all public facilities and high traffic areas.
35 Part I: Background December 2024
segment of the ride. These stops were strategically placed within the bike route in order to highlight positive and negative features within the city’s bicycle network.
Survey
The studio worked with the City of Grover Beach planning staff to develop a community survey to collect data related to existing conditions. The survey was promoted at different outreach events and both digital and paper versions were provided to community members. The topics the survey focused on included how people get around Grover Beach, their transportation priorities, and general sentiment about circulation in the city. The survey asked participants to select their top concerns about getting around Grover Beach; which intersections feel unsafe and why ; and how often residents use different modes of transportation.
The survey had a total of 76 respondents, with 94% being residents of Grover Beach. Many participants reported liking newly paved roads and the city’s proximity to many destinations. The top concerns included speeding cars (47.37%), pedestrian infrastructure (56.58%), and potholes and pavement quality (61.84%). Grand Avenue and 4th Street, Grand Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard, 13th Street and Farroll Road, and Oak Park Boulevard and Saratoga Bike Tour:
On March 1, 2025, the Studio partnered
with a local biking advocate group, Bike
SLO County, to conduct a bike tour through
the City of Grover Beach. The goal of this
event was to gather opinions and insights
on biking in Grover Beach. The bike tour
began at Ramona Garden Park at 10 a.m.
Stops included Vons Grocery, Mentone
Basin Park, Grover Beach Elementary, and
the 4th & Grand Avenue intersection. The
bike tour did a loop through the city and
returned to the starting point at Ramona
Garden Park. At each stop on the tour,
participants provided feedback on each
Figure 19: Image of Bike Tour
36 Part I: Background December 2024
Avenue were identified as intersections where pedestrians feel unsafe. The same intersections, as well as Grand Avenue and State Highway 1, were identified as intersections where cyclists feel unsafe. The same intersections, as well as the Atlantic City Avenue area, were identified as intersections where drivers felt unsafe. The top reason for feeling unsafe as a pedestrian, cyclist, and driver was excessive vehicle speeds. Participants stated that parking is not an issue in the city. Participants would like to see improved bicycle infrastructure and raised and high-visibility crosswalks. Additional comments mentioned a lack of sidewalks, as well as a desire for safe crossing over the railroad to the Monarch Grove, more frequent bus service, and improved American Disabilities Act compliance.
37 Part I: Background December 2024
Transportation Vision
Our vision for transportation in Grover Beach is to create and maintain a system that is accessible to all users while prioritizing safety and convenience.
This vision was shaped through community outreach efforts, particularly our visioning workshop. During the workshop, attendees participated in an interactive exercise where they completed vision statement templates, allowing them to express their priorities and ideas. The input gathered from this exercise informed the development of the final transportation vision for the city, as shown in Figure 20.
Figure 20: Grover Beach Circulation Vision Mad Libs
Grover Beach Circulation Mad Libs
The City of Grover Beach envisions a circulation system that prioritizes , , and .
Grover Beach will build and maintain a transportation network that is for all users, while enhancing .
Improvements will include and the reduction of
____________. Streets will be .
noun noun noun
noun
adjective
noun
adjective noun
Improvements will include and the reduction
of .
lighting
complete
streets
traffic control
confusion
speed
accidents
poorly aged
design
Grover Beach will build and maintain a transportation
network that is for all users, while enhancing
.
accessible (2)
safe
balanced
parking
accessibility
safety
convenience
Streets will be paved and finished .
smooth
attractive
maintained
The City of Grover Beach envisions a circulation system that prioritizes: , , and . safety (2)
connections
children
wayfinding
tourism
community
sidewalks
signage
traffic flow
economic -
improvement
attractivness
38 Part I: Background December 2024
Mode Share Goals
Mode share is the percentage of trips made using a particular type of transportation, and sustainable modes are everything except driving alone.
According to the Grover Beach Bicycle Master Plan, 14% of all trips are now made using sustainable modes, while driving alone accounts for the majority at 73%. Grover Beach, like many small cities in California, is heavily cardependent, with most trips made by single-occupancy vehicles. This reliance on cars contributes to congestion, pollution, and inefficiency in the transportation network. Fortunately, Grover Beach’s compact size and gridded street pattern makes it well-suited for using sustainable modes. According to the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 52% of all trips in the United States were less than three miles in 2021. With Grover Beach’s longest trip within the city being two miles, many local trips could easily shift to active or shared modes with the right investments.
This Circulation Element proposes a new goal for mode share: 25% of all trips will be made by sustainable transportation modes such as walking, biking, carpooling, or public transit by 2050. This is an ambitious goal that will require the city to dedicate resources to improve infrastructure, particularly for pedestrians and cyclists. Reducing car trips lowers greenhouse gas emissions, improves air quality, and promotes a healthier community by encouraging walking and biking. A shift toward sustainable modes will make Grover Beach more connected, safer, and economically vibrant. While this will require policy changes, infrastructure investments, and community engagement, the longterm benefits far outweigh the challenges. By adopting proven strategies from other cities and capitalizing on its compact urban form, Grover Beach can take meaningful steps toward a more prosperous future.
39 Part I: Background December 2024
Bicycle Plan
This plan proposes new bicycle infrastructure that updates the proposals in the 2011 Bicycle Plan. Grover Beach bikeways will play a key role in the city’s transportation system in the future. The proposed infrastructure map is shown in Figure 21. It shows where potential protected bicycle infrastructure could be integrated.
Improving bicycle infrastructure on high-stress streets is a top priority of the proposal. There are four north-south corridors and four east-west corridors. The studio proposed improvements to corridors such as 10th Street, Grand Avenue, and Long Branch Avenue due to proximity to downtown retail space and public schools. Community feedback about the lack of protection on these routes was also considered. These corridors are a high safety risk for bicyclists due to high volumes and speed of traffic. Additionally, there are several proposed intersection improvements. The City of Grover Beach may need to apply for State Active Transportation Program funding to construct these projects.
A buffered bicycle lane network is proposed on local streets throughout the city.
This development currently exists on Newport Avenue. This type of bicycle infrastructure is appropriate to implement in Grover Beach because it is low cost yet high impact, requiring only paint and flex posts. This network can be built out year by year, focusing on only one section at a time as funding allows.
Last, a traffic diverter is being proposed to make intersections safer for bicyclists. These diverters prevent through-traffic for cars and allow cyclists to pass through safely. The proposed location for this diverter is the intersection of 16th Street and Atlantic City Avenue. This intersection is an appropriate location for this development because of the reported traffic issues at this location caused by traffic spillover from North Oak Park Boulevard.
40 Part I: Background December 2024
Figure 21: Proposed Bicycle Infastructure Map
41 Part II: Goals,
Policies & Programs
42 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Goal 1: Use green infastructure and climate adaptation strategies to create a sustainable transportation system.
Policy 1.1: Natural Resources
Protect natural resources.
Program 1.1.1:
Strive to minimize grading for new roads and improvements, conserve prominent landforms, and minimize tree removals.
Program 1.1.2:
Comply with the Clean Air Act.
Program 1.1.3:
Consider the construction of landscaped medians on commercial thoroughfares (such as West Grand Avenue) to help slow traffic flows and to help provide for a more scenic roadway.
Program 1.1.4:
Update and continue to implement the Street Tree Program, consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 5 (9500).
Policy 1.2: Heat Island Effect
Incorporate lighter-colored (higher albedo) materials and surfaces, such as lighter-colored pavements, and create a robust tree canopy to reduce the built environments absorption of heat to reduce the urban heat island effect.
Policy 1.3: Recycled Materials
Use Recycled and/or recyclable materials for new transportation infastructure whenever feasible.
Policy 1.4: Mitigation Efforts
Cooperate with Caltrans to install and maintain landscaping and other mitigation elements along freeways and highways, especially when they are adjacent to existing residential or other noise sensitive uses.
43 December 2024
Policy 1.5: Landscaping
Encourage the use of drought-tolerant native plants and the use of recycled materials for roadway landscaping.
Policy 1.6: Green Streets
Incorporate green street elements, including stormwater curb extensions, tree trenches, and permeable pavement into roadway reconstruction and new developments where feasible.
Policy 1.7: Drainage
Integrate natural drainage systems, including bioswales, native vegetation, and meandering roadways, into residential street projects to reduce surface runoff and enhance urban green space when applicable.
Policy 1.8: Food Access
Ensure that Grover Beach residents can access food sources through a multitude of modes.
Program 1.8.1:
Collaborate with food banks and mobile food vendors to create transportation solutions that directly support food access.
Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs
44 December 2024 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024 Goal 2: Reduce drive-alone trips and vehicle miles traveled by automobile.
Policy 2.1: Employee Incentives
Encourage the provision of employee cost incentives, such as covering public transit fees, vanpools, transportation incentives for carpooling.
Policy 2.2: Work Schedules
Encourage employers to offer flexible work schedules, such as staggered work hours and telecommuting, to reduce commuter traffic, especially during peak traffic times.
Policy 2.3: Carpool
Encourage the use of carpooling to school, recreational activities, and shopping centers to reduce single automobile trips.
Program 2.3.1:
Work with local community groups to provide resources and services for carpooling.
Program 2.3.2:
Increase awareness about transportation demand management programs and services (i.e. shuttle services, school busses, and available incentive programs). 45 December 2024
Goal 3: Implement a balanced and accessible multi-modal transportation network that provides equitable mobility options for all users.
Policy 3.1: Travel Modes
Design and operate city streets to provide safe, comfortable, and convenient movement for users of all travel modes, including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, and motorists.
Policy 3.2: Complete Streets
Convert major streets into complete streets.
Policy 3.3: Bike Lanes
Develop complete networks of bike lanes throughout the city.
Program 3.3.1:
Implement low-stress bicycle boulevards, and erect barriers and traffic diverters at key intersections to prevent through-traffic from accessing designated bicycle boulevards.
Policy 3.4: Bike Facilities
Provide bike facilities in all public and high-traffic areas.
Program 3.4.1:
Amend the zoning code to require new developments to incorporate bicycle parking.
Program 3.4.2:
Install municipally owned bicycle racks to ensure safe bicycle storage where demand exists.
Program 3.4.3:
Install self-serve bike-fix stations in high-traffic public areas.
Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs
46 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Policy 3.5: Funding
Pursue funding to complete projects that close the gaps in the existing sidewalk network.
Program 3.5.1:
Increase sidewalk coverage in first and last mile areas.
Policy 3.6: Sidewalk Improvement
Engage in regular maintenance and improvement of sidewalk conditions.
Policy 3.7: Street Rehabilitation
Coordinate with street rehabilitation projects funded by Measure K-14 to create opportunities to include bicycle lanes and crosswalks in new street painting.
Policy 3.8: Expand Public Transit
Continue to work with transit operators and providers to support the expansion of public transit within Grover Beach and meet the needs of all residents and visitors.
Program 3.8.1:
Improve the pedestrian connection between downtown Grover Beach and the beach access point off West Grand Avenue.
Policy 3.9: Pedestrian Safety
Improve pedestrian crossings to maximize safety in high-traffic areas.
Policy 3.10: Sidewalk Maintenance
Continue to work with the City of Arroyo Grande and San Luis Obispo Council of Governments to ensure crucial maintenance and design of pedestrian corridors to encourage a walking connection between Grover Beach and surrounding communities.
Policy 3.11: Connectivity
Improve the connection between the City of Grover Beach and Oceano Dunes Natural Reserve State Park.
47 December 2024
Subsection:
Subsection Description
Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs
Goal 4: Strengthen partnerships to coordinate local and regional transportation priorities and programs.
Policy 4.1: Transportation Issues
Publicize major transportation issues and solicit public information.
Program 4.1.1:
Provide timely notification to the public through press releases, public service radio announcements, television, and contact with local organizations.
Program 4.1.2:
Conduct public hearings on proposed major actions and notify the public through mandated public notices.
Policy 4.2: Transportation Coordination
Coordinate transportation planning with regional and local plans.
Program 4.2.1:
Coordinate compatibility of proposed actions with transportation plans of adjacent cities, San Luis Obispo County and San Luis Obispo Council of Governments.
Program 4.2.2:
Evaluate regional impacts of proposed local improvements.
Program 4.2.3:
Coordinate with Caltrans District 5 and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on improvement plans to state/federal facilities within the City’s planning area and its vicinity.
48 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Goal 5: Ensure an efficient circulation system for the movement of people, goods and services by transportation modes Including freight trucks, rail, and air.
Policy 5.1: Commuter Rail
Coordinate with the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments regarding the potential for commuter rail service.
Policy 5.2: Emergency Service Vehicles
Consider potential impacts of traffic calming measures on response times for emergency service vehicles. To further limit potential usage of residential streets between the Front Street industrial area and 4th Street, traffic calming measures should be considered on Newport Avenue, Saratoga Avenue, and Brighton Avenue.
Policy 5.3: Amtrak
Improve the use of the Amtrak station by expanding multi-modal connections, enhancing infrastructure, and supporting sustainable transportation options.
Program 5.3.1:
Install bike-friendly facilities at and near the Amtrak station, including bike lockers, and bike racks.
Program 5.3.2:
Expand electric vehicle charging facilities at the terminal.
Program 5.3.3:
Coordinate bus schedules, improve signage, and improve pedestrian infrastructure.
Policy 5.4: Emergency Response Time
Provide for the safety of emergency vehicle traffic to reduce response times for incidents.
Program 5.4.1:
Upgrade traffic signal installations to include emergency vehicle pre-emption to enhance emergency response safety.
49 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Policy 5.5: Amtrak Thurway Bus Service
Cooperate with Amtrak to enhance long distance passenger rail service and Amtrak thruway connecting bus service.
Policy 5.6: Freight Trucks
Provide reserved freight truck loading zones in appropriate commercial areas.
Policy 5.7: Airport Accessibility
Support the accessibility to the San Luis Obispo and Oceano airports.
Program 5.7.1:
Implement signage and routing between city and San Luis Obispo and Oceano airports, as these airports provide important air communter, air freight, and air emergency response to and from the city and its citizens. 50 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Goal 6: Improve safety and efficiency for all road users.
Policy 6.1: Mode Share
Encourage a mode share goal of 25% of all trips by sustainable modes by 2050.
Policy 6.2: Street System
Monitor the operation and performance of the street system.
Program 6.2.1:
Maintain a minimum traffic operating Level of Service of “C” on all City transportation facilities.
Program 6.2.2:
Strive to control traffic levels in residential neighborhoods to not exceed a threshold of 4,000 ADT on any given residential street segment. If such threshold is exceeded, alternative traffic calming strategies shall be considered and implemented as resources permit.
Policy 6.3: Road Maintenance
Maintain roadways and traffic signals in good condition.
Program 6.3.1:
Develop a priority system for physical improvements based on demonstrated needs, according to the collected data on physical conditions, traffic volumes, and safety reports.
Program 6.3.2:
Respond quickly to traffic signal breakdowns and sign damages and losses. 51 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Policy 6.4: Traffic Capacities
Improve traffic capacities of streets.
Program 6.4.1:
Create a Capital Improvement Program to construct, pursuant to available funding and priority, improvements that are consistent with the City’s Circulation Master Plan.
Program 6.4.2:
Control and coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions’ major access points.
Program 6.4.3:
Restrict on-street parking on major and secondary arterials when needed to provide additional street capacity.
Program 6.4.4:
Optimize traffic signal performance to increase traffic flow. Every effort will be made to coordinate this effort with adjacent jurisdictions.
Policy 6.5: Traffic Safety
Improve traffic safety.
Program 6.5.1:
Review the location and frequency of accidents and develop specific site improvements.
Program 6.5.2:
Consider changes in speed limits, parking and turning restrictions to enhance safety.
Policy 6.6: Street Infastructure
Promote a collaborative relationship between the City and local schools to improve street infrastructure, safety, and accessibility around schools.
Program 6.6.1:
Collaborate with schools on an action plan that facilitates creative engagement activities to involve children in the active transportation planning process. 52 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Policy 6.7: Safe Routes to School
Collaborate with schools to implement Safe Routes to School education programs that strengthen connections between schools and homes, supporting safe travel options for all.
Policy 6.8: Pedestrian and Bike Network
Reduce pedestrian and bicycle network gaps between homes and schools.
Policy 6.9: Road Design
Prioritize vulnerable users and high-risk areas in road design.
Policy 6.10: Vision Zero
Follow the safe system approach to encourage Vision Zero in eliminating traffic deaths and serious injuries.
Program 6.10.1:
Adopt a Vision Zero Action Plan to aim for zero deaths and serious injuries by 2050.
Policy 6.11: Lighting
Improve lighting in high traffic corridors with low visibility.
Program 6.11.1:
Implement rectangular rapid flashing beacons in high traffic intersections such as Atlantic City Avenue, Saratoga Avenue, Fourth Street, and Oak Park Boulevard.
Program 6.11.2:
Rplace outdated streetlights and install new ones where necessary. Streetlights should follow the following criteria:
a. Use forward-facing, low-level fixtures like bollards, providing comfortable, cost-effective lighting for pedestrians and cyclists.
b. Ensure that light fixtures are angled downward with no spillover beyond the roads or sidewalks, complying with International Dark Sky Standards. c. Install louvers and baffles to reduce glare, enhance visibility at crosswalks, and improve safety at intersections.
53 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
d. Add streetlights in underlit neighborhoods, commercial areas and mixeduse zones that do not meet these standards.
Policy 6.12: Safe System Approach
Use a safe system approach to proactively design safe roadways.
Policy 6.13: Traffic Calming
Implement traffic calming measures on all streets to enhance safety, reduce vehicle speed, and minimize traffic congestion spillover into local streets and residential neighborhoods.
54 Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs December 2024
Goal 7: Embrace emerging mobility technologies.
Policy 7.1: Vehicle Technologies
Monitor the development and implementation of self-driving, autonomous vehicle technologies and consider appropriate methods to accommodate and adapt to these changes when necessary.
Policy 7.2: Micromobility
Develop a road network that safely accommodate micromobility modes.
Program 7.2.1:
Amend local ordinances to ensure the safe use of e-scooters and other road users.
Policy 7.3: Accessuble Charging Stations
Install public and accessible electric vehicle charging stations at key public locations throughout Grover Beach, ensuring long-term accessibility and promoting widespread electric vehicle adoption.
Program 7.3.1:
Install EV chargers in city owned public parking lots as needed. 55 December 2024
Goal 8: A land use pattern that shortens trip length, reduces trips, and increases sustainable modes
Policy 8.1: Trip Reduction
Encourage mixed-use districts to reduce the number of trips taken and replace vehicle trips with alternative modes
Policy 8.2: Small Lots
Encourage smaller parking lots to promote mixed-use land use.
Program 8.2.1:
Conduct a parking study to evaluate the elimination of parking minimums for commercial land uses.
Part II: Goals, Policies and Programs
'ZKs
Z
,/Zh>d/KE
>
D
EdhWd
s
,/>
D/>
^dZs
>
;sDdͿE>z^/^Z
WKZd
GROVER BEACH, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 16, 2026
Prepared for: Prepared by: Under the Supervision of:
City of Grover Beach Megan Lam, P.E. Zawwar Saiyed, M.S. P.E. R.S.P.
Community Development Department Transportation Engineer III Principal 154 S. 8th Street &
Grover Beach, CA 93433 Pengxiang Zhang, Ph.D.
Transportation Engineer I
LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update i
d>
K&KEd
Ed^
SECTION PAGE
1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 Project Description .............................................................................................................. 2
2.1 2022 Land Use Element ................................................................................................ 2
2.1.1 Northeast Grover Beach .................................................................................... 2
2.1.2 The 13th Street Corridor .................................................................................... 3
2.1.3 The Strawberry Field ......................................................................................... 3
2.2 San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Travel Demand Model .................. 4
3.0 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis .............................................................................. 6
3.1 VMT Screening Criteria ................................................................................................. 6
3.2 Thresholds of Significance for VMT ............................................................................... 6
3.2.1 Cumulative Transportation Impact Analysis ....................................................... 7
3.3 VMT Analysis ................................................................................................................ 8
3.3.1 Residential Projects ........................................................................................... 8
3.3.2 Work Projects .................................................................................................... 8
3.3.3 Retail and Other Projects ................................................................................... 8
4.0 VMT Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................. 10
4.1 Potential Mitigation Measures ..................................................................................... 11
4.1.1 Project/Site Scale Mitigation Measures ............................................................ 11
4.1.2 Plan/Community Scale Mitigation Measures .................................................... 12
5.0 Conclusions ....................................................................................................................... 14 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update ii
>/^dK&&/'hZ
^
FIGURE # FOLLOWING PAGE
Figure 1 Grover Beach Vicinity Map .....................................................................................................2 Figure 2 Grover Beach Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) Map ...................................................................9 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update iii
>/^dK&d>
^
SECTION – TABLE # PAGE
3–1 VMT Thresholds of Significance .............................................................................................7 3–2 Residential Projects VMT Analysis Summary .........................................................................8 3–3 Work Projects VMT Analysis Summary ..................................................................................8 3–4 Retail and Other Projects VMT Analysis Summary .................................................................9 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 1 ϭ͘Ϭ /EdZKhd/KE
The City of Grover Beach is undertaking a Circulation Element Update. The goal of the Circulation Element Update is to support the City in updating and expanding its Circulation Element, which is essential for guiding the growth and development of transportation and circulation infrastructure within the City’s planning areas. The City’s Circulation Element was last updated in August 2005, and an update is critical to ensure the City can adequately anticipate and plan transportation infrastructure to meet the future needs of the community. This update aims to ensure that the City’s circulation system evolves in tandem with anticipated land use changes and community growth over the next twenty years, allowing for smooth and efficient traffic flow throughout the City.
The purpose of this Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Report for the proposed Grover Beach Circulation Element Update project (hereinafter referred to as Project) is to address the requirements of Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which mandates the use of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) as a metric for evaluating the environmental impacts of new development.
This report documents the City of Grover Beach-specific updates to the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Travel Demand Model (SLOCOG RTDM), findings and recommendations of a traffic analysis conducted by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) to determine the potential impacts the proposed Project may have.
The following sections of this report summarize the Project model updates and present the Project description, City of Grover Beach’s VMT analysis methodology, thresholds, and mitigation measures.
It should be noted that the approach and methodology for VMT analysis outlined in this report are generally consistent with the San Luis Obispo County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (dated June 2021), which provides additional detail on the language and analysis procedures described in this report. The work program for this VMT analysis was developed in conjunction with the City of Grover Beach staff.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 2 Ϯ͘Ϭ WZK:
d
^Z/Wd/KE
The City of Grover Beach covers 2.25 square-miles. The City is located in San Luis Obispo County along the Central Coast of California, 92 miles north of Santa Barbara and 150 miles south of Monterey. The City extends from Arroyo Grande in the east to Pismo State Beach, bordering Oceano, an unincorporated community to the south. The City is part of the 5 Cities Metropolitan Area. The “5 Cities” includes three cities; Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, and Arroyo Grande along with Oceano and Shell Beach (part of Pismo Beach). As of 2024, the City has a population of 12,495 and draws tourists with its moderate coastal climate, drive-on beach and diverse recreational opportunities. The beach and sand dune recreation area attracts more than one million visitors per year and provides recreation opportunities for off-highway enthusiasts. Figure 1 presents the Vicinity Map.
Ϯ͘ϭ ϮϬϮϮ>Eh^
>
D
Ed
The City of Grover Beach is mostly built-out. According to the 2022 Land Use Element, buildout of the General Plan will occur through the development of the remaining undeveloped infill parcels. The Land Use Element provides specific guidance for the three remaining larger undeveloped areas of the City as described below. Appendix A contains the 2022 City of Grover Beach General Plan Land Use Element Map.
Ϯ͘ϭ͘ϭ EKZd,
^d'ZKs
Z
,
There are three largely vacant parcels located north of Atlantic City Avenue and west of Oak Park Boulevard that comprise of about 15.5 acres. Two of these parcels (APN 060-031-021 and APN 060- 031-022) are approved and under construction for a new hotel with a street address of 1598 El Camino Real, Grover Beach, CA 93433. The northerly property APN is 060-031-021, the middle property APN is 060-031-022 and the southerly property APN is 060-031-005 as shown in Exhibit 2- 1 below.
Exhibit 2-1. Northeast Grover Beach
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 3 Per the 2022 Land Use Element:
The northerly property fronting El Camino Real (APN 060-031-021) is about 5.8 acres and is an appropriate extension of the Retail Commercial Services land use designation on the northerly and easterly portions of the site outside of sensitive biological resources. This parcel and the middle parcel are approved and under construction for a new hotel with a street address of 1598 El Camino Real, Grover Beach, CA 93433. The middle property (APN 060-031-022) is about 1.8 acres. This parcel and the northern parcel are approved and under construction for a new hotel with a street address of 1598 El Camino Real, Grover Beach, CA 93433.
The Atlantic City Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard Property (APN 060-031-005) consists of 9.7 acres and is an appropriate location for both Medium Density and High Density Residential land use designations. Appropriate land uses for the site would include single family and multi-family dwelling units, senior housing and long-term care facilities.
Development of this site should also consider the incorporation of a park. It should be noted that the Land Use Element Policy 3 – 4 requires Master Plan for development.
Ϯ͘ϭ͘Ϯ d,
ϭϯd,^dZ
dKZZ/KZ
Per the 2022 Land Use Element, the 13th Street Corridor is one of three primary north-south connections between West Grand Avenue and the community of Oceano and beyond. The corridor has been developed with an eclectic mix of residences and businesses between West Grand Avenue and Farroll Road. There are a number of neighborhood-serving commercial businesses along 13th Street serving the day to day needs of surrounding residents within easy walking distance. The 13th Street Corridor is shown in Exhibit 2-2 below
The 2022 Land Use Element recommends preserving existing residential development along 13th Street, including the existing mobile home park. In addition, it recommends limited expansion of neighborhood serving businesses along 13th Street where such expansion will be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.
Exhibit 2-2. 13th Street Corridor
Ϯ͘ϭ͘ϯ d,
^dZt
ZZz&/
>
Per the 2022 Land Use Element, the Strawberry Field could accommodate a wide range of land uses and help the City achieve its affordable housing and economic development objectives. It also Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 4 recommends keeping the Strawberry Field in productive agriculture until such time development is initiated by the property owner. The Strawberry Field is shown in Exhibit 2-3 below.
Exhibit 2-3. The Strawberry Field
Ϯ͘Ϯ ^E >h/^ K/^WK KhE/> K& 'Ks
ZED
Ed^ Z
'/KE> dZs
>
DEDK
>
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Travel Demand Model (SLOCOG RTDM) and the adopted 2022 Land Use Element will serve as the foundation for the Circulation Element Update. Figure 2 presents the Grover Beach Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ) Map.
The SLOCOG RTDM projects the following General Plan Buildout growth for the undeveloped infill parcels:
Northeast Grover Beach:
o Northerly property fronting El Camino Real (APN 060-031-021) and middle property (APN 060-031-022):
- Hotel Rooms = 60
- Households = 7
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 5 - Employment = 56
o Atlantic City Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard Property (APN 060-031-005):
- Households = 80
The Strawberry Field:
- Households = 363
Additionally, a list of projects that are either under construction or undergoing building permit review was provided by City staff. SLOCOG RTDM was reviewed to verify their inclusion.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 6 ϯ͘Ϭ s
,/>
D/>
^dZs
>
;sDdͿE>z^/^
ϯ͘ϭ sDd^Z
E/E'Z/d
Z/
The VMT screening criteria is not applicable to this Project since it is a Land Use Plan and the screening criteria do not apply to Land Use Plans. Screening criteria applies to individual Land Use projects.
The San Luis Obispo County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (June 2021) states:
The VMT outcomes of the entire land use plan should be analyzed across the full plan area for which the plan may substantially affect travel patterns. This may include the plan boundary or extend beyond County boundaries. VMT should be counted in full rather than split between origin and destination. Consistent with guidance from OPR (2018):
Analysis of specific plans may employ the same thresholds described above for projects. A general plan, area plan, or community plan may have a significant impact on transportation if proposed new residential, office, or retail land uses would in aggregate exceed the respective thresholds recommended above.
Therefore, specific plans should apply the thresholds described below under, Thresholds of Significance for VMT, and general plans, area plans, or community plans would result in a significant impact if the proposed new combined residential, office, or retail land uses would exceed the respective thresholds described above. In addition, the plan would need to demonstrate consistency with the SLOCOG RTP/SCS to make a less than significant impact determination.
ϯ͘Ϯ d,Z
^,K>^K&^/'E/&/E
&KZsDd
A detailed CEQA transportation analysis is required to determine Project VMT and evaluate the VMT generated by the Project against the appropriate thresholds of significance. The County utilizes the Unincorporated Countywide Average VMT as a baseline for the thresholds of significance.
Even though the VMT thresholds of significance values are provided in Table 1 VMT Thresholds of Significance, San Luis Obispo County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (June 2021), the most recent SLOCOG RTDM version was released in May 2022. Hence, LLG calculated the baseline VMT threshold values, utilizing the most current SLOCOG RTDM. The VMT calculations are consistent with the County of San Luis Obispo VMT Thresholds Study (March 2021). As shown below, Table 3-1 presents the VMT metrics that will be calculated:
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 7 Table 3-1. VMT Thresholds of Significance
Baseline Daily VMT Project Type Threshold Calculation VMT Threshold VMT per Capita Residential
Projects 15% below Baseline
15% below Baseline
VMT per Capita
VMT per Employee Work Projects 15% below Baseline
15% below Baseline
VMT per Employee
Existing VMT from
Project site
Retail and Other
Projects N/A No net increase in VMT
Based on the above, the following VMT metrics have been calculated as thresholds:
¾ Unincorporated Countywide Baseline Average VMT per Capita ¾ Unincorporated Countywide Baseline Average VMT per Employee ¾ Baseline Citywide Boundary VMT
The Project will have a significant VMT impact if:
¾ The Cumulative Citywide VMT per Capita exceeds 15% below the Baseline Unincorporated Countywide Average VMT per Capita
¾ The Cumulative Citywide VMT per Employee exceeds 15% below the Baseline Unincorporated Countywide Average VMT per Employee
¾ A net increase in VMT from the Baseline Citywide Boundary VMT to the Cumulative Citywide Boundary VMT.
ϯ͘Ϯ͘ϭ hDh>d/s
dZE^WKZdd/KE/DWdE>z^/^
The San Luis Obispo County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (June 2021) states:
Projects must demonstrate consistency with the SLOCOG RTP/SCS to address cumulative transportation impacts because the SLOCOG RTP/SCS is the regional transportation plan that demonstrates long-term transportation goals in the County. Consistency may be demonstrated qualitatively by showing compliance with applicable transportation goals of the RTP/SCS. If a project can demonstrate consistency with the SLOCOG RTP/SCS in terms of development location, density, and intensity it will be considered part of the cumulative solution to meet the RTP/SCS long-range environmental and transportation goals and result in a less than significant cumulative impact.
It is our understanding that the 2022 Land Use Element is consistent with the SLOCOG Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) since the 2022 Land Use Element has been adopted by the City of Grover Beach.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 8 ϯ͘ϯ sDdE>z^/^
Summarized in the section below are the average VMT per Capita, VMT per Employee, and Citywide boundary VMT values and thresholds utilizing the SLOCOG RTDM for the Unincorporated County and the proposed Project.
ϯ͘ϯ͘ϭ Z
^/
Ed/>WZK:
d^
As shown below in Table 3-2, the proposed Project Cumulative Citywide VMT per Capita is 21.61% less than the threshold of 15% below the Unincorporated Countywide Baseline Average VMT per Capita. Based on the application of the VMT significance criteria described in this report, the proposed Project will not have a significant Project impact for the residential projects.
Table 3-2 Residential Projects VMT Analysis Summary
Residential Projects VMT per Capita
VMT Type VMT/Capita
Cumulative Citywide VMT/Capita 8.99
Threshold: 15% below the Countywide Baseline Average VMT/Capita 11.47 Compared to the Threshold 21.61% Lower
ϯ͘ϯ͘Ϯ tKZ<WZK:
d^
As shown below in Table 3-3, the proposed Project Cumulative Citywide VMT per Employee is 0.98% less than the threshold of 15% below the Unincorporated Countywide Baseline Average VMT per Employee. Based on the application of the VMT significance criteria described in this report, the proposed Project will not have a significant Project impact for work projects.
Table 3-3 Work Projects VMT Analysis Summary
Work Projects VMT per Employee
VMT Type VMT/Employee
Cumulative Citywide VMT/Employee 7.73
Threshold: 15% below the Countywide Baseline Average VMT/Employee 7.80 Compared to the Threshold 0.98% Lower
ϯ͘ϯ͘ϯ Z
d/>EKd,
ZWZK:
d^
As shown below in Table 3-4, the proposed Project Cumulative Citywide Boundary VMT results in a net increase of 23,180.26 when compared to the Baseline Citywide Boundary VMT. Based on the application of the VMT significance criteria described in this report, the proposed Project will have a significant Project impact for retail and other projects and will need to be reduced by 19.59% to meet the Baseline Citywide Boundary VMT.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 9 Table 3-4 Retail and Other Projects VMT Analysis Summary Retail and Other Projects Boundary VMT
VMT Type Boundary VMT
Baseline Citywide Boundary VMT (Threshold) 95,145.88
Cumulative Citywide Boundary VMT 118,326.15
Net increase in Boundary VMT 23,180.26
Compared to the Threshold 19.59% Reduction Needed
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 10 ϰ͘Ϭ sDdD/d/'d/KED
^hZ
^
When a project exceeds the VMT thresholds of significance, the project will need to implement feasible mitigation measures to reduce CEQA transportation impacts related to VMT. The type and size of the project will determine the most appropriate mitigation strategies for VMT impacts. For large projects such as general plans or specific plans, VMT mitigations should concentrate on the project’s density and land use mix, site design, regional policies, and availability of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. For smaller projects such as an individual development project, VMT mitigations will typically require the preparation of a TDM program. A TDM program is a combination of strategies to reduce VMT.
As referenced in the OPR Technical Advisory, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity, Designed for Local Government, Communities, and Project Developers Report, Chapters 3 - Transportation, October 2024, (CAPCOA Report) quantifies the reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) associated with a particular mitigation measure. The CAPCOA VMT reduction strategies include built environment changes and transportation demand management (TDM) actions.
The Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies are sub-categorized into the following:
1) Land Use
2) Trip Reduction Program
3) Parking or Road Pricing/Management
4) Neighborhood Design
5) Transit
6) Clean Vehicles and Fuels
7) School Programs
It may be noted that there are rules and combined maximums for calculating the VMT reduction when applying multiple mitigation measures. To safeguard the accuracy and reliability of the methods while maintaining their case of use, the following rules should be followed when considering reductions achieved by transportation measures.
Combining Measures Across Scales
According to the CAPCOA, there are nineteen (19) quantified measures at the Project/Site scale that can be applicable and nineteen (19) quantified measures at the Plan/Community scale that can be applicable. The GHG reductions of transportation measures from different scales of application should never be combined.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 11 Combining Measures Within a Subsector
Effectiveness levels for multiple measures within a subsector may be multiplied to determine a combined effectiveness level. The CAPCOA recommends that measure reductions within a subsector be multiplied. This will take the following form:
ܴ݁݀ݑܿݐ݅݊௦௨௦௧ ൌͳെሾሺͳെܣሻ כ ሺͳെܤሻ כ ሺͳെܥሻሿ
Where A, B, and C are the individual measures reduction percentages for the measures to be combined in each subsector. In addition, each subsector has a maximum allowable reduction.
Combining Measures Across Subsectors
The CAPCOA report adopts 70 percent as a maximum for the combined VMT impact from the following four subsectors: Land Use, Neighborhood Design, Parking or Road Pricing/Management, and Transit:
ܴ݁݀ݑܿݐ݅݊௨௧ି௦௨௦௧ ൌͳ-ሾሺͳ െ ܮܽ݊݀ሻ כ ሺͳ െ ܦ݁ݏ݅݃݊ሻ כ ሺͳ െ ܲܽݎ݇݅݊݃ሻ כ ሺͳ െ ܶݎܽ݊ݏ݅ݐሻ ͲΨ Please note that this multi-subsector maximum purposefully excludes the Trip Reduction Program subsector.
ϰ͘ϭ WKd
Ed/>D/d/'d/KED
^hZ
^
Since approved individual project specifics are unavailable, applicable mitigation measures from the CAPCOA report are presented in this section as a menu of potential mitigation strategies. The mitigation measures are separated into Project/Site Scale and Plan/Community Scale as presented below:
ϰ͘ϭ͘ϭ WZK:
dͬ^/d
^>
D/d/'d/KED
^hZ
^
The following list provides a menu of potential mitigation measures that are available for the Project/Site Scale:
x Measure T-1. Increase Residential Density (Up to 30.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-2. Increase Job Density (Up to 30.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-3. Provide Transit-Oriented Development (Up to 31.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-4. Integrate Affordable and Below Market Rate Housing (Up to 28.6% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-5. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program (Voluntary) (Up to 4.0% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-6. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program (Mandatory Implementation and Monitoring) (Up to 26.0% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-7. Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing (Up to 4.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-8. Provide Ridesharing Program (Up to 8.0% VMT Reduction) Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 12 x Measure T-9. Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program (Up to 5.5% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-10. Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities (Up to 4.4% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-11. Provide Employer-Sponsored Vanpool (Up to 20.4% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-12. Price Workplace Parking (Up to 20.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-13. Implement Employee Parking Cash-Out (Up to 12.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-15. Limit Residential Parking Supply (Up to 13.7% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-16. Unbundle Residential Parking Costs from Property Cost (Up to 15.7% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-40. Establish a School Bus Program (Up to 57.0% of School Commute VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-55. Infill Development (Up to 30.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-56. Active Modes of Transportation For Youth (Up to 22.2% of School Commute VMT Reduction)
ϰ͘ϭ͘Ϯ W>EͬKDDhE/dz^>
D/d/'d/KED
^hZ
^
The following list provides a menu of potential mitigation measures for the Plan/Community Scale:
x Measure T-17. Improve Street Connectivity (Up to 30.0% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-18. Provide Pedestrian Network Improvement (Up to 6.4% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-19-A. Construct or Improve Bike Facility (Up to 0.8% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-19-B. Construct or Improve Bike Boulevard (Up to 0.2% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-20. Expand Bikeway Network (Up to 0.5% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-21-A. Implement Conventional Carshare Program (Up to 0.15% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-21-B. Implement Electric Carshare Program (Up to 0.18% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-22-A. Implement Pedal (Non-Electric) Bikeshare Program (Up to 0.02% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-22-B. Implement Electric Bikeshare Program (Up to 0.06% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-22-C. Implement Scootershare Program (Up to 0.07% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-23. Provide Community-Based Travel Planning (Up to 2.3% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-24. Implement Market Price Public Parking (On-Street) (Up to 30.0% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-25. Extend Transit Network Coverage or Hours (Up to 4.6% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-26. Increase Transit Service Frequency (Up to 11.3% VMT Reduction) Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 13 x Measure T-27. Implement Transit-Supportive Roadway Treatments (Up to 0.6% VMT Reduction)
x Measure T-28. Provide Bus Rapid Transit (Up to 13.8% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-29. Reduce Transit Fare (Up to 1.2% VMT Reduction) x Measure T-46. Provide Transit Shelters (Up to 0.32% VMT Reduction) Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Circulation Element Update 14 ϱ͘Ϭ KE>h^/KE^
Based on the San Luis Obispo County Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (June 2021) and utilizing the VMT methodology, criteria, analysis, thresholds and results outlined in this report, the proposed Circulation Element Update will have a signifcant and unavoidable transportation impact under CEQA. It is recommended that the applicant minimize VMT impacts as much as possible by implementing all feasible mitigation measures once the details of individual projects are determined. *UDQG $YH
)URQW 6W
6KHULGDQ 5G XUI
6 'ROOLYHU 6W
&DEULOOR +Z\
3LVPR
6WDWH
%HDFK
*ROI
&RXUVH
1RUWK %HDFK
&DPSJURXQG
&
5RFNDZD\ $YH
1 WK 6W
$WODQWLF &LW\ $YH
1 WK 6W 1 WK 6W
1 WK 6W
1 WK 6W
5DPRQD $YH
1 WK 6W
1WK 6W
1 QG 6W
1 WK 6W
1UG 6W
1 WK 6W
5LWFKLH5G
1VW 6W
&KDUOHV6W
3DUN 9LHZ $YH
6DUDWRJD $YH
1 WK 6W
1 WK 6W
1WK 6W
1 WK 6W
1 2DN 3DUN %OYG
%HFNHWW 3O
$PWUDN *URYHU
%HDFK 6WDWLRQ
6 2DN 3DUN %OYG
7KH 3LNH
+XVWRQ 6W
6 WK6W
6 WK 6W
%DGHQ $YH
1LFH$YH
/D 6HOYD $YH
)DUUROO 5G
0HQWRQH $YH
/RQJEUDQFK $YH
7URXYLOOH $YH
:LOPDU $YH
6HDEULJKW $YH
6 WK 6W
/D
VW 6W
5RVH &W
+LJKODQG :D\
WK
6 WK 6W
6WK6W
6 WK 6W
6 WK 6W
0DQKDWWDQ $YH 0DQKDWWDQ $YH *ULIILQ 6W
WK
5D
+XEHU 6W
6 WK 6W
2FHDQR &RXQW\
3DUN
*URYHU %HDFK
(OHPHQWDU\
6FKRRO
2FHDQR
&DPSJURXQG
%ULVFR 5G
/LQGD 'U
5RGHR 'U
1&RXUWODQG 6W
-DP HV :D\
1HZSRUW $YH
&KLOWRQ6W
5DQFKR 3NZ\
9LD %DQGROHU R
$YHQLG D GH 'LD PDQWH
1 (OP 6W
%HOO 6W
%ULJKWRQ $YH
*UDFH /Q %HQQ HWW $YH
( *UDQG $YH
(O &DPLQR 5HDO 1 2DN 3DUN 3OD]D
3DFLILF &RDVW
3OD]D
(O &DPLQR 5HDO
3DUN
5DQFKR *UDQGH
3DUN
2FHDQ 9LHZ
(OHPHQWDU\
6FKRRO
$UU R\R *UDQGH &UHHN
$OGHU 6W
WK
:RRGODQG 'U
6 &R XUWODQG6W
6 +DOF\RQ 5G
QG
$VK 6W
UG
:DOQXW 6W
6 (OP 6W
6 2DN 3DUN %OYG
)DLU 2DNV $YH
6 5H
QD 6W
)DUUROO $YH
7KH 3LNH
*D\QIDLU 7HU
6XQVHW 'U
3RSODU6W
$VSHQ 6W
'RGVRQ :D\
7HPSOH 6W
6SUXFH 6W
6$OSLQH 6W
0DSOH 6W
( *UDQG$Y H 6RWR 6SRUWV
&RPSOH[
*U
0HU
(VUL&RPPXQLW\0DSV&RQWULEXWRUV&DOLIRUQLD6WDWH3DUNV(VUL7RP7RP*DUPLQ6DIH*UDSK*HR7HFKQRORJLHV,QF0(7,1$6$86*6%XUHDXRI/DQG 0DQDJHPHQW(3$13686&HQVXV%XUHDX86'$86):6
/HJHQG
*URYHU%HDFK%RXQGDU\
k
0LOHV
)LJXUH
9LFLQLW\0DS
&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQW8SGDWH*URYHU%HDFK
)LJXUH
*URYHU%HDFK7$=0DS
&LUFXODWLRQ(OHPHQW8SGDWH*URYHU%HDFK
APPENDIX A
2022 CITY OF GROVER BEACH GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT MAP
)HHW
City Limit
Union Pacific Railroad
Coastal Zone
Ramona Specific Plan Area
Low Density Residential (1-5 units / Acre)
Medium Density Residential (6-9 units / Acre)
High Density Residential (10-20 units / Acre)
Central Business - Mixed-Use
Visitor Serving - Mixed-Use
Neighborhood Serving - Mixed-Use
Retail and Commercial Services
Industrial
Public / Quasi Public
Parks and Recreation
Open Space / Resource Conservation
Urban Reserve
Water Bodies / Streams
Land Use Designations
City of Grover Beach
General Plan Land Use
Element Map
Legend
SARATOGA AVE
SARATOGA AVE
ATLANTIC CITY AVE
PARK VIEW AVE
FRONT ST
N 1ST ST
N 2ND ST
PAR
N 3RD ST
EW
N 4TH ST
N 5TH ST
N 6TH ST
N 7TH ST
N 8TH ST
N 8TH ST
N 9TH ST
N 10TH ST
N 11TH ST
N 12TH ST
N 12TH ST
LAGUNA
BALBOA
N 13TH ST
N 14TH ST
N 16TH ST
S 16TH ST
S 16TH ST S
CAPITOLA
S 14TH ST
S 13TH ST
S 12TH ST
S 10TH ST
S 11TH ST
S 9TH ST
S 8TH ST
S 6TH ST
S 7TH ST
BARCA ST
HUBER ST
GRIFFIN ST
HUSTON ST
BODEGA CT
REFUGIO
MARBELLA
LORETO
ROSE ROSE
CT
ENCINITAS
S 5TH ST
S 4TH ST
S 4TH ST
S 4TH ST
S 3RD ST
S 13TH ST
OCEAN VIEW AVE
RITCHIE RD
MARGARITA AVE
EL CAMINO REAL
NEWPORT AVE NEWPORT AVE
RAMONA AVE RAMONA AVE
PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY
WEST GRAND AVE
ROCKAWAY AVE
ROCKAWAY AVE
LONG BRANCH AVE
MANHATTAN AVE
T
MANHATTAN AVE
T SEABRIGHT AVE
S
ST
TROUVILLE AVE
MENTONE AVE MENTONE AVE
NICE AVE
T
LEONI DR
CALVIN CT
NICE AVE
ST
HIGHLAND WAY
THE PIKE
BADEN AVE
SAUSALITO
MONACO CT
HUNTINGTON
R
FARROLL RD
AVE
LA
A SELVA LA
ANITA AVE
THE PIKE JANET AVE
ST
FARROLL RD
WEST GRAND AVE WEST GRAND AVE
BRIGHTON AVE BRIGHTON AVE
BECKETT PL
INO R
N
O
ACIMIENTO AVE
PITOLA
S 13 DEL MAR AVE
LYNNE ST
REB
RT AVE
N OAK PARK BLVD
T S. OAK PARK BLVD
N8TH ST
CHARLES S
N
T
6TH ST
N 4TH ST
ESTUA RY
FRONT S
CARMELDE
SAN DIEGO
NAPLES
ST. JOHNS CIR
VE
1 2 T
3 4
R
43 44
5 RIT
6 7 8
42 IMIEN
9 TO A 10
11 12 13 14
15 16
17 ATTA 18
N AVE
19 20 22
23 24
25 26
27 31
28 29
30 41
32 33
34 39 40
36 37
HE P 38
6 35
21 Pacific
Ocean
City of Pismo
Beach City of Pismo
Beach
City of Arroyo
Grande
Pismo Lake Meadow Creek
LAND USE MAP AMENDMENTS
EFFECTIVE DATE RESOLUTION NO.
11/16/2020 20-09
05/16/2012 12-20
08/06/2012 12-54
DATE PRINTED: 05/25/2021
MAP FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
1. BOLINAS CT. 24. HERMOSA CT.
2. PACIFICA DR. 25. NAPA WAY
3. GRANDVIEW DR. 26. HALF MOON BAY CT.
4. RITCHIE CT 27. MONTEREY AVE.
5. SAND CASTLE CT. 28. MESSINA CT.
6. FOREMASTER LN. 29. CRYSTAL COVE CR.
7. SHARON LN. 30. SAND DOLLAR DR.
8. ANGELLO TERRACE 31. MARSEILLE CT.
9. OWEN CT. 32. JENNIFER CT.
10. MONO CT. 33. SHANNA PL.
11. SANTO TOMAS CT 34. SAN SEBASTIAN CT.
12. MIRA MAR CT. 35. CAPISTRANO CT.
13. CORONADO CT. 36. LA JOLLA CT.
14. CABRILLO CT. 37. SOLANA CT.
15. NORMA LN. 38. CARMEL CT.
16. ALMA CT. 39. DRIFTWOOD ST.
17. MOSS BEACH CT. 40. SAN SORRENTO CT.
18. DOVER CT. 41. ABERDEEN CT.
19. STINSON CT. 42. SAVANNAH DR.
20. MALIBU CT. 43. TEDDY BEAR LN.
21. JALAMA CT. 44. TANNER LN.
22. RINCON CT.
23. REDONDO CT.
STREET NAME LIST
GROVER BEACH CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
TRAFFIC STUDY
GROVER BEACH, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 16, 2026
Prepared for: Prepared by: Under the Supervision of:
City of Grover Beach Angela Besa, P.E. Zawwar Saiyed, M.S., P.E., R.S.P.
Community Development Department Transportation Engineer III Principal 154 South 8th Street
Grover Beach, CA 93433
LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION PAGE
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ vi
1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 10
1.1 Study Area ................................................................................................................................... 10
1.1.1 Intersections .................................................................................................................... 10
1.1.2 Roadway Segments ........................................................................................................ 11
1.2 Traffic Impact Analysis Components ........................................................................................... 11
1.3 Traffic Impact Analysis Scenarios ................................................................................................ 11
1.4 Level of Service Criteria ............................................................................................................... 12
1.4.1 Traffic Impact Criteria and Thresholds .............................................................................. 12
1.5 Capacity Analysis Methodologies ................................................................................................ 12
1.5.1 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Signalized Intersections) ............ 12
1.5.2 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Method of Analysis (Unsignalized Intersections) ........ 12
1.5.3 Volume to Capacity (V/C) Ratio Method of Analysis (Roadway Segments) .................. 13
2.0 Project Description .............................................................................................................................. 18
2.1 2022 Land Use Element .............................................................................................................. 18
2.1.1 Northeast Grover Beach ................................................................................................. 18
2.1.2 The 13th Street Corridor .................................................................................................. 19
2.1.3 The Strawberry Field ....................................................................................................... 20
3.0 Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................. 21
3.1 Existing Street Network ................................................................................................................ 21
3.2 Regional Transit ........................................................................................................................... 21
3.2.1 South County Transit (SCT) Routes ................................................................................. 21
3.2.2 REgional Transit Agency (RTA) ROute ............................................................................ 22
3.2.3 Avila Trolley..................................................................................................................... 22
3.2.4 Specialized Regional Transit ............................................................................................ 22
3.2.5 Amtrak .......................................................................................................................... 23
3.3 Bicycle Facilties ........................................................................................................................... 23
3.3.1 City of Grover Beach Bicycle Master Plan ........................................................................ 24
3.3.1 Existing Bikeways ............................................................................................................ 24 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
SECTION PAGE
3.4 Pedestrian Facilities and Trails .................................................................................................... 24
3.4.1 Sidewalks ........................................................................................................................ 24
3.4.2 Other Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................................... 24
3.4.1 Trails .......................................................................................................................... 25
3.5 Existing Area Traffic Volumes ...................................................................................................... 25
3.6 Existing Level of Service Results ................................................................................................. 25
3.6.1 Intersections .................................................................................................................... 25
3.6.2 Roadway Segments ........................................................................................................ 26
4.0 Traffic Forecasting Methodology ....................................................................................................... 29
4.1 General Plan Buildout Traffic Volumes ........................................................................................ 29
5.0 General Plan Buildout Traffic Impact Analysis ................................................................................ 30
5.1 General Plan Buildout Intersection Capacity Analysis ................................................................. 30
5.2 General Plan Buildout Roadway Segment Capacity Analysis ..................................................... 33
6.0 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis ......................................................................................................... 36
6.1 General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................... 36
7.0 All-Way Stop Warrant Analysis .......................................................................................................... 38
8.0 Recommended Improvements ........................................................................................................... 45
8.1 General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions ..................................................................................... 45
8.1.1 Intersections .................................................................................................................... 45
8.1.1 Roadway Segments ......................................................................................................... 45 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
iii
APPENDICES
APPENDIX
A. Existing Traffic Count Data
A-I Intersection Counts
A-II Roadway Segment Counts
B. Existing Traffic Conditions Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets B-I Existing Traffic Conditions
C. General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions Intersection Level of Service Calculation Worksheets
C-I General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions
C-II General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions With Improvements D. Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Worksheets
D-I General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions
E. All-Way Stop Warrant Analysis Traffic Count Data
E-I Existing Traffic Counts
E-II 8-Hour Volume Counts
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
SECTION – FIGURE # FOLLOWING PAGE
1–1 Study Locations .................................................................................................................... 13 2–1 City of Grover Beach Current General Plan Land Use Element Map .................................... 20 3–1 Existing Roadway Conditions and Intersection Controls .................................................. 26 3–2 City of Grover Beach Current General Plan Circulation Element ........................................ 26 3–3 Bike Routes Map ................................................................................................................. 26 3–4 Bike Parking Map ................................................................................................................. 26 3–5 Sidewalk Gap Map ............................................................................................................... 26 3–6 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................................. 26 3–7 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ............................................................................. 26 3–8 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes ............................................................................................. 26 3–9 Existing AM Peak Hour Level of Service Results ............................................................... 26 3–10 Existing PM Peak Hour Level of Service Results ............................................................... 26 3–11 Existing Daily Roadway Segment Level of Service Results ............................................... 26 4–1 SLOCOG RTAM TAZ Map .................................................................................................. 29 4–2 General Plan Buildout AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes....................................................... 29 4–3 General Plan Buildout PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes....................................................... 29 4–4 General Plan Buildout Daily Traffic Volumes ...................................................................... 29 5–1 General Plan Buildout AM Peak Hour Level of Service Results ........................................... 30 5–2 General Plan Buildout PM Peak Hour Level of Service Results ........................................... 30 5–3 General Plan Buildout Daily Roadway Segment Level of Service Results ........................... 33 7–1 N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue Sight Distance Analysis ............................. 38 7–2 N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue Sight Distance Analysis ................................................. 38 7–3 N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue Sight Distance Analysis................................... 38 8–1 Recommended Improvements ............................................................................................. 45 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
v
LIST OF TABLES
SECTION – TABLE # PAGE
1–1 Level of Service Criteria For Signalized Intersections (HCM Methodology) ....................... 14 1–2 Level of Service Criteria For Unsignalized Intersections (HCM Methodology) ................... 15 1–3 Level of Service Criteria For Roadway Segments (V/C Methodology) ................................ 16 1–4 Daily Roadway Segment Capacities .................................................................................... 17 3–1 Existing Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary .......................................... 27 3–2 Existing Daily Roadway Segments Level of Service Summary ........................................... 28 5–1 General Plan Buildout Peak Hour Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary ................ 31-32 5–2 General Plan Buildout Daily Roadway Analysis Summary ............................................ 34-35 6–1 Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis Summary ........................................................................... 37 7–1 N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue All-Way Stop Warrant Analysis ........... 39-40 7–2 N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue All-Way Stop Warrant Analysis ................................ 41-42 7–3 N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue All-Way Stop Warrant Analysis ................. 43-44 Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
vi
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
x The General Plan Buildout consists of the development for the three remaining larger undeveloped areas of the City of Grover Beach per the 2022 Land Use Element. These areas are as follows:
o Northeast Grover Beach
o The 13th Street Corridor
o The Strawberry Field
STUDY AREA
x Fifteen (15) key study intersections selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of Grover Beach staff. The fifteen (15) key study intersections provide regional and local access to the City of Grover Beach and are listed below:
1. N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue
2. N 12th Street at Atlantic City Avenue
3. N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue
4. N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue
5. N Oak Park Boulevard at Saratoga Avenue
6. N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue
7. 4th Street at W Grand Avenue
8. 8th Street at W Grand Avenue
9. 13th Street at W Grand Avenue
10. Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue
11. Oak Park Boulevard at Mentone Avenue
12. S 4th Street at Farroll Road
13. S 13th Street at Farroll Road
14. Oak Park Boulevard at Farroll Road
15. Oak Park Boulevard/22nd Street at The Pike
x Ten (10) key study roadway segments selected for evaluation based on discussions with City of Grover Beach staff and are listed below:
A. Saratoga Avenue, between N 16th Street and N Oak Park Boulevard B. N Oak Park Boulevard, between Atlantic City Avenue and Saratoga Avenue C. N Oak Park Boulevard, between Saratoga Avenue and Newport Avenue D. N Oak Park Boulevard, between Newport Avenue and W Grand Avenue E. W Grand Avenue, between Pacific Coast Highway and 4th Street F. W Grand Avenue, between 8th Street and 13th Street
G. W Grand Avenue, between 13th Street and Oak Park Boulevard H. S Oak Park Boulevard, between Grand Avenue and Mentone Avenue Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
vii
I. Farroll Road, between S 4th Street and S 13th Street J. Farroll Road, between S 13th Street and S Oak Park Boulevard
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
Existing Traffic Conditions
x For the Existing traffic conditions, the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue, N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue, and Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue currently operate at unacceptable LOS during the AM and/or PM peak hours based on the LOS criteria defined in this report. The remaining key study intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS during both AM and PM peak hours of a “typical” weekday. x For the Existing traffic conditions, all ten (10) key study roadway segments currently operate at acceptable levels of service on a daily basis.
General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions
x For the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions, one (1) of the fifteen (15) key study intersections are forecast to operate at a deficient LOS under the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions based on the LOS standards defined in this report. Although the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue and N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue are forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS D and F, respectively, during the PM peak hour, they do not meet a peak hour traffic signal warrant. The remaining key study intersections are forecast to continue operate at an acceptable LOS under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The locations projected to operate at a deficient LOS are as follows:
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Key Intersection Delay (s/v) LOS Delay (s/v) LOS
10. Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue 35.0 D 38.3 D
The implementation of recommended improvements at the one (1) deficient location improves the intersection to acceptable service levels.
x For the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions, all ten (10) key study roadway segments are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions
x For the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions, the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue and N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue do not have future traffic conditions that would exceed the volume thresholds of Warrant #3, Part A or Part B for the AM or PM peak hours. Thus, a traffic signal is not recommended at these locations.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
viii
ALL-WAY WARRANT ANALYSIS
x As requested by the City of Grover Beach, all-way stop control warrant assessments have been conducted at the following key study intersections:
o 3. N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue
o 4. N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue
o 6. N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue
x Based on the existing traffic volumes, the existing pedestrian/bicycle data and current intersection lane geometrics, none of the criteria is satisfied. Therefore, based on the results of this analysis, it can be concluded that the installation of multi-way stop control is not justified at any of the three (3) intersections.
RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions
x The results of the intersection capacity analysis for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions indicate that one (1) of the key study intersections is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS based on the LOS standards defined in this report. The following are improvements recommended for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions:
o Intersection 10. Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue: Modify the existing traffic signal to provide northbound right-turn and southbound right-turn overlap phasing. x The results of the roadway segment analysis for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions indicate that the ten (10) key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable service levels. As there are no deficiencies, no traffic improvements are required under this traffic scenario.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
9 GROVER BEACH CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
TRAFFIC STUDY
GROVER BEACH, SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MARCH 16, 2026
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
10 1.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Grover Beach is undertaking a Circulation Element Update to reflect the 2022 Land Use element, which addresses the development of the remaining undeveloped infill parcels within the City. This traffic impact analysis evaluates the potential traffic impacts of the proposed Grover Beach Circulation Element Update under the 2022 Land Use Element (hereinafter referred to as General Plan Buildout), on the area traffic circulation.
This report documents the findings and recommendations of a traffic impact analysis conducted by Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers (LLG) to determine the potential traffic impacts the General Plan Buildout may have on the local network within the City and its neighboring jurisdictions. The traffic impact analysis evaluates the operating conditions at fifteen (15) existing key study intersections and ten (10) key study roadway segments throughout the City and forecasts future (long-term) operating conditions with the General Plan Buildout as detailed in the 2022 Land Use Element.
Fieldwork was conducted throughout the City and an inventory of adjacent area roadways and intersections was performed. Existing peak hour traffic information has been collected at the fifteen (15) key study intersections and the ten (10) key study roadway segments on a “typical” weekday for use in the preparation of intersection and roadway segment level of service calculations. This traffic report analyzes existing and future (long-term) weekday daily and AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions for Existing and Year 2045 traffic conditions with the General Plan Buildout (i.e. 2022 Land Use Element).
The work program for this traffic study was developed in conjunction with the City of Grover Beach staff.
1.1 STUDY AREA
1.1.1 INTERSECTIONS
The fifteen (15) key study intersections selected for evaluation were based on discussions with City of Grover Beach staff. The fifteen (15) key study intersections listed below provide regional and local access to the City of Grover Beach and define the extent of the boundaries for this traffic impact investigation.
1. N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue
2. N 12th Street at Atlantic City Avenue
3. N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue
4. N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue
5. N Oak Park Boulevard at Saratoga Avenue
6. N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue
7. 4th Street at W Grand Avenue
8. 8th Street at W Grand Avenue
9. 13th Street at W Grand Avenue
10. Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue
11. Oak Park Boulevard at Mentone Avenue
12. S 4th Street at Farroll Road
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
11 13. S 13th Street at Farroll Road
14. Oak Park Boulevard at Farroll Road
15. Oak Park Boulevard/22nd Street at The Pike
1.1.2 ROADWAY SEGMENTS
The ten (10) key study roadway segments selected for evaluation were based on discussions with City of Grover Beach staff. The ten (10) key study roadway segments listed below provide regional and local access to the City of Grover Beach and define the extent of the boundaries for this traffic impact investigation.
A. Saratoga Avenue, between N 16th Street and N Oak Park Boulevard B. N Oak Park Boulevard, between Atlantic City Avenue and Saratoga Avenue C. N Oak Park Boulevard, between Saratoga Avenue and Newport Avenue D. N Oak Park Boulevard, between Newport Avenue and W Grand Avenue E. W Grand Avenue, between Pacific Coast Highway and 4th Street F. W Grand Avenue, between 8th Street and 13th Street
G. W Grand Avenue, between 13th Street and Oak Park Boulevard H. S Oak Park Boulevard, between Grand Avenue and Mentone Avenue I. Farroll Road, between S 4th Street and S 13th Street J. Farroll Road, between S 13th Street and S Oak Park Boulevard
1.2 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS COMPONENTS
The Level of Service (LOS) calculations at the key study locations were used to evaluate the potential traffic-related impacts associated with the 2022 Land Use Element. When necessary, this report recommends intersection improvements that may be required to accommodate future traffic volumes and restore/maintain an acceptable Level of Service and/or addresses the impact of the 2022 Land Use Element. Included in this Traffic Impact Analysis are:
x Existing Traffic Counts,
x Daily, AM and PM Peak Hour LOS Analyses for Existing Conditions, x Daily, AM and PM Peak Hour LOS Analyses for General Plan Buildout (2022 Land Use Element) Conditions,
x All-Way Stop Control Warrant Assessment, and
x Recommended Circulation Improvements.
Figure 1-1 illustrates the study locations and surrounding street system.
1.3 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCENARIOS
The following scenarios are those for which Delay and corresponding LOS calculations have been performed at the key intersections and roadway segments for existing and long-term traffic conditions:
A. Existing Traffic Conditions,
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
12 B. General Plan Buildout Traffic Conditions (2022 Land Use Element), and C. Scenario (B) With Recommended Improvements, if any.
1.4 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA
1.4.1 TRAFFIC IMPACT CRITERIA AND THRESHOLDS
The City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element (August 2005) identifies the following policies for level of service thresholds:
x Program 1.2.3: The City shall maintain a minimum traffic operating Level of Service of “C” on all City transportation facilities.
x Program 1.2.4: The City shall strive to control traffic levels in residential neighborhoods to not exceed a threshold of 4,000 ADT on any given residential street segment. If such a threshold is exceeded, alternative traffic calming strategies shall be considered and implemented as resources permit.
1.5 CAPACITY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGIES
AM and PM peak hour operating conditions for the key study intersections were evaluated using the Highway Capacity Manual 7 (HCM 7) for the signalized and unsignalized intersections. Daily operating conditions the key study roadway segments were evaluated using the Volume to Capacity methodology.
1.5.1 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL (HCM) METHOD OF ANALYSIS (SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS) The HCM signalized methodology for signalized intersections was utilized for the analysis of the unsignalized intersections. Based on the HCM operations method of analysis, level of service for signalized intersections and approaches is defined in terms of control delay, which is a measure of the increase in travel time due to traffic signal control, driver discomfort, and fuel consumption. Control delay includes the delay associated with vehicles slowing in advance of an intersection, the time spent stopped on an intersection approach, the time spent as vehicles move up in the queue, and the time needed for vehicles to accelerate to their desired speed. LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the control delay in seconds per vehicle. The LOS thresholds established for the automobile mode at a signalized intersection are shown in Table 1-1.
1.5.2 HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL (HCM) METHOD OF ANALYSIS (UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS) The HCM unsignalized methodology for stop-controlled intersections was utilized for the analysis of the unsignalized intersections. LOS criteria for unsignalized intersections differ from LOS criteria for signalized intersections as signalized intersections are designed for heavier traffic and therefore a greater delay.
Unsignalized intersections are also associated with more uncertainty for users, as delays are less predictable, which can reduce users’ delay tolerance.
Two-way stop-controlled intersections are comprised of a major street, which is uncontrolled and a minor street, which is controlled by stop signs. Level of service for a two-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay. The control delay by movement, by approach and for the intersection as a whole is estimated by the computed capacity for each movement. LOS is determined for each minor-street movement (or shared movement) as well as major-street left turns. The Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
13 worst side street approach delay is reported. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole or for major-street approaches, as it is assumed that major-street through vehicles experience zero delay. The HCM control delay value range for two-way stop-controlled intersections is shown in Table 1-2.
All-way stop-controlled intersections require every vehicle to stop at the intersection before proceeding.
Because each driver must stop, the decision to proceed into the intersection is a function of traffic conditions on the other approaches. The time between subsequent vehicle departures depends on the degree of conflict that results between the vehicles and vehicles on the other approaches. This methodology determines the control delay for each lane on the approach, computes a weighted average for the whole approach and computes a weighted average for the intersection as a whole. Level of service (LOS) at the approach and intersection levels is based solely on control delay. The HCM control delay value range for all-way stop-controlled intersections are shown in Table 1-2.
1.5.3 VOLUME TO CAPACITY (V/C) RATIO METHOD OF ANALYSIS (ROADWAY SEGMENTS) Daily operating conditions for the key study roadway segments have been investigated according to the Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio of each roadway segment. The V/C relationship is used to estimate the LOS of the roadway segment with the volume based on the 24-hour traffic volumes and the capacity based on the City’s classification of each roadway. The six qualitative categories of Level of Service have been defined along with the corresponding Volume to Capacity (V/C) value range and are shown in Table 1-3.
The roadway link capacities as described in the City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element are shown in Table 1-4.
Although the arterial segment V/C analysis provides a general assessment of overall system performance, the performance is measured on the ability to serve peak hour traffic demands. To identify deficient arterial segments, the segments that are identified as deficient under daily conditions are evaluated under peak hour conditions to evaluate the capability of serving forecast peak hour throughput. Arterial segments that operate deficiently under peak hour conditions are candidates for improvement.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
14 TABLE 1-1
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM 7 METHODOLOGY)1
LEVEL OF
SERVICE (LOS)
INTERSECTION CAPACITY
UTILIZATION (ICU) VALUE
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION
A < 10.0
This level of service occurs when progression is
extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during
the green phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay.
B > 10.0 and < 20.0
This level generally occurs with good progression,
short cycle lengths, or both. More vehicles stop than
with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay.
C > 20.0 and < 35.0
Average traffic delays. These higher delays may result
from fair progression, longer cycle lengths, or both.
Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this
level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, though many still pass through the
intersection without stopping.
D > 35.0 and < 55.0
Long traffic delays At level D, the influence of
congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays
may result from some combination of unfavorable
progression, long cycle lengths, or high v/c ratios.
Many vehicles stop and the proportion of vehicles not
stopping declines. Individual cycle failures are
noticeable.
E > 55.0 and < 80.0
Very long traffic delays This level is considered by
many agencies to be the limit of acceptable delay.
These high delay values generally indicate poor
progression, long cycle lengths and high v/c ratios.
Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.
F > 80.0
Severe congestion This level, considered to be
unacceptable to most drivers, often occurs with over
saturation, that is, when arrival flow rates exceed the capacity of the intersection. It may also occur at high v/c ratios below 1.0 with many individual cycle failures.
Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be
major contributing factors to such delay levels.
1 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 7, Chapter 19: Signalized Intersections.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
15 TABLE 1-2
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM METHODOLOGY)2,3
LEVEL OF
SERVICE (LOS)
HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL (HCM)
DELAY PER VEHICLE (SECONDS/VEHICLE)
LEVEL OF SERVICE
DESCRIPTION
A d 10.0 Little or no delay
B > 10.0 and d 15.0 Short traffic delays
C > 15.0 and d 25.0 Average traffic delays
D > 25.0 and d 35.0 Long traffic delays
E > 35.0 and d 50.0 Very long traffic delays
F > 50.0 Severe congestion
2 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 7, Chapter 20: Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections. The LOS criteria apply to each lane on a given approach and to each approach on the minor street. LOS is not calculated for major-street approaches or for the intersection as a whole.
3 Source: Highway Capacity Manual 7, Chapter 21: All-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections. For approaches and intersection-wide assessment, LOS is defined solely by control delay.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
16 TABLE 1-3
LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA FOR ROADWAY SEGMENTS (V/C METHODOLOGY)4
LEVEL OF
SERVICE (LOS)
VOLUME TO CAPACITY (V/C)
RATIO
LEVEL OF SERVICE DESCRIPTION
A d 0.60
EXCELLENT. Describes primarily free flow operations at
average travel speeds, usually about 90% of the free flow speed for the arterial class. Vehicles are completely
unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Stopped delay at signalized intersections is minimal.
B 0.61 – 0.70
VERY GOOD. Represents reasonably unimpeded operations
at average travel speeds, usually about 70% of the free flow speed for the arterial class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. Drivers are not generally subjected to
appreciable tension.
C 0.71 – 0.80
GOOD. Represents stable conditions; however, ability to maneuver and change lanes in mid-block location may be
more restricted than in LOS B and longer queues and/or
adverse signal coordination may contribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50% of the average free flow speed for the arterial class. Motorists will experience appreciable tension while driving.
D 0.81 – 0.90
FAIR. Borders on a range in which small increases in flow may cause substantial increases in approach delay and,
hence, decreases in arterial speed. This may be due to
adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or some combination of these. Average travel
speeds are about 40% of free flow speed.
E 0.91 – 1.00
POOR. Characterized by significant approach delays and
average travel speeds of one-third the free flow speed or lower. Such operations are caused by some combination of adverse progression, high signal density, extensive queuing at critical intersections and inappropriate signal timing.
F > 1.00
FAILURE. Characterizes arterial flow at extremely low
speeds below one-third to one-quarter of the free flow speed.
Intersection congestion is likely at critical signalized locations, with resultant high approach delays. Adverse progression is frequently a contributor to this condition.
4 Source: Transportation Research Board 2000.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
17 TABLE 1-4
DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITIES5
ROADWAY SEGMENT TYPE
TOTAL TWO-WAY AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC (ADT)
LOS “A” LOS “B” LOS “C” LOS “D” LOS “E”
4-Lane Divided Freeway 28,000 43,200 61,600 74,400 80,000 2-Lane Highway 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,000 18,000
4-Lane Major Divided Arterial
(with left-turn lane) 22,000 25,000 29,000 32,500 36,000 4-Lane Minor Undivided Arterial
(no left-turn lane) 18,000 21,000 24,000 27,000 30,000
2-Lane Major Arterial
(with left-turn lane) 11,000 12,500 14,500 16,000 18,000 2-Lane Minor Arterial
(with left-turn lane) -- -- -- -- 16,5006
2-Lane Minor Arterial
(no left-turn lane) 9,000 10,500 12,000 13,500 15,000
2 Lane Collector 6,000 7,500 9,000 10,500 12,000
2-Lane Local Street 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000
5 Source: City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element, dated August 2005. 6 Interpolated between 2-Lane Major Arterial (with left-turn lane) and 2-Lane Minor Arterial (no left-turn lane).
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
18 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Grover Beach covers 2.25 square-miles. The City is located in San Luis Obispo County along the Central Coast of California, 92 miles north of Santa Barbara and 150 miles south of Monterey. The City extends from Arroyo Grande in the east to Pismo State Beach, bordering Oceano, an unincorporated community to the south.
The City is part of the Five Cities Metropolitan Area. The “Five Cities” includes three cities; Grover Beach, Pismo Beach, and Arroyo Grande along with Oceano and Shell Beach (part of Pismo Beach). As of 2024, the City has a population of 12,495 and draws tourists with its moderate coastal climate, drive-on beach and diverse recreational opportunities. The beach and sand dune recreation area attracts more than one million visitors per year and provides recreation opportunities for off-highway enthusiasts.
Activities such as dune hiking, fishing, clamming, kite surfing, golfing, horseback riding, wine tasting and off-road vehicle riding are some of the activities offered in and around Grover Beach. The beach and sand dune recreation area attracts more than one million visitors a year and provides recreation opportunities for off-highway enthusiasts.
2.1 2022 LAND USE ELEMENT
The City of Grover Beach is mostly built-out. According to the 2022 Land Use Element, build out of the General Plan will occur through the development of the remaining undeveloped infill parcels. The Land Use Element provides specific guidance for the three remaining larger undeveloped areas of the City as described below. Figure 2-1 presents the 2022 City of Grover Beach General Plan Land Use Element Map.
2.1.1 NORTHEAST GROVER BEACH
There are three largely vacant parcels located north of Atlantic City Avenue and west of Oak Park Boulevard that comprise of about 15.5 acres. Two of these parcels (APN 060-031-021 and APN 060-031- 022) are approved and under construction for a new hotel with a street address of 1598 El Camino Real, Grover Beach, CA 93433. The northerly property APN is 060-031-021, the middle property APN is 060- 031-022 and the southerly property APN is 060-031-005 as shown below.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
19 Northeast Grover Beach
Per the 2022 Land Use Element:
The northerly property fronting El Camino Real (APN 060-031-021) is about 5.8 acres and is an appropriate extension of the Retail Commercial Services land use designation on the northerly and easterly portions of the site outside of sensitive biological resources. This parcel and the middle parcel are approved and under construction for a new hotel with a street address of 1598 El Camino Real, Grover Beach, CA 93433.
The middle property (APN 060-031-022) is about 1.8 acres. This parcel and the northern parcel are approved and under construction for a new hotel with a street address of 1598 El Camino Real, Grover Beach, CA 93433.
The Atlantic City Avenue and Oak Park Boulevard Property (APN 060-031-005) consists of
9.7 acres and is an appropriate location for both Medium Density and High Density Residential land use designations. Appropriate land uses for the site would include single family and multifamily dwelling units, senior housing and long-term care facilities. Development of this site should also consider the incorporation of a park. It should be noted that the Land Use Element Policy 3 – 4 requires Master Plan for development.
2.1.2 THE 13TH STREET CORRIDOR
Per the 2022 Land Use Element, the 13th Street Corridor is one of three primary north-south connections between West Grand Avenue and the community of Oceano and beyond. The corridor has been developed with an eclectic mix of residences and businesses between West Grand Avenue and Farroll Road. There are a number of neighborhood-serving commercial businesses along 13th Street serving the day to day needs of surrounding residents within easy walking distance. The 13th Street Corridor is shown below.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
20 The 2022 Land Use Element recommends preserving existing residential development along 13th Street, including the existing mobile home park. In addition, it recommends limited expansion of neighborhood serving businesses along 13th Street where such expansion will be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.
13th Street Corridor
2.1.3 THE STRAWBERRY FIELD
Per the 2022 Land Use Element, the Strawberry Field could accommodate a wide range of land uses and help the City achieve its affordable housing and economic development objectives. It also recommends keeping the Strawberry Field in productive agriculture until such time development is initiated by the property owner. The Strawberry Field is shown below.
The Strawberry Field
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
21 3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS
3.1 EXISTING STREET NETWORK
The principal local network of streets in the City of Grover Beach has been included in this analysis.
Figure 3-1 presents an inventory of the existing roadway conditions within the study area evaluated in this report. The number of travel lanes and intersection controls for the key area study intersections are identified.
Figure 3-2 shows the current City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element.
3.2 REGIONAL TRANSIT
The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) provides bus services in San Luis Obispo County.
This allows for transportation within the Five Cities and the greater San Luis Obispo County.
3.2.1 SOUTH COUNTY TRANSIT (SCT) ROUTES
The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) operates the South County Transit (SCT) bus routes. The current operating routes within the City’s vicinity are as follows:
SCT Route 21:
x Route 85 provides service to the Cities of Shell Beach, Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach via Highway 101, Cabrillo Highway and Grand Avenue. x During the weekday AM and PM peak hours, Route 21 has approximate headways of 10 minutes in the eastbound and westbound directions Monday through Friday.
SCT Route 24:
x Route 24 provides service to the Cities of Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach via Cabrillo Highway, Grand Avenue and James Way.
x During the weekday AM and PM peak hours, Route 24 has approximate headways of 10 minutes in the eastbound and westbound directions Monday through Friday.
SCT Route 27:
x Route 27 provides service to the Cities of Grover Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Oceano via Cabrillo Highway, 13th Street, Branch Street and Fair Oaks Avenue. x During the weekday AM and PM peak hours, Route 27 has approximate headways of 10 minutes eastbound and westbound directions Monday through Friday.
SCT Route 28:
x Route 28 provides service to the Cities of Grover Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Oceano via Cabrillo Highway, 13th Street, Branch Street and Fair Oaks Avenue. x During the weekday AM and PM peak hours, Route 27 has approximate headways of 10 minutes eastbound and westbound directions Monday through Friday.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
22 3.2.2 REGIONAL TRANSIT AGENCY (RTA) ROUTE
The San Luis Obispo Regional Transit Authority (RTA) also operates a Region Transit Agency (RTA) Route 10 that goes from San Luis Obispo to Santa Maria, with stops in Pismo Beach, Arroyo Grande, and Nipomo. This bus route does not have any stops in Grover Beach but stops at the Pismo Beach Premium Outlets and on the corner of the intersection of El Camino Real and Halcyon in Arroyo Grande. These are both stops which are in close proximity to Grover Beach.
SLORTA Bus Service Area
Source: SLORTA
The image above shows the RTA bus routes and stations within the vicinity.
3.2.3 AVILA TROLLEY
The Avila Trolley, also overseen by the RTA, is a free season trolley that runs from May to September.
The trolley runs both northbound and southbound, and it has five stops around Avila Beach and one stop at Pismo Beach Outlets. Riders can expect trolleys from Friday to Sunday.
3.2.4 SPECIALIZED REGIONAL TRANSIT
Within San Luis Obispo County there are a handful of services that offer specialized transit services to certain population groups. Notably, these services are dependent on age, location, and disability. These curb-to-curb services vary in terms of price and available times. South of the primary service providers are:
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
23 Ride-On:
x Transportation service provider in San Luis Obispo County with a variety of services available.
Some of the key services available are:
o Veteran Express Shuttle: Transportation service for veterans within San Luis Obispo County from homes to local veteran clinics. It costs $3.00 each way, runs 6:30 AM to 5:00 PM every day, and requires reservations at least two days in advance. o Medi-Cal & CenCal Shuttle: Provides Medi-Cal and CenCal transportation to individuals who cannot use public transportation to get to their medical appointments. It is generally free of cost for Medi-Cal approved riders.
o Access Shuttle: A new shuttle door-to-door service within San Luis Obispo County residents who meet the criteria for low-income individuals who do not have access to public transit. Once registered, individuals can sign up for two round-trip rides per month for $3,00 each way.
o Community Interaction Program (CIP): Door-to-door service for riders with developmental disabilities. It is available Monday through Friday after 5:00 PM and throughout the weekends. The cost is $3.00 each way.
Senior Go!:
x A door-to-door and curb-to-curb service available to all seniors above 65 years old. Fares are based on distance and start at $2.50. This service runs from 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM, Monday through Friday. Each individual may book up to eight one-way trips per month and must reserve at least twenty-four hours in advance.
3.2.5 AMTRAK
Amtrak is the national passenger railroad company of the United States which oversees the rail lines in the state of California. It provides regularly schedule transit through trains and bus connections. The City of Grover Beach has a train station located along Grand Avenue that served by four Amtrack Pacific Surfliner trains. There are two daily southbound trains that go from San Luis Obispo to San Diego and have stops in Grover Beach. The 774 departs from the Grover Beach station at 6:31 AM daily and the 794 departs at 4:42 PM. There are also two daily northbound trains, going from San Diego to San Luis Obispo.
The 761 departs from the Grover Beach Station at 12:09 PM and the 777 departs at 8:11 PM.
In addition to the Surfliner trains, there are also two daily thruway buses that serve as connecting services.
The southbound buses are the 770, which departs from Grover Beach at 4:25 AM, and the 183, which departs at 11:25 AM. The two northbound buses are the 765, which departs at 1:45 PM, and the 785, which departs at 12:00 AM.
3.3 BICYCLE FACILTIES
The State transportation system recognizes four primary bikeway facilities: Bicycle Paths (Class I), Bicycle Lanes (Class II), Bicycle Routes (Class III) and Cycle Tracks (Class IV). Bicycle Paths (Class I) are exclusive car free facilities for exclusive use by bicyclists, pedestrians and those using non-motorized modes of travel, that are typically not located within a roadway area. Bicycle Lanes (Class II) are part of the street design that is dedicated only for bicycles and identified by a striped lane separating vehicle lanes Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
24 from bicycle lanes. Bicycle Routes (Class III) provide shared use with motor vehicle traffic within the same travel lane. Designated by signs, bike routes provide continuity to other bike facilities or designated preferred routes through corridors with high demand. Cycle Tracks (Class IV) are exclusive bike facilities that combine the experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane and is physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk.
3.3.1 CITY OF GROVER BEACH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The 2011 City of Grover Beach Bicycle Master Plan provides guidance on improving the bikeway system to encourage the use of bicycles by residents for transportation and recreation. The Plan includes goals, policies, and implementation measures regarding nine different topics which all work towards improving the bicycle network. These nine topics are bikeway route development, bikeway support facilities, maintenance, enforcement, education, encouragement, environmental, funding, and evaluation.
The Plan identifies major cycling destinations around the City and existing conditions, infrastructure, and facilities related to cycling in Grover Beach. The Plan also identifies key areas that currently lack bicycle facilities and where improvements would be the most effective in achieving the Plan’s goals. It is important to note that during the time in which the Plan was published there may have been major changes to the existing conditions.
3.3.1 EXISTING BIKEWAYS
Since the City adopted the 2011 Bicycle Master Plan, the City has constructed several new bikeways in the Plan. These include, but are not limited to, bikeways along 13th Street, West Grand Avenue, and Longbranch Avenue, as shown in Figure 3-3. Today, there are about 16.4 miles of bikeways in the City, of which 15 miles are Class II Bicycle Lanes and 1.4 miles are Class III Bicycle Routes.
Figure 3-4 presents the existing bicycle racks in the City. These are mainly concentrated near the Grand Avenue Corridor.
3.4 PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES AND TRAILS
3.4.1 SIDEWALKS
Existing sidewalk conditions vary depending on location. Some streets offer continuous sidewalk coverage, while others have gaps, dirt paths, and obstacles which interrupt the pedestrian walkway. The Cal Poly Community Planning Studio surveyed 79 miles of road edges. Out of these 79 miles, 55 miles had paved sidewalks, while 24 miles consisted of gravel, dirt, or nonexistent sidewalks. 70% of sidewalks were paved, while 30% remain unpaved, as shown in Figure 3-5.
3.4.2 OTHER PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES
Crosswalk conditions depend on location, ranging from no markings to decorated painted crosswalks.
Examples of artistically decorated sidewalks can be found at the intersections of West Grand Avenue at 2nd Street and 3rd Street. Other less-common pedestrian facilities include rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) and bulb-outs, present in arterial streets such as West Grand Avenue and 4th Street.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
25 3.4.1 TRAILS
Trails in Grover Beach are used for the recreation and health of residents. Urban parks managed by the City of Grover Beach contain trails open to the public. There are a total of seven (7) parks under City management:
Ramona Garden Park
Hero Community Park
Grover Heights Park
Golden West Park
Mentone Basin Park
16th Street Park
Costa Bella Park
State-owned land in and around Grover Beach contains facilities that are in part managed by the City. The Pismo State Beach natural area is home to the Dune Boardwalk, a pedestrian path that connects the plaza at the end of West Grand Street and cuts through dunes and woodland within State property. Both the plaza and the path are managed by the City of Grover Beach.
Several regional and state-wide trail networks pass through the City. The Beach Cities Multi-Purpose Trails is a proposed trail network that would connect Grover Beach with neighboring beachside cities.
Portions of this trails have already been constructed. Details of this plan are outlined in the 2010 Beach Cities Multi-Purpose Trail Feasibility Study.
3.5 EXISTING AREA TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes for the fifteen (15) key study intersections and ten (10) key roadway segments evaluated in this report, were collected by Counts Unlimited, Inc. in August 2025.
Appendix A contains the existing intersection turning movement and daily roadway traffic count data.
Figures 3-6 and 3-7 present the existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes, respectively, for the fifteen (15) existing key study intersections. Figure 3-8 presents the existing average daily traffic volumes for the ten (10) key roadway segments. The traffic volumes illustrated in Figures 3-6 through 3-8 are comprised of passenger vehicles, large 2-axle trucks, 3-axle trucks and 4+-axle trucks. The truck traffic turning movements were converted to passenger car equivalents (P.C.E.’s) using approved factors. P.C.E. factors of 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 were utilized for large 2-axle trucks, 3-axle trucks and 4+-axle trucks, respectively.
3.6 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE RESULTS
3.6.1 INTERSECTIONS
Table 3-1 summarizes the existing peak hour service level calculations for the fifteen (15) key study intersections based on existing traffic volumes and current street geometry. Review of Table 3-1 indicates that based on the LOS criteria defined in this report, the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue, N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue, and Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue currently operate at unacceptable LOS during the AM and/or PM peak hours. The remaining key study intersections currently operate at an acceptable LOS during both AM and PM peak hours of a “typical” weekday.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
26 To supplement the level of service results as presented in Table 3-1, Figures 3-7 and 3-8 graphically present the Existing traffic conditions level of service results for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
Appendix B contains the Delay and LOS calculation worksheets for the Existing traffic conditions.
3.6.2 ROADWAY SEGMENTS
Table 3-2 summarizes the existing daily level of service results at the key study roadway segments during a “typical” weekday for Existing traffic conditions. Table 3-2 presents the daily roadway segment capacities, as well as the existing number of travel lanes per roadway segment. The Existing daily traffic volumes, Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio and the level of service (LOS) of each roadway segment are listed. Review of Table 3-2 indicates for the Existing traffic conditions, all ten (10) key study roadway segments currently operate at acceptable levels of service on a daily basis.
To supplement the level of service results as presented in Table 3-2, Figure 3-9 graphically presents the Existing traffic conditions level of service results for the daily traffic volumes.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
27 TABLE 3-1
EXISTING PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY Key Intersection
LOS
Standard
Time
Period
Control
Type
Delay
(s/v) LOS
1. N 4th Street at
C
AM Two-Way 23.8 C
Atlantic City Avenue PM Stop 36.6 E
2. N 12th Street at
C
AM Two-Way 12.1 B
Atlantic City Avenue PM Stop 12.6 B
3. N Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM Two-Way 21.0 C
Atlantic City Avenue PM Stop 40.1 E
4. N 13th Street at
C
AM Two-Way 10.5 B
Saratoga Avenue PM Stop 10.7 B
5. N Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM All-Way 14.2 B
Saratoga Avenue PM Stop 19.3 C
6. N Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM Two-Way 16.3 C
Newport Avenue PM Stop 16.1 C
7. 4th Street at
C
AM 5 Traffic 24.7 C
W Grand Avenue PM Signal 25.0 C
8. 8th Street at
C
AM 5 Traffic 8.2 A
W Grand Avenue PM Signal 10.0 B
9. 13th Street at
C
AM 5 Traffic 19.4 B
W Grand Avenue PM Signal 18.3 B
10. Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 6 Traffic 36.0 D
Grand Avenue PM Signal 36.7 D
11. Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM All-Way 11.4 B
Mentone Avenue PM Stop 17.2 C
12. S 4th Street at
C
AM All-Way 8.1 A
Farroll Road PM Stop 8.3 A
13. S 13th Street at
C
AM All-Way 10.7 B
Farroll Road PM Stop 11.6 B
14. Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM All-Way 11.2 B
Farroll Road PM Stop 12.1 B
15. Oak Park Boulevard/22nd Street at
C
AM All-Way 11.2 B
The Pike PM Stop 11.7 B
Notes:
LOS = Level of Service, please refer to Tables 1-1 and 1-2 for the LOS definitions s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay)
Bold Delay and LOS values indicate deficient service levels based on LOS standards Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
28 TABLE 3-2
EXISTING DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT LEVEL OF SERVICE SUMMARY Key Roadway Segment
Type of
Arterial
LOS E
Capacity7
(VPD) Lanes
Existing
Traffic Conditions
Daily
Volume
V/C
Ratio LOS
A. Saratoga Avenue, between
N 16th Street and N Oak Park Boulevard
Local 6,000 2U 1,685 0.281 A
B. N Oak Park Boulevard, between
Atlantic City Avenue and Saratoga Avenue
Minor 30,000 4U 19,507 0.650 B
C. N Oak Park Boulevard, between
Saratoga Avenue and Newport Avenue
Minor 30,000 4U 18,632 0.621 B
D. N Oak Park Boulevard, between
Newport Avenue and W Grand Avenue
Minor 30,000 4U 16,802 0.560 A
E. W Grand Avenue, between
Pacific Coast Highway and 4th Street Major 36,000 4D 10,108 0.281 A F. W Grand Avenue, between
8th Street and 13th Street Major 36,000 4D 13,005 0.361 A G. W Grand Avenue, between
13th Street and Oak Park Boulevard Major 36,000 4D 15,000 0.417 A H. S Oak Park Boulevard, between
Grand Avenue and Mentone Avenue
Minor 16,500 2D 11,941 0.724 C
I. Farroll Road, between
S 4th Street and S 13th Street
Collector 12,000 2U 5,291 0.441 A
J. Farroll Road, between
S 13th Street and S Oak Park Boulevard
Collector 12,000 2U 3,756 0.313 A
Notes:
VPD = Vehicles per Day
V/C = Volume over Capacity
LOS = Level of Service, please refer to Table 1-3 for the LOS definitions Bold V/C and LOS values indicate deficient service levels based on LOS standards 7 Source: City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element, dated August 2005.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
29 4.0 TRAFFIC FORECASTING METHODOLOGY
The traffic forecasting methodology for the General Plan Buildout traffic scenario has been developed utilizing the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments Regional Travel Demand Model (SLOCOG RTDM) based on the land uses of the City for the General Plan Buildout (Year 2045) scenarios as detailed in the 2022 Land Use Element. A list of projects that are either under construction or undergoing building permit review was provided by City staff. SLOCOG RTDM was reviewed to verify their inclusion.
Figure 4-1 shows the Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZ’s) within the City of Grover Beach as provided in the SLOCOG RTDM.
4.1 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
The General Plan Buildout traffic volumes were obtained by post-processing the future peak hour approach and departure traffic volumes based on the relationship of the base year validation model run output to the base year ground traffic counts and represent the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions utilizing the SLOCOG RTDM.
It should be noted that intersection and roadway segments volumes for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions may increase or decrease from Existing traffic conditions due to changes in land use, resulting in modifications to travel patterns.
Figures 4-2 and 4-3 present the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the fifteen (15) key study intersections, respectively. Figure 4-4 presents the General Plan Buildout average daily traffic volumes for the ten (10) key roadway segments.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
30 5.0 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
The relative impact of the General Plan Buildout during the daily and AM and PM peak hours was evaluated based on analysis of future operating conditions at the key study intersections and key roadway segments for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The previously discussed capacity analysis procedures were utilized to investigate the future service level characteristics at each study intersection. The relative operational deficiencies of the General Plan Buildout at each key intersection was then evaluated using the LOS standards defined in this report.
5.1 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Table 5-1 summarizes the AM and PM peak hour Level of Service results at the key study intersections for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The first column (1) of Delay and LOS values in Table 6-1 presents a summary of existing AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions (which were also presented in Table 3-1). The second column (2) lists forecast General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The third column (3) indicates whether the traffic associated with the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions will have a deficient LOS based on the LOS criteria mentioned in this report. The fourth column (4) indicates the anticipated operating conditions with implementation of recommended improvements.
Review of columns (2) and (3) of Table 5-1 indicates that one (1) of the fifteen (15) key study intersections are forecast to operate at a deficient LOS under the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions based on the LOS standards defined in this report. Although the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue and N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue are forecast to operate at unacceptable LOS D and F, respectively, during the PM peak hour, they do not meet a peak hour traffic signal warrant. The remaining key study intersections are forecast to continue operate at an acceptable LOS under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The locations projected to operate at a deficient LOS are as follows:
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Key Intersection Delay (s/v) LOS Delay (s/v) LOS
10. Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue 35.0 D 38.3 D
To supplement the level of service results as presented in Table 5-1, Figures 5-1 and 5-2 graphically present the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions level of service results for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
As shown in column (4) of Table 5-1, the implementation of recommended improvements at the one (1) deficient location improves the intersection to acceptable service levels.
Appendix C contains the Delay and LOS calculation worksheets for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
31 TABLE 5-1
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY Key Intersection
LOS
Standard
Time
Period
(1)
Existing
Traffic Conditions
(2)
General
Plan Buildout
Traffic Conditions
(3)
Operational
Deficiency
(4)
Operational
Deficiency
Delay
(s/v) LOS
Delay
(s/v) LOS Yes/No
Delay
(S/V) LOS
1. N 4th Street at
C
AM 23.8 C 22.0 C No -- --
Atlantic City Avenue PM 36.6 E 31.9 D No [a] -- --
2. N 12th Street at
C
AM 12.1 B 11.3 B No -- --
Atlantic City Avenue PM 12.6 B 13.0 B No -- --
3. N Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 21.0 C 23.5 C No -- --
Atlantic City Avenue PM 40.1 E 73.9 F No [a] -- --
4. N 13th Street at
C
AM 10.5 B 10.3 B No -- --
Saratoga Avenue PM 10.7 B 10.7 B No -- --
5. N Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 14.2 B 13.9 B No -- --
Saratoga Avenue PM 19.3 C 24.4 C No -- --
6. N Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 16.3 C 16.6 C No -- --
Newport Avenue PM 16.1 C 17.9 C No -- --
7. 4th Street at
C
AM 24.7 C 23.7 C No -- --
W Grand Avenue PM 25.0 C 24.1 C No -- --
8. 8th Street at
C
AM 8.2 A 8.0 A No -- --
W Grand Avenue PM 10.0 B 9.8 A No -- --
Notes:
LOS = Level of Service, please refer to Tables 1-1 and 1-2 for the LOS definitions s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay)
Bold Delay and LOS values indicate deficient service levels based on LOS standards [a] = Although the unsignalized intersection results in a deficient LOS, the intersection does not meet a traffic signal warrant due to low side-street traffic volumes.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
32 TABLE 5-1 (CONTINUED)
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY Key Intersection
LOS
Standard
Time
Period
(1)
Existing
Traffic Conditions
(2)
General
Plan Buildout
Traffic Conditions
(3)
Operational
Deficiency
(4)
Operational
Deficiency
Delay
(s/v) LOS
Delay
(s/v) LOS Yes/No
Delay
(S/V) LOS
9. 13th Street at
C
AM 19.4 B 18.9 B No -- --
W Grand Avenue PM 18.3 B 18.4 B No -- --
10. Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 36.0 D 35.0 D Yes 31.4 C
Grand Avenue PM 36.7 D 38.3 D Yes 33.6 C
11. Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 11.4 B 11.8 B No -- --
Mentone Avenue PM 17.2 C 19.5 C No -- --
12. S 4th Street at
C
AM 8.1 A 8.1 A No -- --
Farroll Road PM 8.3 A 9.1 A No -- --
13. S 13th Street at
C
AM 10.7 B 10.8 B No -- --
Farroll Road PM 11.6 B 14.0 B No -- --
14. Oak Park Boulevard at
C
AM 11.2 B 12.1 B No -- --
Farroll Road PM 12.1 B 14.9 B No -- --
15. Oak Park Boulevard/22nd Street at
C
AM 11.2 B 11.2 B No -- --
The Pike PM 11.7 B 13.8 B No -- --
Notes:
LOS = Level of Service, please refer to Tables 1-1 and 1-2 for the LOS definitions s/v = seconds per vehicle (delay)
Bold Delay and LOS values indicate deficient service levels based on LOS standards Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update, Grover Beach LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
33 5.2 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT ROADWAY SEGMENT CAPACITY ANALYSIS Table 5-2 summarizes the daily Level of Service results at the key study roadway segments for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The first column (1) of LOS E capacity values presents the daily roadway segment capacities from the City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element, dated August, 2005. The second column (2) lists the number of travel lanes under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions. The third column (3) indicates the Existing daily traffic volumes, Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio and the LOS of each roadway segment (which were also presented in Table 3-2). The fourth column (4) presents the General Plan Buildout daily traffic volumes, V/C ratio and the LOS of each roadway segment.
Review of column (4) of Table 5-2 indicates that all ten (10) key study roadway segments are forecast to continue to operate at an acceptable LOS under General Plan Buildout traffic conditions.
To supplement the level of service results as presented in Table 5-2, Figure 5-3 graphically presents the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions level of service results for the daily traffic volumes.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update, Grover Beach LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
34 TABLE 5-2
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS SUMMARY (1) (2) (3) (4)
Key Roadway Segment
Type of
Arterial
LOS E
Capacity8
(VPD) Lanes
Existing
Traffic Conditions
General Plan Buildout
Traffic Conditions
Daily
Volume
V/C
Ratio LOS
Daily
Volume
V/C
Ratio LOS
A. Saratoga Avenue, between
N 16th Street and N Oak Park Boulevard
Local 6,000 2U 1,685 0.281 A 1,685 0.281 A
B.
N Oak Park Boulevard, between
Atlantic City Avenue and Saratoga Avenue
Minor 30,000 4U 19,507 0.650 B 20,378 0.679 B
C.
N Oak Park Boulevard, between
Saratoga Avenue and Newport Avenue
Minor 30,000 4U 18,632 0.621 B 19,534 0.651 B
D.
N Oak Park Boulevard, between
Newport Avenue and W Grand Avenue
Minor 30,000 4U 16,802 0.560 A 17,710 0.590 A
E.
W Grand Avenue, between
Pacific Coast Highway and 4th Street Major 36,000 4D 10,108 0.281 A 12,836 0.357 A Notes:
VPD = Vehicles per Day
V/C = Volume over Capacity
LOS = Level of Service, please refer to Table 1-3 for the LOS definitions Bold V/C and LOS values indicate deficient service levels based on LOS standards 8 Source: City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element, dated August 2005.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update, Grover Beach LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
35 TABLE 5-2 (CONTINUED)
GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT DAILY ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS SUMMARY (1) (2) (3) (4)
Key Roadway Segment
Type of
Arterial
LOS E
Capacity9
(VPD) Lanes
Existing
Traffic Conditions
General Plan Buildout
Traffic Conditions
Daily
Volume
V/C
Ratio LOS
Daily
Volume
V/C
Ratio LOS
F.
W Grand Avenue, between
8th Street and 13th Street Major 36,000 4D 13,005 0.361 A 14,946 0.415 A G.
W Grand Avenue, between
13th Street and Oak Park Boulevard Major 36,000 4D 15,000 0.417 A 17,937 0.498 A H.
S Oak Park Boulevard, between
Grand Avenue and Mentone Avenue
Minor 16,500 2D 11,941 0.724 C 12,372 0.750 C
I.
Farroll Road, between
S 4th Street and S 13th Street
Collector 12,000 2U 5,291 0.441 A 5,913 0.493 A
J.
Farroll Road, between
S 13th Street and S Oak Park Boulevard Collector 12,000 2U 3,756 0.313 A 4,734 0.395 A Notes:
VPD = Vehicles per Day
V/C = Volume over Capacity
LOS = Level of Service, please refer to Table 1-3 for the LOS definitions Bold V/C and LOS values indicate deficient service levels based on LOS standards 9 Source: City of Grover Beach General Plan Circulation Element, dated August 2005.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
36 6.0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS
For this study, the need for signalization is assessed on the basis of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant; Warrant #3 described in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Warrant #3 has two parts: 1) Part A evaluates peak hour vehicle delay for traffic on the minor street approach with the highest delay and 2) Part B evaluates peak-hour traffic volumes on the major and minor streets. This method provides an indication of whether peak-hour traffic conditions or peak-hour traffic volume levels are, or would be, sufficient to justify installation of a traffic signal. Other traffic signal warrants are available; however, they cannot be checked under future conditions because they rely on data for which forecasts are not available (such as accidents, pedestrian volume, and four- or eight-hour vehicle volumes.
The decision to install a traffic signal should not be based purely on the warrants alone. Instead, the installation of a signal should be considered and further analysis performed when one or more of the warrants are satisfied. Additionally, engineering judgment is exercised on a case-by-case basis to evaluate the effect a traffic signal will have on certain types of accidents and traffic conditions at the subject intersection as well as at adjacent intersections.
6.1 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
The results of the peak-hour traffic signal warrant analysis for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions are summarized in column (1) of Table 6-1. The results indicate that the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue and N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue do not have future traffic conditions that would exceed the volume thresholds of Warrant #3, Part A or Part B for the AM or PM peak hours. Thus, a traffic signal is not recommended at these locations.
The Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis worksheets for the intersections of N 4th Street at Atlantic City Avenue and N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue are contained in Appendix D.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
37 TABLE 6-1
TRAFFIC SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Key Intersection
Time
Period
(1)
General
Plan Buildout
Traffic Conditions
Part A of
Warrant 3
Satisfied?
Part B of
Warrant 3
Satisfied?
1. N 4th Street at AM No No
Atlantic City Avenue PM No No
3. N Oak Park Boulevard at AM No No
Atlantic City Avenue PM No No
Notes:
Signal Warrant checks based on Warrant 3, Part A - Peak-Hour Delay Warrant and Part B - Peak-Hour Volume Warrant contained in the California MUTCD.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
38 7.0 ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS
As requested by the City of Grover Beach, an all-way stop control warrant assessment has been conducted at the following key study intersections:
3. N Oak Park Boulevard at Atlantic City Avenue
4. N 13th Street at Saratoga Avenue
6. N Oak Park Boulevard at Newport Avenue
This assessment is based on existing traffic volumes, current intersection lane geometrics and controls, and the all-way stop control criteria/guidelines contained in the most current California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA MUTCD).
This method provides an indication of whether daily traffic conditions are, or would be, sufficient to justify installation of an all-way stop control. The all-way stop control analysis is based on 24-hour daily traffic volumes collected at the key study intersections and detailed pedestrian/bicycle observations, as well as speed surveys to determine if an all-way stop is warranted. The data was collected by Counts Unlimited, Inc. in January 2026. Appendix E contains the count sheets for the key study intersections.
As noted above, this assessment is made based on the criteria/guidelines set forth in Sections 2B.12 through 2B. 17 of the CA MUTCD. The above-referenced manual lists five (5) warrants (i.e. Warrants A, B, C, D and E), which helps to determine the necessity of all-way stop control at an intersection.
Tables 8-1 through 8-3 provide a summary of the results for each of the applicable guidelines/criteria for each of the three (3) intersections. Figures 8-1 through 8-3 show the sight distance analysis for each of the three (3) intersections, as noted in Warrant B. Appendix E also contains the vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle totals for each of the three (3) intersections as noted in Warrant D.
A review of Tables 8-1 through 8-3 indicates that based on the existing traffic volumes, the existing pedestrian/bicycle data and current intersection lane geometrics, none of the criteria is satisfied. Therefore, based on the results of this analysis, it can be concluded that the installation of multi-way stop control is not justified at any of the three (3) intersections.
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
39 TABLE 7-1
N OAK PARK BOULEVARD AT ATLANTIC CITY AVENUE ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
40 TABLE 7-1 (CONTINUED)
N OAK PARK BOULEVARD AT ATLANTIC CITY AVENUE ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Comment
Low left-turn
conflicts
Traffic volumes
insufficient
Pedestrian and bike
volumes insufficient
A. The need to control left-turn conflicts,
B. An intersection of two residential neighborhood collector (through) streets of similar design and operating characteristics where all-way stop control would improve traffic operational characteristics of the intersection, or
Are any of the Criteria met? NO
MULTIWAY STOP WARRANT is NOT MET
Warrant E: Other Factors Yes/No (Y/N)
C. Where pedestrian and/or bicyclist movements support the installation of all-way stop control. NO
NO
NO
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
41 TABLE 7-2
N 13TH STREET AT SARATOGA AVENUE ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
42 TABLE 7-2 (CONTINUED)
N 13TH STREET AT SARATOGA AVENUE ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
43 TABLE 7-3
N OAK PARK BOULEVARD AT NEWPORT AVENUE ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Comment
Zero (0) crashes
reported in the last
12-months and zero
(0) crashes
susceptible to
correction in the last
36-months
N/A
Comment
Sight distance is
adequate
Comment
Traffic volumes
insufficient
Comment
Combined volumes
are greater than 300
units per hour for 16
hours
Combined volumes
are not greater than
200 units per hour
for any 8 hours
85th percentile
approach speed on
major street is 34
mph
--
NO
A. For a four-leg intersection, there are five or more reported crashes in a 12-month period or six or more reported crashes in a 36-month period that were of a type susceptible to correction by the installation of all-way stop control.
Warrant C: Transition to Signal Control or Transition to Yield Control at a Circulation Intersection Yes/No (Y/N)
All-way stop control may be installed at locations where all-way stop control is an interim measure that can be installed to control traffic while arrangements are being made for the installation of a traffic control signal at the intersection or for the installation of yield control at a circular intersection.
NO
Are Items A and B met, or is Item C met? NO
A. The combined motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian volume entering the intersection from the major-street approaches is at least 300 units per hour for each of any 8 hours of a typical day; and
YES
B. The combined motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian volume entering the intersection from the minor-street approaches is at least 200 units per hour for each of any of the same 8 hours.
NO
C. If the 85th-percentile approach speed of the major-street traffic exceeds 40 mph, the minimum vehicular volume warrants may be reduced to 70 percent of the values given in Items A and B.
NO
All-way stop control may be installed at an intersection where an engineering study indicates that sight distance on the minor-road approaches controlled by a STOP sign is not adequate for a vehicle to turn onto or cross the major (uncontrolled) road.
NO
Warrant D: 8-Hour Volume (Vehicles, Pedestrians, Bicycles) Yes/No (Y/N) B. For a three-leg intersection, there are four or more reported crashes in a 12-month period or five or more reported crashes in a 36-month period that were of a type susceptible to correction by the installation of all-way stop control.
NO
Warrant B: Sight Distance Yes/No (Y/N)
Warrant A: Crash Experience Yes/No (Y/N)
Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
44 TABLE 7-3 (CONTINUED)
N OAK PARK BOULEVARD AT NEWPORT AVENUE ALL-WAY STOP WARRANT ANALYSIS Linscott, Law & Greenspan, Engineers | Grover Beach Circulation Element Update LLG Ref. 2-24-4892-1
45 8.0 RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
For those intersections where projected traffic volumes are expected to result in unacceptable operating conditions, this report recommends improvement measures that change the intersection geometry to increase capacity. These capacity improvements may involve roadway widening and/or re-striping to reconfigure specific approaches of a key intersection. The identified improvements are expected to:
address the impact of existing traffic and future traffic, and improve Levels of Service to an acceptable range.
8.1 GENERAL PLAN BUILDOUT TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
8.1.1 INTERSECTIONS
The results of the intersection capacity analysis for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions indicate that one (1) of the key study intersections is forecast to operate at a deficient LOS based on the LOS standards defined in this report. The following are improvements recommended for General Plan Buildout traffic conditions:
Intersection 10. Oak Park Boulevard at Grand Avenue: Modify the existing traffic signal to provide northbound right-turn and southbound right-turn overlap phasing.
Figure 8-1 presents the recommended traffic improvements.
8.1.1 ROADWAY SEGMENTS
The results of the roadway segment analysis for the General Plan Buildout traffic conditions indicate that the ten (10) key study intersections are forecast to continue to operate at acceptable service levels. As there are no deficiencies, no traffic improvements are required under this traffic scenario.
2025 Circulation Element Update
Public Engagement Progress Summary
It is important that the City continue to maintain collaborative efforts with the community to ensure the amendments are transparent and easy to understand. Effective community engagement is essential in shaping the future of the City’s community development policies. To facilitate the public engagement process for the City’s Circulation Element Update and ensure a comprehensive and inclusive process, as of April 2025, the City conducted the following outreach initiatives:
Technical Advisory Group: On October 16, 2024, the City brought together regional agencies and organizations to provide input on the City’s Circulation Element Update, with a strong emphasis on safety, multimodal access, and regional coordination. Key themes from the discussion included alignment with the Road to Zero Program, prioritization of collision and Vehicle’s Miles Traveled (VMT) data analysis, enhancements to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, and planning for future mobility needs such as electric vehicles and evacuation scenarios.
Cal Poly Public Engagement: The City partnered with Cal Poly to conduct community outreach and assess existing transportation conditions. Through tabling events, a visioning workshop, a bike tour, and participation in local events, the students gathered valuable input from residents on travel habits, infrastructure concerns, and future priorities. This feedback will help inform policies and programs that reflect the community’s needs and support a safer, more connected transportation network.
Online Community Forum Survey: The City conducted an online survey from October 2024 through February 2025 to gather input from community members who were unable to attend in-person workshops, receiving 76 responses from a diverse cross-section of residents. Key concerns identified included poor pavement conditions, limited pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure, and excessive vehicle speeds at key intersections. The survey results highlighted a strong reliance on personal vehicles, but also demonstrated community interest in expanding safe, accessible options for walking, biking, and public transit.
FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSION
On October 16, 2024, the City convened a focus group meeting with various organizations and agencies to support the Circulation Element Update process. The purpose of the meeting was to foster collaboration and gather input on key aspects of the City's current and future circulation 2025 Circulation Element Update
strategies. Attendees were introduced to the scope, schedule, and objectives of the project, which aims to improve transit connectivity, street conditions, and multimodal access while aligning with regional transportation goals. The session served as an opportunity to discuss data collection methods, environmental review considerations, and innovative approaches to circulation planning. Participants engaged in a roundtable discussion to share insights on industry standards, regional consistency, and potential improvements.
Key Takeaways
SLO Council of Governments (SLOCOG): SLOCOG encourages the city to align its efforts in updating the Circulation Element with the goals of the Road to Zero Program, aiming to eliminate regional traffic fatalities and serious injuries by 2050. The city should prioritize a thorough analysis of VMT and collision data to better understand and address these issues.
Additionally, it is essential to focus on improving mode share and to review licensed replica data regarding commuting patterns across the 5 Cities area and to the City of SLO.
The Circulation Element should reflect the vision set forth in the Regional Transportation Plan and Improvement Program by addressing the following key areas:
• Congestion management
• Infrastructure enhancement
• Safety goals and objectives
• Targets for reducing preventable collisions
• Strategies for increasing mode share
Department of Transportation – CalTrans: Caltrans supports SLOCOG's emphasis on prioritizing the Road to Zero program, asserting that safety must be a central focus in the update of the Circulation Element. Policies and programs should be proactive, addressing not only immediate safety concerns but also post-crash care. The city should aim to create complete streets that accommodate all modes of transportation and establish a local road safety program.
Additionally, the city should monitor Caltrans' maintenance project schedules and coordinate transportation improvements with these plans. This approach will enhance interagency collaboration and maximize shared funding opportunities.
For bicycle infrastructure, the city should prioritize low-stress improvements to enhance safety and consider best practices from the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide. Furthermore, developing a travel demand model that incorporates mode share opportunities, similar to Santa Maria’s recent initiative, would be beneficial.
2025 Circulation Element Update
Caltrans is also open to exploring options for improving pedestrian crossings along Highway 1, enhancing safety for all users.
Air Pollution Control Department (APCD): The City’s Circulation Element should incorporate policies and programs that address micromobility options, such as electric bikes and scooters, as well as autonomous vehicles. This includes implementing improved striping and marking to enhance recognition by autonomous vehicles. The city should also review best management practices from other jurisdictions, including San Jose and Santa Clara.
With the projected growth of electric vehicles (EVs)—expected to reach 5 million on the road by 2030 and with all new vehicles being electric by 2035—the Circulation Element must prioritize infrastructure to support this shift. This includes increasing the number of EV charging stations and expanding charging capacity throughout the city. Additionally, integrating more Reach Code initiatives into the City’s Development Code can further enhance EV infrastructure; resources such as the ICLEI list of Reach Code recommendations can provide valuable guidance in this effort.
California State Parks: State Parks has been gathering data on access to Pismo Beach State Park from Highway 1 and West Grand Avenue. This information will be shared with the City to support the development of policies and programs aimed at enhancing access to the State Park.
Bike SLO County: The Circulation Element should include policies and programs that focus on bicycle and pedestrian crash and violation data to enhance safety. The city's wide streets contribute to increased vehicle speeds, so policies must incorporate traffic calming measures to protect cyclists and pedestrians. Additionally, the city should identify opportunities to develop new Class 1 bike infrastructure and evaluate potential improvements for all four classes of bike facilities throughout the area. Providing educational materials to schools is also essential for informing students about safe routes to school.
Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR): UPRR indicated that they are unlikely to support new at-grade crossings. Instead, any pedestrian or bicycle crossings should be designed as overpasses where feasible. UPRR acknowledges the importance of enhancing safety for pedestrians and cyclists and is actively collaborating with communities across the Central Coast to improve existing infrastructure for the safety of all users.
2025 Circulation Element Update
SLO County Office of Emergency Services (OES): The Circulation Element should be updated to align with PG&E's latest Evacuation Planning initiatives. This alignment will help identify transportation improvements aimed at reducing congestion during evacuation scenarios.
CAL POLY OUTREACH
As part of the Circulation Element Update, the City partnered with the Cal Poly City and Regional Planning Studio to support
public engagement and help assess
existing transportation conditions
throughout the city. From Fall 2024 to
Spring 2025, the Studio conducted a
series of outreach events that
engaged residents through a variety of
creative and interactive methods.
These efforts provided valuable
insight into travel patterns,
transportation preferences, and safety
concerns, helping shape communityinformed policies and programs for the Circulation Element.
Existing Conditions Tabling Events: On October 14, 2024, the Studio hosted citywide outreach at four public locations: Grover Heights Park, 16th Street Park, Vons Grocery Store, and Julie’s Juice Bar. These sites were selected for their high foot traffic and ability to reach a broad crosssection of the community. At each location, students facilitated two interactive activities designed to gather meaningful feedback on how people navigate the city and where key concerns exist.
• Dot Activity: Residents were asked to select from eight common destinations in and around Grover Beach and indicate which modes of transportation they used to reach them. Each participant received three dots to place next to their preferred destinations and modes—driving, walking, biking, or public transportation. Results showed that Vons, the beach, and local parks were among the most frequently visited locations. Driving was the dominant mode of travel, followed by walking and biking, with transit usage being the least common.
Figure 1: Overview of the Community Outreach Timeline
2025 Circulation Element Update
• Map Activity: Residents were invited to mark-up a large map of the city with sticky notes, markers, and stickers to indicate specific transportation challenges or opportunities. Common themes included the need for sidewalk expansion, concerns over unprotected bike lanes, and safety issues at high-traffic intersections. One particularly concerning location identified was the intersection of Oak Park Boulevard and the US-101 offramp, noted for both visibility issues and nearby encampments.
Participants also cited stormwater drainage problems and limited pedestrian crossings, particularly on key arterials like West Grand Avenue and 4th Street.
Trunk or Treat: Cal Poly also participated in the Grover Beach Annual Trunk or Treat event on October 31, 2024. This popular family-friendly event, co-hosted by the Grover Beach Rotary Club, allowed students to engage with children and their parents through a transportation-themed activity.
Cal Poly’s booth featured a decorated “trunk” with
transportation-related games and candy giveaways. A
ring toss activity asked children to identify the
transportation mode they use most to get to and from
school, prompting conversations about school commute
safety and habits. In addition to in-person engagement, handouts were distributed with a QR code linking to a
commute survey designed to gather input from parents
and older students. This event provided a unique
opportunity to reach families and younger residents in a relaxed, festive environment.
Figure 2: Images of students during the tabling event.
Figure 3: Trunk or Treat event.
2025 Circulation Element Update
Visioning Workshop: On November 19, 2024, the Studio hosted a Visioning Workshop at the Ramona Garden Park Community Center. The goal was to give residents the opportunity to shape a collective vision for the future of transportation in Grover Beach through guided group activities.
The workshop began with an overview of the Circulation Element Update’s purpose, followed by breakout sessions at four tables, each led by a student facilitator. City planning staff were also present to assist and answer questions.
Participants completed three structured activities:
1. Visioning Statements: Using a Mad Libs-style worksheet, participants created statements that reflected their aspirations for Grover Beach’s transportation future. Common themes included safety, improved connectivity, infrastructure maintenance, and a desire for more pedestrian- and bike-friendly development.
2. Walking & Biking Discussion: This activity asked participants to share thoughts on alternative transportation. Participants noted sidewalk gaps, unsafe or missing crossings, poor lighting, and the need for protected bike lanes. While many supported the idea of walking and biking more often, infrastructure limitations were cited as major deterrents.
3. Driving & Parking Discussion: Attendees
discussed current traffic issues and ideas
for improvement. Suggestions included
more speed enforcement, flashing
pedestrian lights, and enhanced traffic
calming measures on residential streets.
This workshop helped clarify the community’s
transportation priorities and demonstrated strong
public support for improving non-vehicular
mobility options and overall roadway safety.
Open House Event: On February 12, 2025, the Studio hosted an open house, also at the Ramona Garden Park Community Center. The event showcased seven poster stations presenting draft policy and program ideas tied to key transportation themes:
Safe Streets | Pedestrian Infrastructure | Safe Routes to School | Bike Infrastructure | Roadway Systems | Green Infrastructure | Micromobility Figure 4: Students and community
members at the Visioning Workshop
2025 Circulation Element Update
Participants were issued a “passport” with one section for each topic. At each station, attendees discussed proposals with students and provided feedback using a simple system: circling a rose (liked), thorn (disliked), or rose bud (neutral or mixed). They could also add written comments or questions to their handouts.
Additionally, participants filled out themed
“Valentine’s Day” cards based on their favorite
transportation mode. Each card included a
playful phrase (e.g., “I choo choo choose you” for
train travel) and space to write a short message.
These cards were posted on a wall display titled
“Show Your Love for Grover Beach.” The train
card received the most responses, with
participants praising the convenience and
comfort of rail travel.
This event encouraged meaningful one-on-one conversations, lighthearted engagement, and thoughtful input on proposed circulation policies.
Bike Tour: To further explore the city’s biking environment, the Studio organized a community bike tour on March 1, 2025, in partnership with Bike SLO County. The tour began and ended at Ramona Garden Park, with stops at key locations including Vons, Mentone Basin Park, Grover Beach Elementary, and the 4th & Grand Avenue intersection.
At each stop, participants discussed both strengths and weaknesses of the biking infrastructure. Observations
included a lack of protected bike lanes, difficulty navigating busy intersections, and inconsistent signage. However,
participants also noted the city’s compact layout and flat terrain as advantages for cycling, if safety improvements were made.
The bike tour was instrumental in collecting firsthand user experience and emphasized the need for low-stress bike routes and better connectivity across neighborhoods and commercial areas.
Figure 4: Show your love for Grover
Beach Open House Poster
Figure 5: Bike Tour Event
2025 Circulation Element Update
ONLINE COMMUNITY FORUM SURVEY
Staff prepared and distributed an online survey on the City’s website to solicit public input on specific amendments to the code, offering respondents an opportunity to provide direct feedback and share additional opportunities for improvements.
The online survey serves as an important tool for community engagement for those who were unable to attend and provide feedback at the community workshops. The survey was designed to gather a well-rounded understanding of how community members travel within and beyond Grover Beach, as well as their priorities and concerns related to mobility.
In addition to collecting demographic information and household driving habits, the survey invited respondents to share what they like about getting around the city, their top concerns, and the types of infrastructure they would like to see more of—such as pedestrian, bicycle, or transit facilities. Residents were asked to identify specific intersections that feel unsafe for pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers, and to explain why. The survey also explored transportation behaviors, including frequency of car, bicycle, and public transit use, as well as commute patterns and parking challenges. An open-ended question allowed participants to share any additional thoughts about their experiences navigating the city. Overall, the survey served as a key tool for engaging those unable to attend in-person events and helped collect meaningful, location-specific input to inform future circulation improvements.
Participants: The online survey garnered 76 responses, with 94% of respondents confirming residency in the City of Grover Beach. Respondents represented a range of age groups, with approximately 13% under the age of 34, 20% between ages 35 and 44, 16% between 45 and 54, and 50% aged 55 and older.
Question: What are your top concerns with getting around in the City? Among a range of responses, these five issues emerged as the top concerns that survey participants most commonly agreed with regarding mobility in Grover Beach. A majority (61.84%) identified potholes and pavement quality as a primary issue, followed closely by concerns about inadequate pedestrian infrastructure (56.58%). Speeding vehicles were flagged by 47.37% of respondents, while 39.47% pointed to poor visibility of bike lanes and crosswalks while driving. Additionally, 31.58% expressed concern about the lack of dedicated bike lanes and cycling infrastructure. While other concerns were also noted in the survey, these five stood out as the most consistently cited across participants. 2025 Circulation Element Update
Question: What intersection in Grover Beach makes you feel the least safe as a pedestrian/cyclist/driver?
Survey respondents identified several intersections in Grover Beach where they feel the least safe as pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. The most frequently mentioned locations included W Grand Avenue at 4th Street, W Grand Avenue at Oak Park Boulevard, 13th Street at Farroll Road, and N Oak Park Boulevard at Saratoga Avenue. Cyclists additionally flag W Grand Avenue and Highway 1, while drivers expressed concern about the Atlantic City Avenue area. Across all modes of travel, the most commonly cited reason for feeling unsafe was excessive vehicle speeds. These responses highlight the need for targeted safety improvements at key intersections throughout the city.
Question: Do you experience any parking challenges in the City? In response to the question about parking challenges in Grover Beach, most participants indicated that parking is generally not an issue throughout the city. Respondents noted that they are typically able to find parking near their destinations without significant difficulty. This suggests that, while mobility and infrastructure improvements are a priority, parking availability is not currently perceived as a major concern by the community.
Question: How long is your commute to work or school?
Survey responses indicated a wide range of commute times among participants. Approximately 21% reported a commute of less than 15 minutes, while 24% commute between 15 and 30 minutes, and 17% between 30 and 45 minutes. Only 1.5% of respondents have a commute longer than 45 minutes. Notably, the largest group (36% of participants) reported working from home, reflecting a significant portion of residents with no daily commute.
Question: What type of infrastructure would you like to see more of? When asked what type of infrastructure they would like to see more of, participants most commonly requested improved bicycle infrastructure and raised, high-visibility crosswalks to enhance safety. Additional feedback highlighted the need for more continuous and accessible sidewalks, improved ADA compliance, and a safe pedestrian crossing over the railroad to access the Monarch Grove. Some respondents also expressed interest in more frequent and reliable bus service to better support transit users.
2025 Circulation Element Update
Question: How frequently do you use public transit/car/bicycle? Survey results show that the vast majority of respondents rely on their personal vehicles as their primary mode of transportation, with most using a car daily or several times a week. In contrast, public transit is used infrequently, with nearly all participants reporting they use it less than once a month. Bicycle use varied more widely, while over half reported riding less than once a month, a notable portion indicated they bike regularly, with some using a bike daily or several times a week. These patterns reflect a strong dependence on car travel, with limited but present interest in active and alternative transportation.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the City has demonstrated its commitment to transparency and community engagement throughout the process of Circulation Element Update. The feedback received will directly inform updates to the Circulation Element, ensuring that policies and programs reflect local priorities, align with regional goals, and support long-term mobility improvements for all users. Moving forward, the City remains dedicated to fostering an inclusive and comprehensive approach that reflects the values and aspirations of the Grover Beach community.