San Luis Obispo City Council
February 4, 2025

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
45 2025-27
Financial
Plan
Procurement 2.9 – Include an explicit reference to the City’s standing Socially Responsible Investment Policy in the Investment Policy and Management Plan (Finance).

Procurement 2.10 – Analyze industry best practices for including Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions within the scope of a municipal greenhouse gas inventory (Administration).
2027-29
Financial
Plan
Procurement 3.1 – Establish measurement performance reports of spend categories identified in Procurement Action 2.3 (Finance).

Procurement 3.2 – Begin to evaluate, model, and track Scope 3 emissions to support decision-making in the subsequent Lead by Example planning document (Administration).

Procurement Sector Emissions
The Procurement, Budget, and Finance sector is associated with indirect emissions not quantified as part of the 2025 LBE. Any emission reductions that will occur via implementation of emission reduction actions will either be counted as part of another sector’s quantified emissions, or they will fall under indirect emissions and are not currently quantified. The City recognizes the importance of taking action within the procurement, budget, and finance sector, especially given the opportunity to “lead by example” and implement highly replicable and scalable measures.

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
46 3.8 Administrative
Actions
In addition to the sector specific actions in Chapter 3, the City commits to the following administrative actions to ensure active and effective implementation of Lead by Example.  Administrative Action 1: Lead by Example Update
The City will update Lead by Example every four years (concurrent with every other Financial Plan). The City will synch the update with the community Climate Action Plan so that each plan is updated in an alternating fashion concurrent with every Financial Plan.  Administrative Action 2: Plan Monitoring and Reporting The City will monitor and report implementation to City Council on a regular basis.  Administrative Action 3: Secondary Emissions
The City will evaluate the feasibility of including direct emissions from the treatment of wastewater and Scope 3 emissions from City operations in the subsequent Lead by Example inventory and planning document.
 Administrative Action 4: Sustainable Decision Making
The City will continue integrating climate action into decision making processes including:
o Develop guidance for report writers to include Climate Action and Sustainability consistency sections in certain reports (e.g., Council Agenda Reports, City Manager Reports, etc.).
o Continuing and enhancing CIP evaluations processes to ensure Lead by Example alignment.
 Administrative Action 5: Statewide Advocacy
The City, through the legislative platform, participation in statewide city networks, and direct regulatory and legislative advocacy, among other things, will advocate for conditions under which Lead by Example can be successfully implemented.

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
47 4. ACHIEVING OUR GOALS
The table below provides the actions required to achieve the estimated 85% reduction in emissions by 2030 and to keep the City on a trajectory to carbon neutrality. The table includes the action number, action description, responsible departments, and the planned initiation period. Under the Responsible Department(s) column, departments that are bolded are the primary lead for implementation and those that are not bolded have been identified as having a supportive role. Tasks requiring more than staff time and that are scheduled for 2025–27 or 2027–29 will need City Council approval to be funded and/or included in their respective financial plans.

Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Energy
Energy 1.1 Continue to strategically replace fossil fuel equipment across all City buildings and facilities. Public Works, Administration Ongoing
Energy 1.2 Continue ongoing efficiency improvements as part of routine maintenance across City facilities. Public Works Ongoing Energy 1.3
Continue to leverage external funding including Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) rebates, federal tax incentives, and more to cost-effectively implement building energy projects that support the City’s goals.

Administration Ongoing
Energy 2.1
Complete priority electrification projects at the (1) Swim Center, (2) Ludwick Community Center, (3) Corporation Yard, and (4) City Hall, alongside the remaining energy saving lighting efficiency retrofits across all facilities through the PG&E Sustainable Solutions Turnkey (SST) Program.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27
Energy 2.2 Add solar and battery storage, where feasible, to City facilities to increase the generation of local renewable electricity, reduce the City’s energy demand, and save money.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27
Energy 2.3 Assess the feasibility of launching a facility-wide energy management software (See Water 2.9).

Administration,
Public Works,
Utilities
2025-27
Energy 2.4 Consider "opting up" to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) Prime to receive 100% renewable energy.

Administration,
Utilities 2025-27
Energy 2.5
Develop a green municipal building and facility policy to require that: 1) new buildings and facilities are allelectric, 2) fossil fuel equipment at the end of its useful life is replaced with an electric alternative, 3) municipal facility construction and retrofit projects above a certain valuation remove fossil fuels in the facility, and 4) funding would be identified to help offset the cost of electric alternatives. As part of the policy development process, identify a process for approving reasonable exemptions.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
48 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Energy 3.1 Complete the priority electrification, solar, and battery storage projects identified in Energy 2.1 and 2.2. Public Works, Administration 2027-29
Energy 3.2 If the City pursues Energy 2.4, continue to "opt-up" to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) Prime to receive 100% renewable energy.

Administration,
Utilities 2027-29
Energy 3.3 Design and implement hard-to-reach facility retrofits to strategically replace natural gas equipment across buildings and facilities.

Public Works,
Administration 2027-29
Energy 3.4 Analyze, and if feasible, coordinate City solar and battery assets as a “Virtual Power Plant” to save money on electricity and reduce peak demand. Administration 2027-29 Fleet
Fleet 1.1 Convene quarterly meetings of the Interdepartmental EV Fleet Charger Deployment Team to track and report progress on infrastructure build out. Administration Ongoing Fleet 1.2 Convene an initial meeting of regional fleet managers for purpose of sharing and learning best practices for fleet electrification. Administration Ongoing
Fleet 1.3 Establish standard protocols for maximizing IRS elective pay, 3CE, and APCD grant funds and submit refunds for 2025-27.

Administration,
Finance Ongoing
Fleet 2.1
Consistent with the City’s fleet replacement policy, purchase only all-electric light duty vehicles and purchase at least half all-electric medium and heavy-duty vehicles as required by California’s Advanced Clean Fleet regulation.

Public Works, Fire,
Utilities 2025-27
Fleet 2.2
Amend the City’s fleet replacement policy to require that any new vehicle purchased after July 1, 2025, should be all-electric, with exemptions available for short-term leases and where there are no reasonable electric alternatives available on the market.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27
Fleet 2.3
Deploy the 2025-27 fleet charging infrastructure projects as outlined in the City of SLO EV Infrastructure Project Schedule while also regularly evaluating opportunities for innovation and increased system efficiency.

Public Works,
Administration 2025-27
Fleet 2.4 Initiate PG&E EV Fleet program participation at sites with anticipated heavy duty electric vehicles for purpose of upgrading “front of meter” site infrastructure at no cost to the City. Administration 2025-27 Fleet 2.5 Continue to only purchase electric transit fleet vehicles; only continue to operate diesel buses so long as they contribute to reduced community VMT.

Public Works 2025-27
Fleet 2.6 Replace fossil fuel landscape and maintenance equipment with all-electric alternatives on burn out/end of useful life, or sooner as resources allow.

Public Works,
Parks & Recreation 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
49 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Fleet 2.7 Revisit Lawn and Garden Request for Proposals in 2026 to prioritize the use of electric battery-powered equipment and apply similar amendments to other contracted landscaping services RFPs as applicable.

Public Works,
Finance 2025-27
Fleet 2.8 Conduct a telematics pilot to support efficient vehicle operation. Utilities 2025-27 Fleet 2.9 Monitor SGIP and other funding sources to identify potential low-cost battery storage opportunities to supplement diesel generators. Administration 2025-27
Fleet 2.10 For employees who take fleet vehicles home, conduct research on take-home EV charging reimbursement program/policy and if feasible, conduct an initial pilot. Administration 2025-27 Fleet 3.1 Amend the City’s fleet replacement policy to require all new equipment purchases to be all-electric, with reasonable exemptions where electric alternatives are not practically available for purchase.

Public Works, Fire,
Utilities 2027-29
Fleet 3.2 Deploy the 2027-29 fleet charging infrastructure projects as outlined in the City of SLO EV Infrastructure Project Schedule.

Public Works,
Administration 2027-29
Fleet 3.3 Continue to only purchase electric transit fleet vehicles and identify resources to transition the remaining diesel-powered buses to electric by 2030. Public Works 2027-29 Fleet 3.4 Continue to replace fossil fuel landscape and maintenance equipment with all-electric alternatives. Public Works, Parks & Recreation 2027-29
Fleet 3.5 Update contracted landscaping services RFPs to require electric battery-powered equipment. Public Works, Finance 2027-29
Fleet 3.6 If feasible and beneficial, scale telematics to support efficient vehicle operation across the fleet. Utilities, Public Works 2027-29
Fleet 3.7
If feasible and beneficial, implement take-home fleet vehicle policy that enables the transition to electric vehicles and supports household charging. Administration 2027-29 Commute
Commute 1.1 Create and maintain a centralized digital hub on SharePoint under employee benefits that hosts all information related to mobility, programs, and the City’s goals.

Human Resources,
Public Works,
Administration
Ongoing
Commute 2.1 Launch a year-long campaign focused on low-carbon employee commutes with the goal of 50% of total City employees logging at least one sustainable commute on iRideShare each month.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27
Commute 2.2 Incorporate Employee Commute goals and supportive programs into the onboarding process and Day of Welcome. Human Resources 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
50 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Commute 2.3 Encourage employees to participate in sub-regional carpools and vanpools and provide supportive infrastructure for employee carpools.

Human Resources,
Administration,
Public Works
2025-27
Commute 2.4 Update the Downtown Access Pass to better serve all City employees and enable transfers to SLO Regional Transit Authority buses for regional employees.

Public Works,
Administration 2025-27
Commute 2.5 Evaluate and if feasible provide discounted charging rates for employees at public-facing City-owned electric vehicle charging stations.

Public Works,
Administration 2025-27
Commute 2.6 Explore the feasibility of creating a parking pass cash out incentive for employees that opt-out of having a City-funded parking pass.

Human Resources,
Public Works,
Administration
2025-27
Commute 3.1 Organize another year-long campaign focused on low-carbon employee commutes in 2028 with the goal of 75% of total City employees logging at least one sustainable commute on iRideShare each month.

Administration,
Public Works 2027-29
Commute 3.2 Evaluate staff commute habits and reevaluate strategic approach to achieving sector objectives.

Administration,
Public Works,
Human Resources
2027-29
Waste
Waste 1.1 Use periodic surveys, employee networking, Green Team participation, and attendance at City committee meetings to cultivate support for waste reduction among City employees.

Utilities Ongoing
Waste 1.2 Conduct periodic waste characterization studies and audits of City containers to monitor changes in waste composition, program success, and to identify new diversion opportunities. Utilities Ongoing Waste 1.3 Promote and support regional and state legislation developing infrastructure to increase resource recovery efforts. Utilities Ongoing
Waste 1.4
Encourage staff to utilize developed waste reduction programs such as the Reusable Food ware Program, Sustainable Meeting/Event Checklist, Paper Procurement Policy, Surplus Policy, and Sustainable Purchasing Policy.

Utilities Ongoing
Waste 2.1 Reduce paper waste by eliminating paper filing systems and electronically receive and review building and demolition plans.

Community
Development 2025-27
Waste 2.2 Identify replicable waste reduction and diversion practices and promote best practices to businesses in the community. Utilities 2025-27
Waste 2.3 Evaluate and amend City landscape maintenance, custodial, and tree trimming contracts to continue to require landfill diversion of City generated green waste and recyclable materials.

Public Works,
Utilities, Finance 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
51 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Waste 2.4
Identify recycling and/or reuse opportunities for items such as glass lab specimen bottles at the Wastewater Resource Recovery Facility, staplers, markers, compostable plastics, film plastics, latex gloves, and candy/snack wrappers.

Utilities 2025-27
Waste 2.5
Continuously assess City facilities for waste stream contamination issues and implement relevant waste container and signage improvements. Update rental facility recycling guidelines to include detailed program instructions and downloadable temporary signage.

Utilities 2025-27
Waste 2.6 Identify ways to recover clean paper towel waste generated in City restrooms. Utilities 2025-27 Waste 2.7 Utilize volunteers for recycling outreach at public events, social media content creation, videography, diversion data analysis, waste characterization studies, and municipal waste reduction initiatives. Utilities 2025-27 Waste 3.1 Redesign office waste receptacle system to promote higher diversion and lower waste generation. Utilities 2027-29 Waste 3.2 Advocate and support statewide packaging and product design policies that encourage items to be repairable, reusable, fully recyclable/compostable, and less toxic. Utilities 2027-29 Waste 3.3 Create a “Waste Reduction Lifestyle” program for employee participation and attend networking/support meetings. Utilities 2027-29
Waste 3.4 Support and foster efforts to increase the types of materials recoverable at the Materials Recovery Facility and augment source separated recycling program accordingly. Utilities 2027-29 Waste 3.5 Initiate the discussion on creating better recycling efforts and collection in City parks.

Utilities, Public
Works, Parks &
Recreation
2027-29
Water
Water 1.1 Continue to encourage a culture of innovation in the Utilities Department by integrating innovation into the staff goal setting and performance evaluation process. Utilities Ongoing Water 1.2 Establish regular cross-division Water and Wastewater meetings to encourage better teamwork, innovation, and strategic planning. Utilities Ongoing
Water 2.1
Continue to reduce inflow and infiltration into the wastewater collection system through capital replacement of gravity sewer mains and private sewer lateral programs, resulting in less wastewater to pump and treat.

Utilities 2025-27
Water 2.2 Explore on-site energy generation opportunities at the Water Treatment Plant while continuing to invest in efficiency. Utilities 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
52 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Water 2.3
Complete the Water Treatment Plant Infrastructure Renewal Strategy, which shall include short-term (0-5 year) actions and capital projects to optimize facility operations and reduce average and peak energy demands.

Utilities 2025-27
Water 2.4 Develop and utilize tools to optimize water resources to reduce capital expenditures and energy associated with transmission and treatment. Utilities 2025-27 Water 2.5
Initiate a leak detection program to increase efficiency and reduce water loss using hydraulic modeling and implement a smart water meter program to detect and correct leaks (and reduce emissions from manual meter reading.

Utilities 2025-27
Water 2.6
Continue to optimize and explore the expansion of onsite energy generation at the Water Resource Recovery Facility to reduce external energy demand and subsequent electricity purchases through an investment grade audit (IGA or similar assessment program).

Utilities 2025-27
Water 2.7 Study pretreatment options in the wastewater collections system to reduce energy demands at the Water Resource Recovery Facility. Utilities 2025-27
Water 2.8 Explore the potential for accepting additional waste streams at the WRRF to reduce regional transportation emissions and increase onsite energy production. Utilities 2025-27 Water 2.9 Collaborate across departments to develop a City-wide power monitoring platform to increase data collection and decision-making abilities (see Energy 2.3).

Utilities,
Administration 2025-27
Water 2.10 Explore natural treatment solutions to augment treatment performance and reduce energy requirements in collaboration with California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Utilities 2025-27 Water 2.11 Support a regional biosolids cooperative to enable beneficial uses of biosolids in local markets and landscapes (see Natural Solutions 2.11).

Utilities,
Administration 2027-29
Water 3.1 Continue to optimize onsite energy generation at the Water Resource Recovery Facility to reduce external energy demand and subsequent electricity purchases. Utilities 2027-29 Water 3.2 Research commercially available technology that could reduce emissions from the combustion of biogas at the WRRF, and plan for implementation of a linear co-generator if feasible. Utilities 2027-29 Water 3.3 Continue to implement the Water Treatment Plant Infrastructure Renewal Strategy’s short-term actions and capital projects. Utilities 2027-29
Water 3.4 Reduce the irrigation of non-functional turf to reduce the demand for potable water treatment. Utilities 2027-29 Natural Solutions

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
53 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Natural
Solutions 1.1
Convene an interdepartmental staff team to assess, strategize, and implement 10 Tall with representation from Office of Sustainability and Natural Resources, Community Development, Public Works Parks Maintenance, Ranger Services, and Utilities.

Administration,
Community
Development, Public
Works, Parks &
Recreation
Ongoing
Natural
Solutions 1.2
Assess open space maintenance and vegetation management needs amid changing climate hazards and allocate sufficient resources to enable community adaptation and ecosystem resilience.

Administration,
Parks & Recreation,
Fire
Ongoing
Natural
Solutions 2.1
Actively pursue opportunities to purchase open space lands and permanent land conservation agreements in furtherance of the City's Greenbelt Protection Program. Administration 2025-27 Natural
Solutions 2.2 Implement the Community Forest Plan and operate a robust tree planting and maintenance program.

Community
Development,
Public Works, Parks
& Recreation,
Administration
2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.3 Ensure that the City’s tree inventory is accurate and integrates trees planted by key external stakeholders.

Community
Development,
Public Works, Parks
& Recreation,
Administration
2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.4
Work with community partners to reach the 10 Tall goal of planting 10,000 new trees by 2035. Coordinate 10 Tall community tree giveaways to support tree planting on private property.

Community
Development,
Administration
2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.5
Establish autonomous backcountry tree watering infrastructure to better support the establishments of newly planted trees in City Open Space.

Parks &
Recreation,
Administration
2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.6
Analyze the lifecycle of urban street trees and explore the feasibility of an urban wood reuse program and a large woody biomass solution such as biochar.

Community
Development,
Administration
2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.7
Continue to advance Open Space restoration efforts that sequester carbon among other co-benefits, including restoring wetlands, installing riparian beaver dam analogs, applying compost and biochar to grasslands, and reviving Traditional Ecological Knowledge.

Administration 2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.8
Expand high-intensity short-duration grazing and evaluate the feasibility of establishing a year-round goat and sheep flock. Administration 2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.9
Implement the Vegetative Fuels Management Plan to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire and preserve existing carbon stocks in the Greenbelt.

Fire, Administration,
Parks & Recreation 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
54 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Natural
Solutions 2.10
Maximize the use of regional anaerobic digester compost for landscape management operations and other municipal uses.

Public Works,
Utilities 2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.11
In collaboration with the IWMA, expand the application of regional anaerobic digester compost and/or biosolids on private and agricultural lands (see Water 2.11).

Utilities,
Administration 2025-27
Natural
Solutions 2.12
Establish formal partnerships and processes to continue to bring rigorous evidence-based research, monitoring, and scientific study to Natural Solutions projects within the City and the Greenbelt. Administration 2025-27 Natural
Solutions 3.1
Purchase open space lands and permanent land conservation agreements in furtherance of the City's Greenbelt Protection Program. Administration 2027-29
Natural
Solutions 3.2 Continue making progress on the 10 Tall goals.

Community
Development,
Public Works, Parks
& Recreation,
Administration
2027-29
Natural
Solutions 3.3
Leverage best practices in satellite imagery technology to better track the status of the City’s canopy coverage and develop specific metrics for measuring the health and growth of the urban forest.

Community
Development,
Administration
2027-29
Natural
Solutions 3.4
Continue to advance restoration efforts in City Open Space that sequester carbon and increase climate resilience, among other co-benefits. Administration 2027-29 Natural
Solutions 3.5 Implement and scale the Natural Solutions actions evaluated and studied in 2025-27 Financial Plan. Administration 2027-29 Procurement
Procurement

1.1 Pursue grant funding, government incentives, rebates, tax credits and other external funding to further Lead by Example actions. Administration Ongoing
Procurement

1.2 Adhere to the Socially Responsible Investments policy and integrate environmental, social, and governance (ESG factors into the City’s investment portfolio and review the ESG risk rating of the portfolio on a quarterly basis.

Finance Ongoing
Procurement

1.3 Support the forthcoming cross-departmental Purchasing Working Group to educate purchasing leads and institutionalize sustainable purchasing decisions consistent with City policies.

Finance,
Administration Ongoing
Procurement

1.4 Participate in regional and state level networks to learn best practices and collaborate on sustainable purchasing policies and programs applicable to decentralized purchasing organizations.

Finance,
Administration Ongoing
Procurement

2.1 Continue identifying, developing, and implementing ways to align the City’s Capital Improvement Program with Council-adopted climate goals.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27

CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO LEAD BY EXAMPLE
55 Action Description Responsible
Departments
Planned
Initiation
Procurement

2.2 Update and advance a climate and equity budgeting approach for the 2025-27 Financial Plan through the CIP steering committee. Amend the City’s Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards and CIP manual to promote consistency with Council-adopted climate goals. Include standard language for apprenticeships for CIP projects that want to take advantage of Federal Tax Rebate adders.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27
Procurement

2.3 Update Section 202 of the City’s Purchasing Policy through the Purchasing Working Group to establish spend categories for goods and professional services, directly align with high-impact Lead by Example actions, and incorporate third-party certifications supported by the Sustainable Purchasing Leadership Council.

Finance,
Administration 2025-27
Procurement

2.4 Establish a sustainable purchasing program that provides training to all employees about updates to the purchasing policy (Procurement 2.1, and 2.3) and leverages best practices for accountability recommended by other decentralized purchasing operations.

Finance,
Administration 2025-27
Procurement

2.5 Update the Council-adopted sustainability criteria for procurement contracts to be directly aligned with Council’s adopted Lead by Example goals.

Finance,
Administration 2025-27
Procurement

2.6 Provide clear guidance and training to City employees on how to incorporate Government Code 4217 into energy-efficient City projects and purchases.

Administration,
Public Works 2025-27
Procurement

2.7 Assess the feasibility of pursuing a municipal charter amendment to clarify the City’s ability to take advantage of flexible procurement pathways available under state law, including design-build.

City Attorney,
Public Works,
Administration
2025-27
Procurement

2.8 Establish standard processes for applying for grants, rebates, incentives, and tax credits, as well as for reserving revenues from these sources for reinvestment in Lead by Example actions.

Administration,
Public Works,
Finance
2025-27
Procurement

2.9 Include an explicit reference to the City’s standing Socially Responsible Investment Policy in the Investment Policy and Management Plan. Finance 2025-27
Procurement

2.10 Analyze industry best practices for including Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions within the scope of a municipal greenhouse gas inventory. Administration 2025-27 Procurement

3.1 Establish measurement performance reports of spend categories identified in Procurement Action 2.3. Finance 2027-29 Procurement

3.2 Begin to evaluate, model, and track Scope 3 emissions to support decision-making in the subsequent Lead by Example planning document. Administration 2027-29

R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2025 SERIES)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE LEAD BY EXAMPLE 2025-29

WORK PROGRAM
WHEREAS, greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere as the result of human activity is the primary cause of the global climate crisis; and WHEREAS, in California alone, the initial and ongoing impacts of climate change have resulted in unprecedented disasters with tremendous human, ecological, economic, and environmental costs; and
WHEREAS, in 2022 the State of California enacted Assembly Bill (AB) 1279 to formally declare that it is the policy of the state to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter; and
WHEREAS, to protect public health, safety, and welfare, it is in the best interest of the City of San Luis Obispo to substantially reduce or eliminate local greenhouse gas emissions; and
WHEREAS, the 2006 Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan Policy 2.2.1 states, “City actions shall seek to minimize undesirable climate changes and deterioration of the atmosphere’s protective functions that result from the release of carbon dioxide and other substances”; and
WHEREAS, the 2006 Conservation and Open Space Element of the General Plan Policy 2.2.5 states, “The City will be a model of pollution control efforts. It will manage its own operations to be as pollution free as possible. The City will work with other agencies and organizations to help educate citizens in ways to prevent air pollution”; and WHEREAS, the City of San Luis Obispo City Council first adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2012; and
WHEREAS, the 2014 Land Use Element of the General Plan Policy 9.4 states, “The City shall maintain and implement its Climate Action Plan to reduce community and municipal GHG emissions consistent with State laws and objectives”; and WHEREAS, since 2017 City Council has included Climate Action as a Major City Goal in response to the climate crises; and
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2020, City Council adopted the 2020 Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery via Resolution R-11159 (2020 Series), which in addition to establishing a pathway to achieve community carbon neutrality by 2035, highlights the role the City can play in “leading by example” and includes a goal of carbon neutral government operations by 2030 and direction to complete a carbon neutral government operations plan; and

Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 2
R ______
WHEREAS, the City intends to lead by example and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations in order to model the actions needed to reduce community-wide emissions; and
WHEREAS, in pursuing a sustainability-oriented approach to achieving carbon neutral government operations by 2030, the City can also promote a more resilient, diverse, equitable, and inclusive City organization; and WHEREAS, on July 7 2021, City Council adopted a carbon neutral government operations plan titled, Lead by Example: A Plan for Carbon Neutral City Operations (2021 LBE) via Resolution R-11263 (2021 Series); and
WHEREAS, the 2021 LBE establishes sector-specific goals and objectives for City operations by 2030, and includes an action to update the plan every four years; and WHEREAS, on December 13, 2022, City Council adopted an updated Climate Action Plan that reaffirmed the 2020 goals and commitments, including the goal of carbon neutral government operations by 2030; and
WHEREAS, on May 21, 2024, City Council received and filed the Lead by Example 2024 Progress Report, which provides a snapshot of the City’s municipal operations climate action and sustainability work completed since the adoption of the 2021 LBE; and WHEREAS, throughout 2024, the Green Team, an interdepartmental staff working group with representation from every City department developed a shared work program for the next four years of Lead by Example; and
WHEREAS, the Green Team co-created a document referred to as the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program that includes an updated greenhouse gas inventory and actions to continue reducing greenhouse gas emissions from municipal operations during the 2025-27 and 2027-29 Financial Plans; and
WHEREAS, the Green Team worked closely with the Leadership Team to ensure the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program aligns closely with respective departmental priorities and available resources; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared pursuant to CEQA (EID 0275 -2020) by Rincon Consultants to evaluate the potential significant effects of implementing the 2020 Climate Action Plan (2020 CAP) for Community Recovery and CEQA GHG Thresholds Guidance; and
WHEREAS the Initial Study concluded that implementation of the Climate Action Plan and GHG thresholds of significance would not result in potentially significant impacts on the environment; and

Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 3
R ______
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was adopted on August 18, 2020, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(b)(2), which states that “the lead agency shall prepare a Negative Declaration if there is no substantial evidence that a project or any or its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment”; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Determination was filed with the County-Clerk Recorder and with the State Clearinghouse on August 19, 2020; and WHEREAS, the San Luis Obispo City Council determined that the 2021 LBE was a measure and supportive action within the scope of the project covered by the already adopted Initial Study-Negative Declaration (IS/ND) prepared by the City pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that addressed the environmental impacts of implementing the 2020 CAP; and
WHEREAS, the 2025 LBE furthers the sector specific goals and foundational actions adopted by City Council in the 2021 LBE; and
WHEREAS, the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program is a measure and supportive action within the scope of the project covered by the already adopted Initial Study-Negative Declaration (IS/ND) prepared by the City pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), circulated for public review, and adopted on August 19, 2020 (EID-0275-2020) that addressed the environmental impacts of implementing the 2020 CAP.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are hereby adopted as the findings of the City in adopting the policies herein.

SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City Council has reviewed the Negative Declaration adopted on August 18, 2020 and determined that the Lead by Example 2025- 29 Work Program is within the general scope of and consistent with the Initial Study/Negative Declaration adopted for the 2020 Climate Action Plan for Community Recovery (Resolution No. 11159) and hereby reincorporates and adopts the findings and determinations therein as applicable to the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program as if fully set forth herein.
 No substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previously adopted Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of the previously identified effect;
 No substantial changes will occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of an identified effect;

Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 4
R ______
 No new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous Negative Declaration was adopted, shows that the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous Negative Declaration or that any previously examined effect would be more severe than shown in the previous Negative Declaration.

SECTION 3. Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program. The City Council hereby approves the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program (attached as Exhibit A) and the sector specific goals established therein.

SECTION 4. Grant Authority. Consistent with direction taken on December 13 2022, Council hereby delegates authority to staff to apply for grants, rebates, or incentives that fund implementation of the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program and authorizes the City Manager to execute grant agreements and related documents.

SECTION 5. Lead by Example Revenue Allocation. Grants, rebates, incentives, tax credits, or similar, that are secured from Lead by Example actions shall be reserved for reinvestment in Lead by Example actions, and revenue from these sources shall be deposited into an appropriate account designated for the acquisitions of similar assets (e.g. fleet replacement fund).

Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 5
R ______
SECTION 6. Relationship to 2021 Resolution. This resolution is an amendment supplementary to, and does not replace, Resolution Number 11263 (2021 Series).

Upon motion of Council Member ___________, seconded by Council Member ___________, and on the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

The foregoing resolution was adopted this _____ day of _______________ 2025. ___________________________
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
ATTEST:
______________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of San Luis Obispo, California, on ______________________. ___________________________
Teresa Purrington
City Clerk

Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 6
R ______
EXHIBIT A – LEAD BY EXAMPLE 2025-29 WORK PROGRAM
Pending approval by City Council, the Lead by Example 2025-29 Work Program (provided in this Council Agenda Report as Attachment A) will be included here.

City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum
City of San Luis Obispo
Council Agenda Correspondence
DATE: February 4, 2025
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
VIA: Whitney McDonald, City Manager
SUBJECT: ITEM 7A – STUDY SESSION ON HIGUERA COMPLETE STREETS

PROJECT
Staff received the following questions, regarding the Higuera Complete Streets Project.

The questions are below with staff’s responses shown in italics:
1) The report states that Chumash Dr. does not meet criteria for a traffic signal.

How close is it to the criteria? Is the issue traffic volume, collision history, or other factors? Can average age of the resident in the neighborhood be considered? My understanding is that traffic engineers can waive MUTCD warrants when other factors are present?
Current conditions at this intersection were not particularly close to meeting required warrants for installation of a traffic signal pursuant to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD). For reference, to satisfy warrants for signalization based on volume, the Peak Hour Warrant on a 40 mph street would require side street volumes that exceed 100 vehicles per hour (if two lanes per direction are present on the major street) or 75 vehicles per hour (if one lane per direction is present on the major street). Current peak hour approach volumes on the minor street (Chumash Drive) are 26 vehicles/hour during the AM peak hour and 31 vehicles/hour on during the PM peak hour period. Current volumes on the major street (Higuera Street) meet the required thresholds for signalization, but side street volumes (Chumash Drive) would need to more than double to meet volume-based warrants for signalization. The chart below shows existing volumes at Higuera/Chumash compared to Peak Hour warrant thresholds.

In terms of crash experience, the CAMUTCD requires there to be at least five (5) collisions within a 12-month period before installation of a signal is warranted based on collision history. In the most recent 10-year history, there has been one crash reported at the Higuera/Chumash intersection itself—this was a fatal collision involving a motorist who had a medical emergency and left the roadway, striking a utility pole.

There are high overall collision rates elsewhere along this segment of Higuera Street, but insufficient crash history at the Higuera/Chumash intersection to justify installation of a traffic signal.

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 2 Other warrants for signalization per the CAMUTCD, such as warrants based on school crossing proximity, proximity to an at-grade rail crossing, pedestrian crossing volumes, etc., were reviewed, but not evaluated in detail as they were not applicable to this location.

The CAMUTCD allows for consideration of other location-specific characteristics (i.e. approach conditions, driver confusion, future land use plans, etc.) and engineering judgement when considering justification for installation of a traffic signal, but ultimately states that a traffic signal should not be installed unless one or more of the standard warrants are met. Agencies may choose to deviate from the CAMUTCD standards where the term “should” is applied; however, detailed documentation would need to be provided to support the decision to deviate from these standards, and this may ultimately increase the agency’s risk/liability if a future incident were to occur following installation of an unwarranted traffic signal. 2) If Council wanted to pursue the two-way path extension on Madonna, would that preclude doing the currently proposed improvements to Madonna? Advancing a two-way path on Madonna Road in the future would not preclude advancing the improvements currently proposed with the Higuera Complete Street Project. Implementation of the two-way path would require modifications to roadway striping and modifications to traffic signals (i.e. relocating loop detectors), which would incur additional costs, but the currently proposed improvements would not preclude a future two-way path.

Existing PM Peak
Hour Volume at
Higuera/Chumash

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 3 3) What are the cost savings with using flex posts versus concrete barriers? Could the saving be used for additional enhancements of the project? The current cost savings of replacing the concrete barriers currently shown in the project plans on Higuera between Margarita and Bridge Streets with flex posts is estimated at approximately $400,000.

As noted in the staff report, total project costs exceed available project funding and an additional budget allocation of at least $1M will be requested as part of the 2025-27 Financial Plan. Council could reduce project cost or add enhancements to the project by replacing the concrete barriers with flex posts. It should be noted that some enhancements might not be grant reimbursement eligible. 4) What is the change in width to the center turn lane at Chumash Dr.? The current width of the center turn lane at Chumash Drive is approximately 11 feet.

While the current draft striping plans included in the Council Agenda Report show a 10-foot wide center turn lane as part of the project, staff intends to increase this width to at least 12 feet and has already provided this direction to the project design engineering consultant preparing the final plans. There may be flexibility to increase this turn lane width further, if desired by the Council.

The images below show existing and proposed configuration of the Higuera/Chumash intersection. Note that Higuera Street currently has one lane in the northbound direction at Chumash Drive, which would remain with the proposed project. The project would provide one lane in the southbound direction, which opens up to two lanes just south of Chumash Drive. The center turn lane and two lanes exiting Chumash Drive would remain with the project.

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 4

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 5 5) Do we have any data on southbound bicyclists through the LOVR intersection? My observation is these are mostly recreational bicyclists rather than commuters.

Yes, based on recent traffic count data, approximately 60% of southbound cyclists continue straight on southbound Higuera Street through this intersection, with the remaining 40% of cyclists turning right onto westbound Los Osos Valley Road. Note that the direction and mix of cyclists navigating this intersection may change in the future as additional homes are completed and occupied at Avila Ranch and when the County’s Bob Jones Trail Extension between Avila Beach and Octagon Barn is completed.
6) Have additional bicycle safety improvements been considered for the Higuera/Suburban intersection beyond what is shown in the proposed plan? Yes. Following the tragic death of a cyclist involved in a “right-hook” collision with a truck in 2021, the City installed a “RIGHT TURN YIELD TO BICYCLES” warning sign and green bike lane pavement markings through this intersection conflict area. As part of the Higuera Complete Streets Project, staff is pursuing additional improvements that can be reasonably accommodated within the project grant funding and schedule constraints—focusing on installation of an illuminated “RIGHT TURN YIELD TO BICYCLES” sign that is activated when an approaching bicyclist is detected upstream of the intersection. This sign is not shown on the current striping plans, but staff plans to install this illuminated sign as part of the Complete Streets Project, or sooner, if feasible. Staff is currently coordinating with the manufacturer of the City’s traffic signal controller equipment to verify that the exiting equipment at this intersection can accommodate this somewhat unique sign operation. More information on this proposed illuminated sign design from a previous installation in the City of Portland is available here: https://bikeportland.org/2015/04/02/right-hook-riskdrops-flashing-yield-bikes-sign-ne-couch-136458 Staff has identified opportunities for more substantive improvements at this intersection to reduce potential for bicycle right-hook collisions; however, these recommendations would require acquisition of private property for additional right-ofway for improvements that are beyond what can be reasonably funded within the current grant-funded project funding and schedule limitations. These future options are recommended in the City’s Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, which will be presented to the City Council on March 18, 2025, and include potential to widen the intersection to provide (a) a dedicated right-turn lane with bike lane channelization to the left of the turn lane and potential for a bicycle signal phase, or (b) construction of a setback bikeway crossing, commonly referred to as a “protected intersection” or “bend-out” crossing. Either option would require off-site right-of-way, relocation of drainage infrastructure, relocation of a fire hydrant, relocation/replacement of traffic signal poles, and likely removal of off-street private parking stalls within the adjacent property.

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 6 7) For the Bridge St path crossing at Exposition, rather than having a speed hump just north and south of the crossing, could the crossing itself be raised instead? Yes, this mid-block crossing could be designed as a raised crosswalk, if desired by the Council. The purpose behind the current design, which includes speed humps upstream and downstream of the crosswalk is to not only slow speeds at the crosswalk itself, but along the longer segment of Exposition Drive-Woodbridge Street, where prevailing speeds (30 mph) currently exceed the posted speed limit and General Plan Circulation Element Target (25 mph). The intent is to not only reduce speeds and improve safety at this mid-block crossing, but also at the intersection with Corrida Drive to the south, which is part of the Meadow Park Greenway alignment an intersection where pedestrians cross to access the South Hills Open Space trails. 8) Will speed limits be reduced on any portion of Higuera? Speed limits on Higuera Street are currently posted as low as legally allowed pursuant to the California Vehicle Code, as speed limits generally need to be set within 5 mph of the prevailing travel speeds. Some further reductions of 5 mph are allowed when certain circumstances are met, but staff has already applied these reductions where feasible. The segment between Prado Road and Tank Farm Road was recently reduced from 40 mph to 35 mph, as prevailing speeds had decreased in recent years, which allowed for this reduction. Staff would endeavor to lower speed limits on other segments of Higuera wherever feasible after study speed surveys can be conducted following completion of the Higuera Complete Streets Project. 9) Is Higuera a designated evacuation route?
The City’s 2023 General Plan Climate Adaptation and Safety Element identifies areas of the city near high fire risk zones and areas with limited evacuation route options, where particular focus is required for providing ingress and egress during emergency events. Higuera Street is not designated as a formal evacuation route in this plan.

Based on discussions with the consultant team who prepared the Climate Action and Safety Element, and from previous experience, during closures on US 101 that divert significant traffic to Higuera Street, bottlenecks occur at Higuera/Madonna Road intersection and Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersections. The proposed project increases overall delay at the Higuera/Madonna intersection but increases capacity for the direction approaching the US 101 ramps (northbound left-turn from Higuera to westbound Madonna Road) by striping a second northbound left turn lane. At the Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection, design Option 1, which retains the existing bike lane configuration, provides similar traffic operations to existing conditions, while Option 2 (add bike signal phase) increases vehicle delays and queueing, particularly in the southbound direction heading to the US 101 ramps on Los Osos Valley Road. Ultimately, staff anticipates that the proposed road diet will not represent a primary bottleneck on Higuera Street during a significant emergency event or evaluation—the primary bottleneck would be at the signalized intersections upstream and downstream. If the Council desires to minimize concerns regarding

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 7 emergency evaluation scenarios on Higuera Street within the framework of including the proposed road diet in some form, staff would recommend considering the following options presented in the staff report:
 Use flex posts only for the proposed bikeway separation along the road diet segment, which provides more functional roadway clearance for emergency vehicle throughput, and allows for easy removal/adjustments in the short-term, with flexibility to remove the road diet all together in the future if traffic conditions change significantly beyond current growth projections.  Adjust the proposed road diet limits to retain four lanes on Higuera at unsignalized side streets and major driveways, such as Chumash Drive. This would retain the road diet along the narrowest roadway segment near the cemetery, while retaining the majority of the benefits of the road diet and reducing potential impacts to drivers on side streets turning to/from Higuera Street during an emergency event.

Lastly, it should be noted that the Transportation Division has the ability to make urgent traffic signal timing changes to flush traffic along major streets during major incidents. This has been used several times in the past during major incidents along US 101 when traffic is detoured to local streets.
10) Can the City paint red curbs on Higuera, north of Chumash Dr up to the bus stop?
Yes, there is an existing “NO PARKING” sign posted at the bus stop itself, but staff can add installation of red curb paint north of Chumash Drive for further visibility. 11) Can you clarify the type of signalization proposed at Elks Lane? Installation of a full traffic signal is proposed at Elks Lane, including signalized pedestrian crossings at all legs of the intersection. Initially, a Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon was proposed, as initial analysis indicated that warrants for full signalization were not met. However, staff has conducted additional analyses in 2024 with newer traffic count data and confirmed that warrants are now met, allowing for full signalization. Full signalization is the preferred design alternative, as signalization will improve level of service and these improvements will be required to support the construction of the Prado Creek Bridge. During construction of the Prado Creek Bridge project as Elks Lane will be the primary route to/from the City Corporation Yard, SLO Transit and RTA Bus Yards, and the various commercial businesses on Prado Road, including JB Dewar Fueling Facility.

The current traffic signal designs for Higuera/Elks include a “protected only” northbound left-turn phase turning from Higuera Street to Elks Lane, and a dedicated east/west signal phase that can be actuated by bicyclists from the street-level bike lanes. If the Council recommends removal of the proposed road diet on Higuera between Bridge Street and Elks Lane, the traffic signal plans will need to be modified

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 8 to (a) remove the protected only left-turn phase, which can not be used without a dedicated left turn pocket, and (b) to remove the on-street bicycle queue area for the northbound-to-westbound bicycle movement, as there is in sufficient road space to accommodate these features without removing traffic lanes on Higuera Street. Staff is happy to elaborate on these design details during the study session, if desired. 12) We have received some emails over the past few days expressing that some of the improvements proposed in the Meadow Park neighborhood (bulbouts, speed bumps, etc.) are not necessary and/or worth the money. Can you explain how it was decided that these were relevant additions to the plan, and what the approximate costs of these improvements are estimated to be? Preliminary project plans proposed more substantial traffic calming measures in the Meadow Park neighborhood, including more frequent speed humps, addition of neighborhood traffic circles at several intersections, and reconstruction of several intersection corners to add permanent curb extensions (“bulbouts”). Staff held a focused community workshop at Meadow Park during early plan development to invite input from neighbors on the project plans. Staff received several comments from Meadow Park neighbors requesting a more “gentle touch” with the traffic calming elements in this neighborhood, expressing general opposition to neighborhood traffic circles and suggestions to only include features that are truly warranted based on existing traffic conditions and safety concerns.

Based on this input, the project designs within the Meadow Park area were modified significantly—all neighborhood traffic circles were eliminated, permanent bulbouts were removed, and speed humps were limited only to Exposition and Woodbridge Streets, where existing prevailing speeds reach 30 mph, exceeding the 25 mph speed limits and General Plan target speed for local residential streets. The current plans include recommendation for an all-way stop at the Woodbridge/Meadow intersection in lieu of a traffic circle, as originally proposed, to improve pedestrian safety crossing to and from Meadow Park. Other than these features, elements are limited to greenway wayfinding signs, pavement legends and striped bulbouts at a few intersections on Exposition and Woodbridge Streets where existing corners have wide radii, which encourage high turning speeds and impact pedestrian safety and comfort.

Staff does not have a detailed cost breakdown readily available that isolates only the costs for various features in the Meadow Park neighborhood but would estimate the costs for these features at approximately $150,000, excluding ADA curb ramp upgrades and roadway sealing.
13) We received an email from a constituent that asked the following questions about the Higuera/Walker and Marsh/Higuera intersections. a. At Higuera and Walker Streets, green paint needs to mark where a cyclist should ride to make a left on Marsh Street. As a cyclist, I am not sure where to cut over and the buffered bike lane markings further confuse this.

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 9 b. At Higuera and Marsh Streets, green paint needs to mark where the cyclist should ride to travel on Marsh under the highway. Initially, is it between the northbound and southbound lanes? Is it the right side of the road and then cut across the northbound on-ramp. I am confused here as a cyclist and motorist.

Thank you for the questions and responses are as follows:
a) If a cyclist is traveling northbound on Higuera Street and wishes to turn left onto westbound Marsh Street to access the Madonna Inn Bike Path or Cerro San Luis Trailhead, they have two options. First, they can merge to the left across the adjacent vehicle lane and into the center left-turn lane to make this left turn as a vehicle would. There are several gaps in the proposed protected bike lane separation (flex posts) upstream of the Higuera/Marsh intersection to provide gaps to make this maneuver, including at the Higuera/Walker/Pacific intersection. Staff is supportive of adjusting flex post placement in the final plans to provide greater flexibility to make this maneuver approaching the intersection, if desired. The second option is to continue to the Higuera/Marsh intersection, dismount and queue at the pedestrian curb ramp, and use the signalized pedestrian crosswalk on foot to cross Higuera Street towards this destination. This option may be more comfortable for cyclists who do not feel confident merging across vehicle traffic lanes.
b) This portion of Marsh Street connecting to the US 101 Northbound and Southbound On-Ramps is within Caltrans right-of-way and outside of the limits of the City’s Higuera Complete Streets Project. No formally designated on-street or off-street bicycle facilities exist currently along this stretch of Marsh Street. Per the California Vehicle Code, bicyclists have the legal right to ride in the vehicle traffic lane, or within the right shoulder where width allows, where formal bicycle facilities are not provided. The City’s Active Transportation Plan includes a recommendation for a future project to improve bicycle facilities along this segment of Marsh Street, but those improvements would require additional funding and design review with Caltrans beyond what is feasible within the resources and schedule of the current grant-funded complete street project.
14) Flex posts are proposed as separation between cyclists and car traffic for most of the project area, with the exception of concrete curbs recommended between Bridge Street and Margarita. Some community members have commented that the curbs already installed in some parts of the city are low, and therefore hard to see for drivers. Is it possible to add features to the curbs to make them more visible? (Some ideas might be reflective paint along the entirety of the curb, vertical flex-type posts along the curbs, etc.)

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 10 Yes, based on observations of the existing concrete bike lane medians installed in the City, the primary point where vehicles tend to hit these medians is at the end points or “noses”. For this reason, the City has focused several visibility enhancements at these end points, including yellow paint, reflective markers, and tall vertical flex posts with reflective strips. In between median end points, the previous strategy has been to include a solid white edge stripes on the pavement along the medians for added mid-block visibility. Staff can certainly modify median designs to include frequent midspan vertical flex posts on top of the concrete medians to increase visibility, if desired. 15) On page 524 of the packet, you mention rubberized or pre-made concrete barriers, that could be used instead of curbs. It states there that these are less expensive but are more expensive to install. Can you explain this a little more…are they more expensive to install than more permanent curbs, or than flex posts, and what is the approximate difference in costs? In general, rubber pre-made barriers/curbs are less costly to install than cast-in-place concrete barriers, as currently proposed in the plans. Concrete pre-made barriers/curb stops are also generally less costly to install than cast-in-place concrete barriers, but more costly than rubber options. Both pre-made rubber and pre-made concrete barriers/curb stops generally incur more ongoing maintenance costs compared to permanent concrete barriers, as they are more likely to be damaged if struck by vehicles. Both pre-made barrier options would still require placement of vertical flex posts in between each barrier to provide sufficient vertical visibility of these objects.

Below is a comparison between barrier material options with an estimated cost difference for the road diet segment of Higuera Street (Bridge to Margarita Street)/  Current Plans (Cast-in-place Concrete Barriers): $600,000  Flex Posts Only: $200,000
 Flex Posts with Pre-Made Rubber Barrers: $300,000
 Flex Posts with Pre-Made Concrete Barriers: $400,000
Note that the current plans propose flex posts only for protected bike lanes outside of the road diet segment of Higuera Street. If Council prefers the addition of rubber or concrete pre-made barriers along all protected bike lane segments, the total project cost is estimated to increase from $300,000 to $500,000. 16) Regarding the intersection of S. Higuera and Suburban, in addition to the lighted signage being proposed for this intersection, have staff considered disallowing “right on red” at this intersection?
Yes, right-turns on red are already prohibited at this intersection (see image below).

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 11 17) Regarding the intersection at LOVR/Higuera, was there any discussion (or is it possible) to implement protected intersection elements on the two eastern corners of LOVR similar to those at Dalidio Drive, allowing cyclists to take refuge behind a physical barrier while cars turn right in front of them? Related to this, can you please clarify the two diagrams on page 527? The bottom diagram (below) shows physical barriers between the cyclist and the car on Higuera and LOVR with a triangular item at the corner (looks like a post, maybe), but Option 2 photo above it doesn’t show those features. Does Option 2 intend to provide cyclist their own turning lane?
Staff did evaluate the possibility of constructing a setback bicycle crossing at the Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection, often referred to as a “protected intersection” or “bend-out” crossing. However, there is insufficient right-of-way to provide this style of bicycle crossing and acquisition of additional right-of-way would

Item 7a. Higuera Complete Streets Agenda Correspondence Page 12 likely not occur within the schedule constraints of the grant-funding. In addition to right-of-way, subsequent design and coordination work would need to occur to relocate a PG&E utility pole, a traffic signal electrical service box and controller cabinet, and traffic signal poles.

The diagram shown above is intended to illustrate the potential traffic signal phasing strategy, where the vehicle right-turn movement is held with a red light during a conflicting bicycle signal phase. The bicycle barrier elements would differ in the project plans – a curbside protected bike lane with flex posts would be proposed on southbound Higuera Street approaching the intersection, but there would be no porkchop island or receiving protected bike lane on westbound Los Osos Valley Road, as the existing turning paths of large trucks would conflict with those vertical elements without further intersection widening.

Item 7a
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 5010
For Agenda of: 2/4/2025
Placement: Study Session
Estimated Time: 90 Minutes
FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager
SUBJECT: STUDY SESSION ON HIGUERA COMPLETE STREETS PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION

1. Receive an update on the Higuera Complete Streets Project; and

2. Provide input on the Higuera Complete Streets Project plans, including specific input on the following features:
a. Limits of proposed “road diet” on Higuera Street.
b. Material used for vertical separation where protected bike lanes are proposed. c. Preferred design alternative for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection; and

3. Provide input to staff on whether to continue further planning and design efforts for a potential shared-use path on Madonna Road as a future project separate from the Higuera Complete Streets Project.

POLICY CONTEXT
On February 2, 2021, the City Council adopted the City’s first Active Transportation Plan (ATP), which recommends proposed improvements to bicycling and walking, including the Higuera Complete Streets Project (the “Project”) as a Tier 1 (highest priority) project.

As part of the FY 2023-25 Financial Plan, the City Council approved an allocation of $1.05 million in local funds to support planning, environmental review, design and construction of this Project, and the City’s Active Transportation Committee (ATC) identified the Project as their top funding priority for the FY2023-25 and upcoming FY2025-27 Financial Plans.

The Project directly aligns with the City’s current Major City Goal of Climate Action, Open Space, & Sustainable Transportation and is consistent with the recommendations presented in the City’s Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, which is scheduled for City Council review and potential adoption in March 2025. As noted in the Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, Higuera Street is part of the City’s High-Injury Network—the 10% of city road miles where 75% of fatal and severe injury collisions have occurred. Over the past five years alone, there have been five (5) fatal collisions on Higuera Street within the Project limits, all involving victims who were walking or bicycling.

Item 7a
The Project supports the City’s General Plan Circulation Element and Climate Action Plan’s sustainable transportation goals and modal shift objectives. The Project does include one intersection design alternative for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection that is projected to result in future traffic operations that would conflict with the General Plan Circulation Element’s adopted minimum automobile level of service (LOS) thresholds. Staff is seeking policy input from the Council on this design alternative, as well as general input on the current draft Project designs.

REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The Higuera Complete Streets Project is intended to provide improved safety and accessibility for all road users, including pavement repairs, and important enhancements to the north/south and east/west connections to local schools, businesses, parks, community services, the downtown, and residences for people walking and bicycling. The Project is identified as a Tier 1 (highest-priority) project in the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) and its goal of increasing access and safety for walking and bicycling supports the City’s Climate Action and General Plan modal shift goals. The Project also supports the City’s Vision Zero objectives to eliminate severe traffic collisions. Staff has secured approximately $9.1 million in outside grant funding to support construction of the Project:
 $6.951 million from the Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP)  $2.185 million from the SLOCOG Community Betterments Program (plus and additional $500,000 specifically for the separate South/King Crossing Project) Staff’s target is to start construction by late 2025, with an ultimate deadline of February 2026 to secure approval from Caltrans to allocate construction funding and advertise the Project for construction before forfeiting grant funds.

Over the course of the last two years, staff has conducted public outreach, environmental review, and traffic operations studies to guide development of Project designs. With designs now at the 95% complete stage, this study session provides a final opportunity for the community and City Council to provide input on the Project prior to initiating construction. Staff welcomes input on all aspects of the Project, with a specific request for Council input on the following:
a) Limits of proposed lane reductions (“road diet”) on Higuera Street  Seeking input on start/end points of proposed 4-lane to 3-lane “road diet”, as well as if road diet is supported or opposed at all. b) Material to be used for vertical separation where protected bike lanes are proposed (i.e. concrete curbing vs. rubber flex posts, etc.)  Seeking input on preference for more permanent and durable concrete bikeway separation vs. more flexible and lower-cost quick-build materials, such as rubber flex posts.

Item 7a
c) Design alternatives at the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection  Two design alternatives have been evaluated, with one alternative providing greater bicycling comfort at the expense of generating a future traffic operations impact. The other alternative retains the existing bikeway configuration, which is less comfortable, but with no substantial change to traffic operations.

While staff welcomes Council direction to guide final design for the Higuera Complete Streets Project, as discussed in detail later in this report, it should be noted that substantial changes to the Project scope could require approval from grant funding agencies and may ultimately risk the funding secured for this Project. For example, the abovementioned grants were awarded based on a competitive call-for-projects process and ranked based on the proposed Project’s features that improve safety and/or access for active transportation users (i.e. number of upgraded pedestrian ramps, new miles of protected bike lanes, number of upgraded signalized intersections, etc.). Any significant reduction in these measurable features will likely require a formal scope change request, which will add delays and may ultimately not be approved by the grant agency, which could risk forfeiture of funds.

Additionally, staff is asking Council whether to proceed with further planning to explore a potential separated bikeway on the Madonna Road overpass as a future capital project separate from the current Higuera Complete Streets Project. This concept was studied exhaustively as part of the Higuera Complete Streets Project but is not feasible within the funding and schedule limitations of the current grant-funded Project. Council input will help shape future budget requests and project priorities for this concept.

DISCUSSION
Background
In 2021, the City Council adopted the City’s first ATP to promote bicycling and walking as modes of transportation to help reach the City’s climate action, modal shift, and traffic safety goals. The ATP identifies a list of infrastructure projects organized by tier, with “Tier 1” projects representing the highest-priority projects with the greatest potential to increase bicycle and pedestrian mode share and reduce existing collision trends. Following adoption of the ATP, the City’s Active Transportation Committee (ATC) ranked the Higuera Street corridor as the top ATP Tier 1 project to advance to project development.

Since early 2022, staff has completed preliminary concept planning, secured $9.1 million in outside grant funding, completed traffic operations and environmental technical studies, and conducted significant public outreach to guide design of the Higuera Complete Streets Project. The purpose of this Council Study Session is to provide a final opportunity for community and City Council input on the Project designs—now 95% complete—before the Project advances to construction.

Item 7a
Project Scope
The Project extents include Higuera Street as a primary north/south backbone corridor, with additional improvements along Madonna Road to the west and through the Meadow Park neighborhood to the east to complete connections between the Higuera Street corridor, schools, popular destinations, and other prominent active transportation routes to the east and west. The Project limits are as follows:
 Higuera Street (Los Osos Valley Road to Marsh Street)  Madonna Road (Entrance to Madonna Inn/US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street)  Meadow Park Neighborhood Greenway Segments connecting Higuera east to Broad and South Streets along Bridge, Exposition, Corrida, and Woodbridge Streets.

See Attachment A for an overview map identifying the Project area, highlights of major improvements and connections to destinations.

The Project design includes improvements for all road users, traffic calming elements to address illegal speeding, as well as enhancements to improve safety, including but not limited to:
a) Pavement repairs and roadway sealing along full Project extents b) 45 upgraded or new pedestrian crosswalks
c) ADA upgrades at more than 70 pedestrian curb ramps
d) ADA-compliant audible pedestrian signal upgrades at signalized intersections e) Reconfiguration of the Higuera/Walker/Pacific Street intersection to reduce conflict points and improve pedestrian safety, as recommended in the Mid-Higuera Enhancement Plan.
f) Reconfiguration of the northwest corner of the Higuera/Madonna intersection to improve bicycle and pedestrian crossings.
g) Installation of a new signalized crossing at the Higuera/Elks intersection h) Installation of high-visibility traffic signal backplates with yellow reflective borders to reduce red light running at all signals within Project limits i) Addition of radar speed feedback signs to discourage illegal speeding j) Reconfiguration of Higuera Street to one auto lane in each direction between Margarita and Bridge Streets to provide width for a center median/turn lane, buffered/protected bike lanes, and discourage illegal/unsafe speeds. k) Neighborhood greenway connections to Hawthorne Elementary School and Broad Street, including traffic calming within the Meadow Park neighborhood on streets with existing speeding concerns.
l) Addition of green bike lane markings to increase visibility at intersection and driveway conflict areas
m) Installation of over 2 miles of physically protected bike lanes (see focused discussion later in this report regarding bikeway separation).

Item 7a
See Attachment B for the draft (95%-level) striping plans, which illustrate the general design details for the Project. Attachment C shows typical street cross sections to further illustrate the proposed street configurations. Additional information on Project details is also available on the Higuera Complete Streets Project website.

Focus Areas for City Council Input
While staff is inviting input from the community and City Council on all components of the Project, there are several focused discussion items presented below where staff is seeking specific policy direction from the Council to guide final designs.

Question #1 for Council: Is the Council interested in modifying the limits or configuration of the road diet currently proposed for Higuera Street between Margarita and Bridge Street?
Portions of the Higuera Street corridor are not currently wide enough to add buffered or protected bike lanes and keep the current number of travel lanes. The project description for Higuera Street in the adopted ATP notes that auto lane reductions or narrowing (often referred to as a “road diet”) or street widening may be required to provide separated/protected bike facilities on portions of this street.

Proposed Road Diet Limits on Higuera Street

Item 7a
Early in the project development process, Central Coast Transportation Consulting (CCTC), a local transportation engineering consulting firm, was commissioned to prepare a traffic operations study for the Higuera Complete Street Project. CCTC evaluated traffic operations along the full Higuera Street corridor for the following analysis scenarios:
 Existing Conditions
 Near-Term Conditions (5–10-year horizon)
o Includes full build-out of San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch, Froom Ranch and other recently approved developments
o Assumes Prado Road Interchange, Prado Road Bridge Replacement and Prado Road Extension east to Broad Street are not yet constructed.  Cumulative Conditions (20+ year horizon)
o Reflects build-out of the General Plan land use and circulation plans o Assumes Prado Road Interchange, Prado Road Bridge Replacement and Prado Road Extension east to Broad Street have been constructed.

CCTC’s traffic analysis concluded that removal of existing traffic lanes was not recommend on the majority of the corridor, with the exception of the segment of Higuera between Bridge Street and Margarita Avenue where existing and projected future traffic volumes are lower. For this stretch of Higuera, existing and future volumes remain within the thresholds that can be served with a single auto lane in each direction while still operating within the City’s adopted level of service (LOS) standards1. Levels of service at intersections along the proposed road diet segment are summarized as follows:

Table 1: Traffic Operations Along Proposed Road Diet Limits Intersection
Worst-Case (PM) Peak Hour LOS
Existing
Existing
+
Project
NearTerm
NearTerm +
Project
Cumulative Cumulative
+ Project
Higuera & Bridge3 LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS D LOS C
Higuera & Elks4 LOS F LOS B LOS F LOS B LOS F LOS B
Higuera & Chumash LOS B LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS C LOS C

1. Source: Higuera Complete Street Project – Traffic Operations Evaluation Report, Central Coast Transportation Consulting, January 2, 2025.

2. City’s General Plan Circulation Element Multimodal Level of Service Thresholds identify LOS D or better as acceptable and LOS E or F as deficient. Locations with deficient LOS are highlighted in bold above.

3. Operations at Higuera/Bridge intersection improves with Project for Cumulative Conditions due to addition of center turn lane.

4. Operations at Higuera/Elks intersection improves with Project due to installation of a traffic signal.

5. Note that no changes to traffic lanes are proposed at Higuera/Margarita (road diet begins north of Margarita); thus, there are no changes to traffic operations at this intersection.

1 The San Luis Obispo General Plan Circulation Element (Policy 6.1.2) establishes a minimum vehicle level of service (LOS) standard of LOS D or better for routes outside of the Downtown Core, such as Higuera Street. "Traffic Level of Service" (LOS) refers to a qualitative measure that describes how well a roadway is operating based on factors like speed, travel time, maneuverability, and delay, typically graded with letters from A (representing free-flowing traffic) to F (severe congestion), where A indicates the best operating conditions and F represents the worst conditions.

Item 7a
Based on this analysis, the Project proposes restriping Higuera from four lanes (two auto lanes in each direction) to a 3-lane configuration (one auto lane each direction with a center turn lane/median) between Bridge and Margarita, retaining the existing number of traffic lanes along the rest of the corridor.

The chart below shows existing, near-term, and cumulative traffic volumes on Higuera Street between Bridge and Margarita compared to the maximum threshold recommended by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for a 3-lane road diet (1,750 vehicles per hour during peak hour periods). However, it should be noted that if the Prado Road Interchange is not constructed within the cumulative 20-year horizon, the volumes on this segment of Higuera Street are projected to be higher and exceed the thresholds recommended for a 3-lane road diet by 5%-10%. By providing a connection over US 101, the Prado Interchange is expected to shift trips off Higuera Street north and south of Prado Road. See Attachment D for CCTC’s detailed traffic operations study for the Project for more details.

Peak Hour Vehicular Volumes on Higuera Street Compared to FHWA Recommended 3- Lane Road Diet Thresholds
The proposed “road diet” provides additional width to add protected bike lanes, increase buffer space between vehicle traffic and pedestrian sidewalks, and a continuous center turn lane (no center turn lane exists currently between Bridge and Fontana). Road diets are an FHWA proven safety countermeasure that have been shown to reduce illegal speeding and improve safety for all road users2. This segment of Higuera Street has some of the highest speeds along the corridor (85th percentile speed = 45 mph) and an aboveaverage crash rate. There have been two fatal collisions and two severe injury collision on this portion of Higuera Street in the past five years, including a fatal hit and run collision in 2024 involving a driver who struck two cyclists riding within the unprotected southbound bike lane near Fontana Avenue, resulting in one fatality. The second fatal collision reported along this segment was from a motorist who drove off the road near the intersection with Chumash Drive.

2 Per the Federal Highway Administration, 4-lane to 3-lane road diets reduce overall collision rates by 19%- 47% on average.

Item 7a
The proposed road diet is intended to improve safety, while maintaining traffic operations within the City’s adopted General Plan level of service (LOS) performance thresholds.

However, staff has received comments from several community members during the public outreach process, particularly from the Chumash Village senior community, expressing concern that removal of auto lanes will create traffic congestion and challenges for drivers entering/exiting driveways on Higuera Street. Staff held a focused town hall meeting with residents of Chumash Village and agreed to conduct focused analysis of their driveway as part of the project traffic study. *Note – While not clearly shown on this conceptual cross section graphic, detailed designs include a minimum 1-foot edge stripe to provide a buffer on each side of any raised medians.

CCTC’s traffic analysis of the Chumash Village driveway (see Attachment D) concluded that the driveway would operate acceptably within the City’s adopted thresholds for vehicle delay/congestion at level of service (LOS) C or better during peak hour periods with the proposed road diet. The project would increase the average delay by 3-5 seconds per vehicle for drivers exiting this driveway during peak commute hours, but it can often be easier for some drivers to judge gaps in traffic with one lane in each direction vs. two when exiting driveways, such as Chumash Drive. In addition, the proposed project will Existing – Higuera (Bridge to Margarita)
Proposed – Higuera (Bridge to Margarita)*

Item 7a
increase the width of the center two-way left-turn lane at this location, improving use of this lane for two-stage left turns. Several Chumash Village residents requested additional improvements at the Chumash Village driveway as part of this project, including request for a traffic signal, additional streetlighting, and more aggressive measures to reduce illegal parking within the intersection line-of-sight. CCTC’s analysis confirmed that this location does not meet the thresholds or “warrants” required to legally install a traffic signal; however, staff plans to accommodate these other requests and has already installed additional parking signage and red curb to address illegal parking concerns.

The typical street cross section labeled “Proposed – Higuera (Bridge to Margarita)” provided on the previous page represents the proposed lane configuration on Higuera near Chumash Drive. The striping plan for this location is also provided below for reference.

Proposed Roadway Striping Plan for Higuera at Chumash Drive It should also be noted that all project designs maintain consistency with state and local fire code requirements by retaining more than 30-foot roadway clearance for emergency vehicle access at all locations (state and local fire codes require minimum 20 feet clearance between any physical elements on most streets and 26 feet clearance fronting taller buildings to accommodate a ladder truck with outriggers). The narrowest street within the project, the road diet segment of Higuera, would provide at least 30 feet clear, including a continuous striped center median/turn lane, which provides a clear bypass lane for emergency vehicles during a response event. Preliminary plans have been reviewed with City Fire Department staff for concurrence, and updated plans will be reviewed again with the Fire Department following Council direction from this Study Session.

Item 7a
Based on this analysis, staff recommends implementing a road diet on Higuera as currently proposed; however, staff is requesting input from the Council on this design approach before finalizing plans. The pros and cons of the current design and various alternatives are summarized below for Council consideration:

Higuera Street Road Diet Design Options
Design Option Advantages Disadvantages
Current Proposal
Reconfigure Higuera to 3
lanes (one lane each
direction + center turn
lane) from Bridge to
Margarita Avenue
 Provides width for
continuous protected bike
lanes that meet City’s
preferred width standards
 Provides greatest
potential to reduce illegal
speeding and improve
separation between autos
and peds/bikes
 Supports ATP and Draft
Vision Zero Action Plan
recommendations
 Roadway can be
reconfigured to four lanes
in future without
substantial cost (requires
roadway restriping and
removal of concrete
medians, which are
poured on top of existing
roadway and do not
require significant
excavation to demolish)
 More substantial change to
road configuration, not
supported by some
community members due to
congestion concerns
 Less excess road capacity
during special events (i.e.
detours from US 101 during
collisions/road work)
 Potential for congestion and
deficient levels of service in
the long-term if City land use
or circulation plans change
from current General Plan (i.e.
greater buildout development
potential or Prado Rd
Overpass delayed
significantly)
 More challenging to retain
efficient traffic flow during
construction work or collision
events
Q1, Alt. A: No Road Diet
Do not remove any auto
lanes on Higuera Street.
 No change to current
road configuration or
reduction in traffic
capacity, likely less
potential for public
concern/opposition
 Retains excess road
capacity to accommodate
additional future growth
or changes to circulation
plans beyond current
General Plan
 Retains additional
flexibility to accommodate
traffic flow during
construction and collision
events
 Excess width provides
 Insufficient width to add
continuous center turn lane,
widen bike lanes or add
physical separation between
auto traffic and
cyclists/pedestrians
 Less potential to reduce illegal
speeding and improve overall
road safety
 Less optimal design for
proposed Higuera/Elks traffic
signal (no width for dedicated
NB left-turn lane or NB bike
left-turn queue area without
auto lane reductions)
 Substantial change to project
scope may require scope
change approval by grant

Item 7a
additional road clearance
for emergencies and
special event detours (i.e.
incidents on US 101)
 Reduces project
construction costs by
eliminating bikeway
separation
agency and risk >$9 million in
grant funding for Project if not
approved.

Q1, Alt. B: Modify Road
Diet Limits
Adjust start and end
points of road diet to
retain four traffic lanes at
most driveways (i.e.
reduce road diet limits to
only the narrowest section
between the Cemetery to
Fontana Ave)
 Retains two auto lanes in
each direction at
Chumash Village and
other higher-activity
driveways. May reduce
some community
concern/opposition to
road diet
 Where road diet remains,
same benefits noted in
“Current Proposal” option
above.
 Reduces project
construction costs by
reducing limits of bikeway
separation
 Insufficient width to provide
buffered/protected bike lanes
along full segment
 Insufficient width to provide
center turn lane/median along
the full segment
 May require scope change
approval by Caltrans/CTC.

Less risk to >$9 million in
grant funding compared to
removing road diet, but some
risk to funding exists.
 Where road diet remains,
same disadvantages noted in
“Current Proposal” option
above.

Q1, Alt. C: Road Diet in
One Direction Only
Reduce number of auto
lanes in one direction only
(i.e. retain 2 southbound
auto lanes)
 Retains existing traffic
pattern and roadway
capacity in highestvolume direction
(southbound)
 Still provides potential to
add buffered/protected
bike lanes along most of
route, but with narrower
width than preferred per
City Standards
 Retains additional
flexibility to accommodate
traffic flow during
construction and collision
events compared to full
road diet
 May reduce some project
construction costs by
reducing extent of
bikeway separation
 Insufficient width to add both
buffered/protected bike lanes
and continuous center turn
lane. May require narrowing
bike lanes and removing
buffer/barrier at certain
intersections/driveways where
center turn lane is desired
 Likely to require scope
change approval by
Caltrans/CTC. Less risk to
>$9 million in grant funding
compared to removing road
diet, but risk remains.
 Where road diet remains,
similar disadvantages noted in
“Current Proposal” option
above.

Item 7a
While protected bikeway separation is discussed further in the next focus area topic below, it is important to note that proposed road diet can be designed in a manner that allows for flexibility to restore four traffic lanes on Higuera Street in the future if City buildout projections change or if desired by a future City Council. As discussed in the next topic, the type of materials used for vertical bikeway separation will have the greatest influence on the level of difficulty and cost to “undo” the proposed road diet in the future.

Question #2 for Council: Does the Council have a clear preference for the type of material used for vertical separation on protected bike lanes? Various materials can be used to provide the physical separation between motor vehicles and bicyclists when installing protected bike lanes. Materials range from lower-cost and more flexible “quick-build” materials, such as flex posts, rubber bumps and parking stops, to more high-cost and durable materials, such as concrete medians/curbs on-street or reconstructing the bike lane to the sidewalk level. There are clear advantages and tradeoffs with each option.

While quick-build materials, like flex posts, provide the advantage of lower installation costs, ability to easily modify/remove bikeway separation, and less potential to damage motor vehicles when struck, these materials provide less physical protection from vehicle traffic, require more frequent maintenance obligations (i.e. replacing broken or worn flex posts or rubber bumps), and are less effective at discouraging illegal parking/encroachment into the bike lanes. More permanent materials such as concrete medians provide greater physical protection, less potential for vehicle encroachment, and less ongoing maintenance obligations, with the trade-off of creating greater potential to damage vehicles when struck and less flexibility to remove/modify these features, as well as increased costs of installation. Some users have also noted that taller vertical features, such as flex posts, have greater visibility than lower-profile concrete curbs. For purposes of comparing costs, a concrete median can require 3-4 times the cost of a rubber flex post per linear foot of protected bike lane for initial installation; but a concrete median can generally remain for more than 20 years with little-to-no maintenance, while flex posts may require replacement every 5-10 years, depending on location and exposure to traffic, incurring higher ongoing equipment and labor costs to maintain.

Ongoing maintenance costs also include potential costs for sweeping by outside contractors, either manually or using a narrower street sweeper than the equipment currently owned by the City—ongoing sweeping costs would be relatively the same regardless of the type of barrier installed. These costs can vary by location and assume that the City never purchases a narrow streetsweeper to allow for in-house sweeping of these facilities. A ballpark estimate of annual contract sweeping costs for this Project as a whole is approximately $20,000 to $30,000 per year, which does not include the potential reduction in in-house sweeping costs if City staff is no longer sweeping these locations.

Item 7a
It should also be noted that placing any physical objects in the roadway, whether flexible or rigid materials, will inherently increase the potential for vehicles and cyclists to accidently hit these objects. Further, more experienced road cyclists often prefer the flexibility of having no bikeway separation to allow for more convenient passing of slower cyclists and maneuverability to enter/exit the bike lane. While design details are important and type of bikeway design should be considered closely on a project-by-project basis, these trade-offs should be acknowledged with any protected bike lane project as well as the available data which consistently concludes that addition of physically-protected bike lanes—even when using only flex posts for separation—increases bicycle mode share3,4 and improves overall road safety5.

As currently designed (see Attachment B and C), the Project includes flex posts only where protected bike lanes are proposed, except for the road diet segment of Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita where greater bikeway width is available and vehicle speeds are highest. Street width is constrained along most of the Project extents, generally allowing for only 5-foot-wide bike lanes with 2-foot-wide buffers—the minimum widths per City engineering standards. Flex posts are proposed for these narrow segments to provide more functional clearance for cyclists and drivers and to reduce potential damage when these objects are hit. While some ATC members would prefer more substantial concrete barriers, the ATC expressed general support for the current project designs.

For the road diet segment of Higuera Street (Bridge to Margarita), where greater width is available to provide wide bike lanes and buffer distance between vertical objects and vehicle traffic, the current plans propose cast-in-place concrete medians, similar to what currently exists on Marsh Street and Santa Barbara Street. This median design provides durability at a lower cost than full street reconstruction and can be installed or removed at a much lower cost than typical concrete medians, which require street excavation to construct/remove. See below for examples of each treatment.

3 Per a study published by the Portland State University Transportation Education and Research Center, addition of protected bike lanes in multiple cities resulted in an increase in bicycle ridership ranging from 21% to 171%.
4 Per preliminary traffic counts collected in November 2024 for the City of San Luis Obispo’s North Chorro Greenway Project, bicycle ridership on Chorro Street and Broad Street increased by approximately 120% and 45%, respectively following installation of protected bicycle lanes. Additional “after study” monitoring data for this project will be published in 2025.
5 Per the Federal Highway Administration , converting existing bike lanes to protected bike lanes with flexible delineators can reduce bicycle/vehicle crashes by up to 53%.

Item 7a
When asked for preference on material used for bikeway separation during public outreach activities, in general, more community members who cycle expressed support for concrete separation than for flexible quick-build materials, while some drivers expressed concern over risk of hitting concrete features. Ultimately, there are clear tradeoffs with each option and staff is seeking Council input on this design direction.

The pros and cons of the current design and various bikeway separation materials alternatives are summarized below for Council consideration:

Example of Protected Bike Lane with Quick-Build Flex Posts Example of Protected Bike Lane with Concrete Separation

Item 7a
Protected Bikeway Separation Design Options
Design Option Advantages Disadvantages
Current Proposal
Use flex posts only
where bikeway width is
narrow, use cast-inplace concrete medians
where extra width is
available within Higuera
road diet extents
(Bridge to Margarita).
 Provides some form of
physical bikeway along
majority of project extends.
 Flex post provide greater
functional width and
flexibility where width is
constrained
 Less potential to damage
vehicles where flex posts
are used
 Where more width is
available, concrete
medians provide more
permanent barrier and
greater physical protection
between vehicle traffic and
cyclists
 Less installation costs
where flex posts are used,
less ongoing maintenance
costs where concrete
barrier is used
 More challenging and costly
to remove barriers
(temporarily or permanently)
where concrete separation is
used
 Less durability and higher
ongoing maintenance costs
where flex posts are used.
 Less physical protection from
motor vehicles where flex
posts are used
 Higher potential for damage to
vehicles when hit where
concrete medians are used
Q2, Alt. A: Use Only
Flex Posts
Use flex posts
throughout where
protected bike lanes are
proposed, no concrete
medians/curbs.
 Reduced project costs
compared to current
proposal of concrete
medians for the road diet
limits on Higuera between
Margarita and Bridge St.
(anticipated savings of
approx. $400,000 using
only flex posts for project)
 Retains safety benefits of
providing some form of
physical separation from
motor vehicle traffic
 More flexibility to remove
barrier (temporarily or
permanently) in the future
 Allows for incremental,
lower-cost safety upgrades
now with potential for more
substantial/permanent
improvements in future, if
desired.
 Unlikely to require major
scope change approval
from grant agency—low
risk of losing grant funding
 Less physical protection from
motor vehicles where flex
posts are used compared to
concrete medians
 Less durability and higher
ongoing maintenance costs
compared to concrete

Item 7a
Q2, Alt. B: Use Only
Concrete
Use concrete
medians/curbs for
vertical separation
throughout where
protected bike lanes are
proposed (Madonna to
LOVR).
 Provides more permanent
barrier and greater physical
separation between vehicle
traffic and cyclists where
width is less constrained
 Less ongoing maintenance
costs compared to flex
posts
 Wider profile than flex posts,
provides less functional
clearance for vehicles and
cyclists where width is
constrained
 Greater potential for vehicle
damage when hit
 Higher initial installation costs
 More challenging (and costly)
to remove/modify barrier,
either temporarily or
permanently in future
 No risk to project grant
funding, but major increase to
project cost and additional
funding need (anticipated
increase of approx. $750,000
to $1 million)
Q2, Alt. C: No Vertical
Separation
Eliminate vertical
separation from all
bikeways in Project,
provide striped buffers
only where width allows
 Lowers overall project cost
and ongoing maintenance
and street sweeping costs
 Eliminates potential for
vehicles or cyclists to hit
bikeway separation
 Preferred by many
experienced road cyclists
 Retains more clear width
and flexibility for shifting
traffic during construction or
collision events, and for
vehicles to pull to curbside
to allow emergency
vehicles to pass
 Substantial change to project
scope may risk >$9 million in
grant funding for Project
 Does not support intended
mode shift and safety
objectives of Project as
strongly as current proposal
 Less potential to attract less
experienced “interested but
concerned” cyclists
There are additional variants to the above-mentioned design options, such as the addition of rubber quick-build elements between flex posts, such as rubber parking stops or bumps, or use of pre-cast concrete medians, similar to concrete parking stops, which can be more easily removed (but cost more to install). Staff welcomes further questions and input on these options from the Council during the study session.

As discussed in the previous section on road diet considerations, project plans have been designed for compliance with applicable state and local fire codes, and preliminary plans have been reviewed with the City Fire Department. While previous review with Fire Department staff did not identify any significant concerns or fatal flaws with the proposed project, the Fire Department does generally prefer as much flexibility and clearance as possible for emergency response—narrow flex posts would generally provide more clearance and flexibility for fire trucks and other emergency response vehicles than wider concrete medians.

Item 7a
If the Council has interest in eliminating concrete bikeway separation from the project, staff would recommend Design Alternative A (Flex Posts Only), as a preferred design option, as this best balances the priorities of (a) improving active transportation access and safety, (b) reducing initial project costs, (c) maintaining flexibility to modify the roadway configurations in the future, and (d) minimizing risk of forfeiting >$9 million in project grant funding with a major scope change. As noted briefly in the previous section, the use of less permanent materials, such as flex posts, would add additional flexibility to modify or “undo” the proposed Higuera Street road diet in the future if the City’s long-term development and circulation plans change, or if restoring additional traffic capacity is desired by a future Council. For example, if the planned Prado Road Interchange Project is delayed or deferred significantly, future traffic volumes on Higuera Street north of Prado Road may increase above current projections and lead to additional congestion and potential traffic operations impacts beyond what is currently projected in the Project traffic study.

Question #3 for Council: Does the Council support the currently proposed design option for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection that reduces conflicts for bicyclists if this option results in future traffic operations impacts? Two design options have been developed as part of the Project for the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection. These options are summarized as follows:

Option 1 (Retain Existing Southbound Bike Lane Design): This option generally retains the existing intersection configuration, with a southbound bike lane on Higuera that transitions from the curbside to the left of the adjacent traffic lane on Higuera approaching Los Osos Valley Rd. This requires southbound cyclists to merge across the adjacent traffic lane on a high-speed roadway to continue southbound, which can be challenging for most cyclists and intimidating for less-experienced cyclists. The addition of a protected northbound left-turn signal phase is proposed with this design alternative to address existing collision trends, but otherwise the intersection design would be similar to existing conditions. Under this option, the intersection is projected to operate at acceptable LOS D for existing, near-term and cumulative traffic conditions.

PROTECTED BIKE LANE W/

FLEX POSTS ENDS

UPSTREAM OF INTERSECTION

Item 7a
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road Intersection Option 1
Option 2 (Southbound Curbside Protected Bike Lane with Bike Signal): This concept was identified as an option to provide a lower-stress route for southbound cyclists consistent with the City’s ATP Design Guidance6 and other industry best practices, which recommend the addition of bicycle signals or setback/protected intersection crossings at locations that conflict with heavy right-turning movements. This concept would retain the southbound protected curbside bike lane all the way to the intersection, then separate the southbound bicycle movement from right-turning vehicles with a dedicated bike signal phase. Right turns on red are already prohibited at this approach and would remain prohibited during the bike signal phase. As with Option 1, this design would add a protected northbound left-turn phase to address ongoing collision concerns.

Analysis of traffic operations under Option 2 shows that adding a dedicated bicycle phase would create a significant traffic impact, resulting in a degradation from acceptable LOS D to unacceptable LOS E for future near-term and cumulative conditions. This option would operate at acceptable LOS D for existing conditions with the Project, but vehicle queues would increase significantly above existing levels in the eastbound and southbound directions.

The City Council would need to formally accept this General Plan policy deficiency before this design could be advanced further. It should also be noted that in addition to increasing traffic congestion, this design relies more heavily on compliance from motorists and cyclists in obeying red lights and right-turn on red restrictions to safely separate conflicts between vehicles and cyclists. With limited traffic enforcement resources to patrol this intersection frequently, this consideration should not be ignored in guiding final project designs.

6 2021 City of San Luis Obispo Active Transportation Plan, Appendix C (Design Guidelines), Policy 4.12: On streets with speeds of 30 mph or greater with striped bike lanes, or where protected bicycle lanes are provided, bike channelization should generally be avoided at rightturn lanes. Instead, alternative treatments such as protected intersections (setback crossings) or dedicated bike signal phases should be implemented to facilitate more comfortable intersection crossings for riders of all ages and ability levels.

Item 7a
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road Intersection Option 2
Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road Signal Phasing (Option 2)
At their May 16, 2024, meeting, the ATC recommended advancing design Option 2 (Southbound Bike Signal) as the preferred design alternative, since it would provide a lower stress option for bicycling through this intersection for more than just the most confident bicycle riders. This is the design option shown in the current 95%-level plans (Attachment B)

Item 7a
The pros and cons of each design option are summarized below for Council consideration:

Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road Intersection Design Options Design Option Advantages Disadvantages
Q3, Option 1 (Retain
Current Southbound
Bikeway Configuration)
Retain current
southbound bike lane
configuration, do not add
bike signal phase.
 Less impact on traffic
congestion, maintains
operations within General
Plan policy thresholds
 Retains existing road
configuration, likely more
intuitive for drivers and
cyclists
 Less reliance on red light
compliance for
effectiveness and safety
compared to Option 2
 Reduced project cost with
fewer modifications to
traffic signal (cost savings
of approximately
$100,000 compared to
Option 2)
 Retains difficult merge for
southbound bicyclists, more
stressful for less experience
cyclists
 Not consistent with ATP
Design Guidelines and best
practices for bicycle facility
design at intersections with
heavy right-turn traffic
Q3, Option 2
(Southbound Bike
Signal Phase)
Retain curbside bike lane
on southbound Higuera
approaching the
intersection, adding a
southbound bike signal
phase to separate cyclists
 More comfortable design
for less experienced
cyclists, eliminates need
to merge across highspeed traffic lanes.
 Consistent with City ATP
Design Guidance and
best practices for lowstress bikeway design at
high-traffic intersections
 Increases traffic delay and
congestion, resulting in future
traffic operations deficiency
conflicting with General Plan
policy thresholds
 May be less intuitive than
existing configuration, with
effectiveness relying on high
red-light compliance from
drivers and cyclists
 Higher project cost compared
to Option 1
It should be noted that both design options described above were included in the grant funding application for the Project, and staff does not expect the need for a scope change approval by the grant agency or risk to grant funding with either design option.

In addition, the General Plan Circulation Element and traffic studies prepared for several previous development projects identify the need for major reconstruction of the Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection to add additional traffic lanes and capacity in the future with build-out of the city. If the Council prefers to advance Option 1 (Retain Current Southbound Bikeway Configuration) as part of this Project, there could be potential to explore further opportunities to improve bicycle facilities at this intersection as part of a larger intersection reconstruction project in the future.

Item 7a
Question #4 for Council: Should staff continue further planning for a potential protected bikeway/shared-use path on Madonna Road as a future project? Early in Project development, staff explored opportunities to extend protected bike lanes on Madonna Road along the US 101 overcrossing, which would provide a continuous protected bikeway between Higuera Street and the terminus of the existing Madonna Road shared-use path at the US 101 SB Ramps/Madonna Inn intersection. This is a primary cross-town route for commuters, recreational bicycle riders, and Laguna Middle School students. The overpass of US 101 is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and any proposed changes would require their design approval.

Initial discussions with Caltrans in 2022 indicated that protected bike lanes could not be supported on the overpass, as this would require narrower auto lanes and clear shoulder widths than allowed per Caltrans design standards. Thus, protected bikeways within Caltrans right-of-way on Madonna were not included in the initial Project scope or grant funding request.

During public outreach throughout 2023, staff received many comments from community members requesting staff to continue to pursue protected bikeways on Madonna Road, including suggestions to evaluate a concept that would add a two-way bikeway on the north side of the street, effectively extending the existing shared-use path on Madonna Road all the way east to Higuera Street. This concept would improve connectivity for Laguna Middle School commuters with a more seamless route that avoids the need for cyclists to cross Madonna Road.

Thus, staff continued coordination with Caltrans, developed additional design concept alternatives, collected additional traffic volume data, prepared additional traffic operations studies, and closely tracked progress on pending amendments to Caltrans design standards. Based on this additional design evaluation, review of updated Caltrans complete street design standards, traffic operations analysis, and discussion with the ATC at their May 16, 2024 meeting, the following conclusions were confirmed:
 There are no design options that would provide physically separated bikeways along the Madonna Road overpass that can be advanced at this time within the funding and schedule constraints of the grant-funded Higuera Complete Street Project. Current plans include standard bike lanes with striped buffers (where width allows) and green pavement markings only on this segment of Madonna.  Any design alternatives for separated bikeways on the Madonna Road overpass would need to be explored as a future CIP project and will require additional funding, and approval of non-standard design elements by the City and Caltrans.

Ultimately, these non-standard design elements may not be approvable, and protected bikeways may not be feasible without larger infrastructure changes, such as widening the bridge over US 101 or constructing a separate parallel ped/bike bridge.

Item 7a
 The design option preferred by the ATC and staff for further evaluation as a future CIP project, depending on Council direction, includes addition of a two-way sidewalk-level shared-use path on the north side of Madona Road between the Madonna Inn/US 101 Southbound Ramp intersection and Higuera Street. This option would improve access for bicyclists and pedestrians (no sidewalks exist on north side of overpass) and provide a seamless low-stress route on Madonna Road. However, this design would require approval of non-standard auto & bike lane widths by the City and Caltrans and is anticipated to result in deficient traffic operations at the Higuera/Madonna intersection per City policy thresholds.

Future Madonna Overpass Shared-Use Path Concept - Looking East (Concept Assumes No Widening to Existing Bridge)
See Attachment E for the latest concept design showing a potential two-way shared-use path on Madonna Road and Attachment F for a traffic operations study prepared by CCTC for this design concept.

As discussed in the traffic study for this concept, a bicycle signal phase would be required at the Higuera/Madonna intersection with this design in order to provide a reasonable option for eastbound cyclists to cross the intersection to continue to northbound Higuera Street or eastbound towards the Meadow Park neighborhood. However, addition of this signal modification would result in deficient LOS E operations at this intersection and significant vehicle queues during peak periods. For example, delay per vehicle for all vehicles entering the intersection would increase by approx. 30 seconds per vehicle on average, and eastbound queues could be expected to regularly spill back on Madonna Road to the US 101 NB Ramps with this design alternative (a distance of approx. 900 feet).

Item 7a
Higuera/Madonna Intersection w/ Potential Future Shared-Use Path Considering these significant design constraints and anticipated traffic operations policy deficiencies, staff is seeking input from the Council on whether to continue further planning of this Madonna Road shared-use path concept. If Council has interest in continuing work on this concept, this project would need to be prioritized and additional funding would need to be approved as part of the FY2025-27 Financial Plan or another future budget cycle. Note that the ATC identified this as one of their priority project funding requests for the FY2025-27 Financial Plan and further improvements to Madonna Road are also recommended in the Draft Vision Zero Action Plan to address high collision rates (in the past five years there have been 2 severe injury collisions, one fatal collision, 7 bicycle collisions and 5 pedestrian collisions on Madonna Road between Higuera and Oceanaire).

The current Higuera Complete Streets Project includes pavement repairs and new roadway striping, including addition of striped bike lane buffers and green markings at conflict points where width allows; however, no physical bikeway separation will be included on the Madonna Overpass.

Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
The Active Transportation Committee (ATC) first reviewed the Higuera Complete Streets project on February 6, 2022, to provide early input on the conceptual design for the Project. The ATC then provided review and comment on 65% level design plans on May 16, 2024. The ATC’s key recommendations to staff following review of 65% designs included:

Item 7a

1. Preference for the Higuera/Los Osos Valley Road intersection design alternative featuring addition of a dedicated bicycle signal phase (Question #3, Option 2 described above)

2. Support for the Higuera road diet as currently proposed between Margarita and Bridge Streets.

3. General preference for more permanent (concrete) vertical separation for protected bikeways, with interest in providing more gaps in bikeway barriers to allow cyclists to merge out of bike lanes to pass other riders and to merge across traffic lanes ahead of intersections.

4. Desire for more significant bicycle safety improvements, if feasible, at the Higuera/Suburban intersection, which has a history of bicycle right-hook collisions, including a recent fatal collision.

5. Preference for staff to continue further design refinement and coordination with Caltrans on a design concept for Madonna Road that includes a two-way shareduse path on the north side of the roadway as a future project.

The current 95% plans reflect most of the ATC’s recommendations, except for (a) use of more permanent concrete barriers for bikeway separation throughout the Project, (b) addition of separated bikeways on the Madonna overpass, and (c) incorporation of major safety improvements at the Higuera/Suburban intersection. Primary safety concerns at the Higuera/Suburban intersection are related to northbound vehicle vs. bicycle right-hook collisions and conflicts between southbound vehicle left-turns vs. pedestrians and bicyclists. These concerns are highlighted with the tragic death of a cyclists at this intersection when hit by a right-turning vehicle in 2021. The City has since installed warning signage and green bike lane conflict markings. The recommended long-term improvements, which are described in the City’s Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, require off-site right-of-way and road widening to provide a dedicated northbound right-turn lane to the right of the northbound bicycle lane; however, the scale of these improvements cannot be accommodated within the current grant-funded project. In the short-term, staff is proposing modifications to the traffic signal to provide (a) a protected southbound leftturn phase, and (b) an illuminated “RIGHT TURN YIELD TO BIKES” sign that activates when cyclists approach the intersection. These improvements are currently in design and staff is endeavoring to install them in 2025 prior to the Higuera Complete Streets Project with existing Traffic Safety/Vision Zero account funds. Additional long-term safety improvements for the Higuera/Suburban intersection will be pursued with future budget requests.

Public Engagement
Over the last three years, staff has held a series of community outreach activities for the Higuera Complete Streets project. The public engagement strategy consisted of a combination of both formal and less-formal outreach activities (including weekend, afternoons and weeknights) to maximize opportunities for feedback and to ensure that input reflects the diverse voices of the full San Luis Obispo community. For those who were not able to attend in-person events, staff also collected input via email and phone.

Item 7a
Public engagement activities included two neighborhood pop-ups (at Food 4 Less Market and Meadow Park), two open house workshops, a resident forum hosted by the Chumash Village community, multiple presentations to the ATC and a project webpage. For a comprehensive description of outreach activities and a summary of input, see Attachment G. General themes from the community input process include the following:
 Concerns for bicycle and pedestrian safety on Higuera Street and Madonna Road due to heavy traffic, illegal speeding and distracted driving. Interest in reducing traffic speeds and increasing physical separation for pedestrians and bicyclists.  Concerns about bicycle safety traveling southbound on Higuera through the Madonna Road intersection due to need to merge across multiple vehicle traffic lanes.
 Interest in providing controlled ped/bike crossing on Higuera between Madonna Road and Margarita signals, ideally near Elks Lane.
 A desire to upgrade pedestrian infrastructure including curb ramps, sidewalks, and crosswalks
 A preference for a “gentle touch” approach to traffic calming along the Meadow Park neighborhood greenway vicinity, with general opposition to neighborhood traffic circles, as originally proposed, instead preferring measures such as speed humps, striped corner bulbouts, and stop-signs only where truly warranted.  A preference for protected bike lanes with strategically placed gaps to facilitate left turns at intersections and passing mid-block.
 Concern from some residents, particularly from the Chumash Village community, about potential traffic congestion and delays traveling along Higuera Street and entering/exiting driveways with addition of the proposed road diet between Margarita and Bridge Streets.

Staff has endeavored to incorporate this feedback into the project designs, where feasible, including a redesign of proposed traffic calming strategies within the Meadow Park neighborhood based on initial feedback from community members.

CONCURRENCE
Transportation staff have reviewed draft project designs with City Fire Department staff and will present final plans for Fire Department review before advancing the project to construction.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A draft environmental analysis has been prepared for the Project by Rincon Consultants, Inc. Based on evaluation of current Project details, the draft analysis concludes that the Project is eligible for a Class 1 Categorical Exemption (CE) under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15301(c) (Existing Facilities.) Based on Council input provided during this study session and final Project design details, the CEQA analysis will be finalized and documentation filed prior to advancing the project to construction.

Item 7a
It should be noted that the potential automobile level of service (LOS) impact discussed above at the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road intersection would represent an inconsistency with local traffic congestion policy, but not an environmental impact under CEQA. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, LOS or other measures of automobile delay shall no longer be used to define significant environmental impacts under CEQA. Instead, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is now used as the primary quantitative metric for evaluating transportation impacts under CEQA. The Project includes many features proven to improve access to walking and bicycling, which are anticipated to reduce citywide VMT.

FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2023-25
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:

There is no immediate fiscal impact attributed to the recommendations of the report; however, the options presented do have impacts to the total cost of the project. Final project estimates will be presented to Council with the formal request to advertise the project for bids. The below provides background on existing project funding potential budgetary impacts.

When project planning began in early 2022, the estimated construction cost based on preliminary design was approximately $8.8 million and only a small amount of funding had been secured for preliminary planning efforts. Since then, staff has secured approximately $9.1 million in outside grant funding towards project construction, including $6.9 million from the Caltrans Active Transportation Program and more than $2 million in regional funding commitments from SLOCOG. An additional $1.1 million in local funding was also approved as part of the 2023-25 Financial Plan to fund the remaining preconstruction activities and contribute towards project construction.

Based on 65%-level designs, construction costs, including contingency and soft costs, are conservatively estimated between $10.5 and $11.5 million, which exceeds current project funding resources by approximately $700,000 to $1.7 million. The primary factors contributing to the increased costs above the preliminary 2022 planning-level estimates are increases in overall road construction costs, particularly pedestrian curb ramp costs, and increases in pavement maintenance/repair costs. Staff is actively working with the project design consultant to fine-tune cost estimates and refine/remove non-essential design elements where possible to reduce construction costs and believes that some cost reductions can be achieved with the final designs. However, it is likely that a deficit of up to $1 million is likely to remain. Portions of this shortfall may be offset by funds remaining within other completed projects and potentially additional opportunities for regional funding increases via SLOCOG, however, staff plans to include a CIP request in the upcoming 2025-27 Financial Plan to fully fund project construction.

Item 7a
As noted previously, major changes to the project scope would require formal approval by the grant funding agencies and could jeopardize forfeiture of the >$9 million in current grant funding, so staff may not have the discretion to eliminate major components of the project design in an effort to reduce costs.

Funding
Sources
Total Budget
Available
Current Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund $0 $ $ $
State $0 $
Federal
Fees
Other: $0
Total $0 $0 $0 $

ALTERNATIVES

1. Council could direct staff not to move forward with this project all together, or to delay the project to a future date. This alternative is not recommended by staff, as this would risk forfeiture of >$9 million in outside grant funding. This would require the City to identify additional local funding to advance not only the active transportation and safety components of the project (if Council desires), but also to fund the pavement repairs included within the current project proposal ($3.8 million of project costs are for pavement repairs).

2. Council could provide specific feedback on topics other than focus area questions provided herein, and/or direct staff to pursue additional design alternatives not discussed in this staff report. Staff is supportive of receiving any feedback from the Council on this project. Staff would note some caution for feedback that requires removal of major project scope or requests that may incur significant delays, which could risk forfeiture of grant funding.

ATTACHMENTS
A – Project Vicinity Map
B – Project Plans (95% Level Striping Plans)
C – Typical Street Cross Sections
D – Higuera Complete Streets Project Traffic Study
E – Madonna Shared-Use Path Concept Design
F – Madonna Shared-Use Path Traffic Memo
G – Public Outreach Summary

Higuera Complete Streets Project Vicinity Map

Higuera Complete Streets Project
Typical Cross Sections by Segment
1 Note: Typical street cross sections shown for reference only. Actual dimensions will vary by location. See project plans for more detailed info.

Higuera Street – Marsh Street to South Street

2 Higuera Street – Bridge Street to Margarita Street

3 Higuera Street – Margarita Street to Las Praderas Drive

4 Higuera Street – Las Praderas Drive to Suburban Road

5 Higuera Street – Suburban Road to Los Osos Valley Road

6 Madonna Road – US 101 Overpass

7 Madonna Road – US 101 Northbound Ramps to Higuera

(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442

MEMORANDUM
Date: January 2, 2025
To: Luke Schwartz and Adam Fukushima, City of San Luis Obispo From: Joe Fernandez and Michelle Matson, CCTC
Subject: Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation This memorandum evaluates the operational effects of the Higuera Complete Street project, which would enhance pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in the City of San Luis Obispo along the Higuera Street corridor between Los Osos Valley Road and Marsh Street, on Madonna Road from the US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street, and on Bridge Street, Corrida Drive, and Woodbridge Street east of Higuera Street with neighborhood greenway improvements.

SUMMARY
Approximately 390 collisions were reported on the Higuera Street corridor between Marsh Street and Los Osos Valley Road within the study area in the ten-year period from 2014 through 2023, including 41 bicycle collisions and 14 pedestrian collisions. There were four bicycle collisions that resulted in a severe injury as well as two bicycle and one pedestrian collision that resulted in fatalities.

The proposed project would improve bicycle facility delineation and would reallocate roadway space to improve cyclist comfort and safety. In addition, the project would improve pedestrian accessibility and crossing experience with the addition of ADA-compliant curb ramps and high-visibility crosswalk markings.

A road diet would be implemented on Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita Avenue. The project would also modify the lane configurations and add bicycle and pedestrian signal phase at Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4), modify the signal phasing and add a bicycle signal phase at Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12), and install a traffic signal at Higuera Street/Elks Lane (#6). On the Madonna Road corridor, the project currently proposes to eliminate one of the westbound travel lanes at the Higuera Street/US 101 Southbound Ramp (#13) intersection. The above intersections would operate acceptably at level of service (LOS) D or better with the project except Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) which would operate at LOS E under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions during the PM peak hour.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The study corridor is a key north-south route for all modes of travel in the City. The City’s Active Transportation Plan proposes protected bicycle lanes along Higuera Street as a Tier 1 (highest) priority, and an Active Transportation Program Grant was recently awarded to construct the project. The project also includes proposed bikeway enhancements on Madonna Road between Higuera Street and the US 101 SB Ramps and a neighborhood greenway connection east of Higuera Street. This report is based on the 65% design plans and

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 2 comments prepared for the project and evaluates
the project effects on traffic operations and safety
for all users.

Exhibit 1 shows the project extents. The project
includes 4.6 miles of protected bike lanes, buffered
bike lanes, and various intersection improvements
(including high visibility crosswalks, leading
pedestrian intervals, a traffic signal installation, and signal safety upgrades) designed to increase safety
and visibility of bicyclists and pedestrians. The
project is intended to create safer routes to
Hawthorne Elementary School and Laguna Middle
School, as well as safe routes to school bus stops
for elementary, middle, and high school students
living along the corridor.

Unhoused residents served by the City’s only
homeless shelter on Prado Road will have improved
access to transit and services. Similarly, Cal Poly
students and other area residents will benefit from
improved connectivity to the southern areas of the
City.

Alternatives Considered but Discarded
This section describes alternatives that were considered in the project development process but were excluded from the current concepts.

Road Diet Limits
Road diets reallocate vehicle travel lanes for other uses and modes of travel, and have been shown to provide operational and safety benefits to all users. Four-lane undivided roadways have a history of relatively high crash rates as traffic volumes increase and as the inside lane is shared by higher-speed through traffic and left-turning vehicles (FHWA, 2014). Road diets typically convert a four-lane undivided road to a three-lane undivided road made up of two through lanes and a center turn lane. Research has shown that road diets reduce crashes, with various studies reporting reductions in crashes ranging from 19 percent to 47 percent (CMF Clearinghouse, 2023).

Generally, road diets may be appropriate when two-way peak hour volumes are below 1,750 vehicles per hour (FHWA, 2014). Exhibit 2 shows the existing PM peak hour volumes along the corridor compared to this threshold. The PM peak hour is typically the highest volume period of the day. Intersection volume flow and lane geometry characteristics play an important role, but this generic threshold is used as a starting point for concept refinement before more detailed analysis of intersection operations.

Exhibit 1: Project Extents

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 3 Exhibit 2: Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes
Exhibit 2 shows that the portion of the corridor north of South Street currently carries volumes below 1,750 vehicles per hour. The segment from South Street to Madonna Road is above this level, then volumes drop below the threshold until Prado Road. These trends and detailed intersection level operations analysis were used to inform initial project designs to determine where lane reductions could be feasible and appropriate based on this analysis. The road diet is proposed along Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita Street only as discussed further below.

South Street to Madonna Road Segment
Initial design concepts considered narrowing the southbound approach to Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) to provide a single southbound through lane instead of the dual lanes that currently exist and that are proposed in the current design. This would increase the available space for bicycle facilities, enabling either a wider bike lane and continuous separation from vehicular traffic on the southbound side and/or the ability to shift the median to provide width for a continuous northbound bike lane between Madonna Road and South Street.

The northbound bike lane currently ends between Madonna Road and South Street, forcing bicyclists to share the travel lane on Higuera Street, a 30 MPH roadway.

Narrowing the southbound approach would create significant queuing and vehicle delay in this constrained portion of the corridor. Using the existing volumes, the southbound average and 95th percentile queues would more than double with a single through lane, with 95th percentile queues spilling back through and beyond the

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 4 South Street intersection. This condition would worsen as traffic volumes grow with approved and pending projects in the area and has the potential to cause safety issues as queued vehicles block crosswalks and sight lines in the area. Retaining the dual southbound through lane design as currently proposed would preclude the ability to provide a continuous northbound bike lane, presenting safety and comfort concerns for cyclists.

The dual southbound lanes are analyzed herein. The project analysis does include prohibiting southbound left turns at Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) with volumes diverted to the Bridge Street intersection where a dedicated turn pocket is available. In addition, the project will convert one of the northbound through lanes at the intersection into a left turn lane which improves operations at the intersection into the future, particularly during construction of the Prado Creek Bridge, which will likely shift traffic to the Madonna Road/US 101 interchange.

The Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#12) intersection was also evaluated for an additional eastbound bicycle phase as well as a bicycle scramble phase which would operate at LOS F and LOS E during the PM peak hour, respectively. A southbound bicycle and pedestrian only signal phase with overlapping northbound and southbound through vehicles is currently proposed and analyzed herein.

Margarita Avenue to Los Osos Valley Road Segment
Initial concept development considered extending the road diet south of Margarita Avenue. This 1.1-mile segment includes six signalized intersections. Applying a road diet configuration to a corridor with frequent signalized intersections will have a larger impact on automobile operations than it would on a corridor with fewer signals (FHWA, 2014).

The Margarita Avenue/Higuera Street (#7) intersection was evaluated using existing volumes to determine the effect of continuing the road diet through this intersection. The wide median on Margarita Avenue requires split phasing on the side street approaches. This increases the green time allocated to the side streets at the expense of major street movements. Narrowing the southbound approach to a single lane would result in average queues blocking the DMV driveway, and 95th percentile queues over 550 feet long, more than double the current lengths. We recommend transitioning to a two-lane section north of Margarita Avenue, as reflected in the current design.

The Higuera Street segment from Prado Road to Tank Farm Road had PM peak hour volumes below 1,500 in 2022 and over 1,750 in 2018. The planned Prado Road overcrossing will significantly increase volumes on this portion of the corridor and reducing vehicular travel lanes is not recommended. Higuera Street south of Tank Farm Road currently carries over 1,750 vehicles per hour, indicating that a road diet is inappropriate.

The Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) intersection was evaluated for a southbound pedestrian and bicycle signal phase. However, the intersection would operate at LOS F and further increase queues. A bicycle only signal phase with overlapping northbound and southbound through vehicles is currently proposed and analyzed herein.

Madonna Road Overpass
Preliminary analysis showed that a Class I path with a bicycle signal phase on the overpass would operate at LOS F at the Southbound Ramps during the PM peak hour with undesirable queues. Class IV protected bike lanes with a bike signal phase on both sides of the roadway would operate at LOS D and would increase queuing on the ramps.

The City is planning to further explore the Class I path on the north side of the overpass with Caltrans.

However, it is not part of the current project, which will restripe the corridor and remove one of the westbound

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 5 lanes at the Higuera Street/ US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13) intersection. The current design includes Highway Design Manual (HDM) standard lane width for ease of approval.

SAFETY ANALYSIS
Traffic collision data was obtained from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and the City for Higuera Street and Madonna Road in the project vicinity. Table 1 summarizes the collision history and severity for the ten-year period between 2014 and 2023:

Table 1: Collision Summary (2014-2023)
There were 390 collisions reported on the Higuera Street corridor between Marsh Street and Los Osos Valley Road within the study area in the ten-year period from 2014 through 2023, fewer than the 398 collisions reported from 2012 to 2021. Between 2014 and 2023, 41 bicycle collisions and 14 pedestrian collisions were reported on the corridor. While bike and pedestrian trips represent about 15% of citywide mode share (ACS Commute Data), bicycles and pedestrians represent 60% and 33% of fatal and severe injury collisions, respectively, in the study area.

The pedestrian fatality occurred north of the South Street intersection due to a pedestrian violation. The two fatal bicycle collisions occurred at intersections, one due to an improper vehicle turning movement and one due to a wrong way cyclist and an impaired vehicle driver. Four bicycle severe injury collisions were reported including one vehicle right-of-way violation when entering traffic, two improper vehicle turning movements, and one unknown cause. Two vehicle hit object fatal collisions occurred, one south of Chumash Lane due to improper turning and one at Marsh Street due to improper driving. Three severe injury collisions were reported including a hit object collision south of Margarita Avenue, a broadside collision south of Fontana Way, and a bicycle collision south of Walker Street.

Location
Total Fatal Severe
Injury
Other
Injury
PDO All
Ped.

All
Bike
Ped.

Severe
Injury
Bike
Severe
Injury
Ped.

Fatal
Bike
Fatal

1. Higuera St/Marsh St 20 1 1 2 16 0 0 0 0 0 0

2. Higuera St/High St/Pismo St 23 0 3 13 7 1 6 0 1 0 0

3. Higuera St/South St 45 1 0 13 31 2 3 0 0 1 0

4. Higuera St/Madonna Rd 41 0 0 16 25 0 4 0 0 0 0

5. Higuera St/Bridge St 11 0 1 5 5 0 1 0 1 0 0

6. Higuera St/Elks Ln 13 0 0 8 5 1 0 0 0 0 0

7. Higuera St/Margarita Ave 18 0 1 10 7 0 2 0 1 0 0

8. Higuera St/Prado Rd 27 1 1 13 12 3 4 0 0 0 1

9. Higuera St/Granada Dr 9 0 0 4 5 1 1 0 0 0 0

10. Higuera St/Tank Farm Rd 23 0 0 12 11 1 2 0 0 0 0

11. Higuera St/Suburban Rd 24 1 0 11 12 0 4 0 0 0 1

12. Higuera St/LOVR 29 0 1 5 23 0 0 0 0 0 0
Higuera Other (LOVR to Marsh) 107 1 3 50 53 5 14 0 1 0 0 HIGUERA TOTAL 390 5 11 162 212 14 41 0 4 1 2
Madonna (SB Ramps to Higuera) 80 0 1 34 45 5 4 0 0 0 0
PDO=Property Damage Only
Source: Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, City of San Luis Obispo, CCTC, 2024.

Collsion Severity Pedestrian/Bike Collisions
Collision Summary (2014-2023)

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 6 Table 2 summarizes the collision factors and types for the ten-year period between 2014 and 2023:

Table 2: Collision Factors and Types (2014-2023)
Approximately half of collisions were due to unsafe speed or improper turning. The primary collision types were broadside and rear end with approximately 30 percent of total collisions each.

Safety Benefits of the Proposed Project
Increased bike delineation of protected bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, green bike lanes, bike boxes, and two stage bike turn boxes will increase visibility for cyclists and guide cyclists through the corridor. In addition, the project would restripe all crosswalks with ladder striping to increase pedestrian visibility.

The project proposes the installation of accessible pedestrian signal (APS) push buttons, countdown pedestrian signal heads, leading pedestrian intervals (LPI), and high-visibility signal backplates throughout the corridor where such features do not currently exist. Crash reduction factors (CRF) estimate the reduction in collisions resulting from specific improvements and are presented as estimated percent reductions as reported by the Federal Highway Administration. Where multiple safety improvements are installed, the effect of each CRF is multiplicative rather than additive. CRFs applicable to the project include:
• 15% reduction for all collision types when improving signal timing. • 15% reduction for pedestrian and bicycle collisions when installing advanced stop bar before crosswalk (Bicycle Box).

Location
Total
Speed
Turning ROW Signals/Signs DUI Other Broad-side Rear End Hit Object Side-swipe Head On Other

1. Higuera St/Marsh St 20 0 5 0 3 5 7 3 1 12 4 0 0

2. Higuera St/High St/Pismo St 23 8 5 3 2 0 5 7 6 4 4 1 1

3. Higuera St/South St 45 8 10 4 5 4 14 10 9 7 15 2 2

4. Higuera St/Madonna Rd 41 12 10 1 1 3 14 4 21 4 7 4 1

5. Higuera St/Bridge St 11 3 5 1 1 0 1 6 4 1 0 0 0

6. Higuera St/Elks Ln 13 3 1 3 0 2 4 3 1 3 3 2 1

7. Higuera St/Margarita Ave 18 0 4 4 4 2 4 11 1 2 1 2 1

8. Higuera St/Prado Rd 27 7 1 2 5 1 11 4 8 0 7 5 3

9. Higuera St/Granada Dr 9 2 1 1 2 0 3 3 2 1 1 1 1

10. Higuera St/Tank Farm Rd 23 8 6 1 2 0 6 6 11 3 2 0 1

11. Higuera St/Suburban Rd 24 2 4 5 7 2 4 16 2 2 1 3 0

12. Higuera St/LOVR 29 7 8 1 3 4 6 4 7 7 3 6 2
Higuera Other (LOVR to Marsh) 107 27 26 23 5 3 23 46 20 17 11 3 10 HIGUERA TOTAL 390 87 86 49 40 26 102 123 93 63 59 29 23 Madonna (SB Ramps to Higuera) 80 22 8 8 6 6 30 16 35 8 10 3 8 Source: Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System, City of San Luis Obispo, CCTC, 2024.

Collision Factors and Types (2014-2023)
ROW = Right-of-Way Violation; DUI: Driving Under the Influence.

Collision Factor Collision Type

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 7 • 15% reduction for all collision types when adding three-inch yellow retroreflective sheeting to signal backplates.
• 25% reduction for pedestrian and bicycle collisions when installing countdown pedestrian signal heads.
• 30% reduction in all collisions when adding protected left turn phasing. • 30% reduction in all collisions for a road diet.
• 45% reduction in pedestrian and bicycle collisions when installing separated bike lanes. • 60% reduction in pedestrian and bicycle collisions when adding a LPI.

The design elements proposed as part of the project include proven best practices for reducing the frequency and severity of collisions for all road users, particularly bicycles and pedestrians.

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Traffic operations were analyzed at the following intersections using the Synchro 11 software package applying the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methods and 2022 counts unless otherwise noted below:

1. Higuera Street/Marsh Street

2. Higuera Street/High Street/Pismo Street

3. Higuera Street/South Street

4. Higuera Street/Madonna Road

5. Higuera Street/Bridge Street

6. Higuera Street/Elks Lane (2023 count)

7. Higuera Street/Margarita Avenue

8. Higuera Street/Prado Road

9. Higuera Street/Granada Drive

10. Higuera Street/Tank Farm Road

11. Higuera Street/Suburban Road

12. Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (2023 count)

13. Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps

14. Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps

15. Higuera Street/Chumash Drive (2024 count)
The City’s Circulation Element specifies a performance standard of level of service (LOS) D or better for arterials like South Higuera Street and Madonna Road. The City’s Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines identify thresholds for local policy consistency, noting that a project may have a significant impact if it causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available turn pocket capacity and presents a contextually significant safety hazard.

Existing Conditions
The existing vehicular traffic volumes are shown in Attachment A and the count data is included as Attachment B. The City is currently updating minimum green and yellow times at traffic signals to comply with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) minimum bike timing and recommended yellow clearance intervals. These timing changes were assumed to be in place for all scenarios and will have minimal effect on delays and queuing.

Table 3 shows the existing peak hour auto level of service (LOS) at the study intersections. The Synchro output sheets including queue reports are included in Attachment C.

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 8 Table 3: Existing Intersection Levels of Service
All intersections operate acceptably at LOS D or better except the side-street stop-controlled intersection of Higuera Street/Elks Lane (#6) during the PM peak hour. The peak hour traffic signal warrant is currently met and the intersection will be upgraded to a traffic signal with the project.

The following existing queue deficiencies are noted:
• Higuera Street/ South Street (#3): the westbound left, northbound left, and southbound left turn queues exceed the storage lengths during one or more peak hours.

Intersection Delay1 LOS
AM 18.1 B
PM 20.8 C
AM 18.8 B
PM 36.0 D
AM 26.5 C
PM 26.7 C
AM 19.6 B
PM 25.4 C
AM 11.5 B
PM 15.7 C
AM 17.3 C
PM 59.5 F
AM 10.0 B
PM 9.9 A
AM 17.4 B
PM 19.9 B
AM 8.8 A
PM 10.8 B
AM 21.1 C
PM 23.7 C
AM 6.5 A
PM 13.7 B
AM 17.2 B
PM 52.7 D
AM 15.4 B
PM 25.5 C
AM 9.4 A
PM 21.5 C
AM 12.9 B
PM 14.5 B

13. Madonna Rd/US 101 SB Ramps

14. Madonna Rd/US 101 NB Ramps

9. Higuera St/Granada Dr

10. Higuera St/Tank Farm Rd

11. Higuera St/Suburban Rd

12. Higuera St/Los Osos Valley Rd
Existing Intersection Levels of Service
Existing

1. Higuera St/Marsh St

2. Higuera St/High St/Pismo St

3. Higuera St/South St

4. Higuera St/Madonna Rd

6. Higuera St/Elks Ln

7. Higuera St/Margarita Ave

5. Higuera St/Bridge St
Peak
Hour

1. HCM 6th or HCM 2000 average control delay in seconds per vehicle. For side-streetstop controlled intersections, the worst approach's delay is reported.

Note: Unacceptable operations at City intersections shown in bold text.

15. Higuera St/Chumash Dr

8. Higuera St/Prado Rd

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 9 • Higuera Street/ Madonna Road (#4): the northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length in the PM peak hour.
• Higuera Street/ Prado Road (#8): the northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length in both the AM and PM peak hours.
• Higuera Street/ Los Osos Valley Road (#12): the eastbound right queue exceeds the storage length in the AM and PM peak hour.

Future Year Scenarios
Peak hour turning movement forecasts were developed for the Near Term (2030) and Cumulative (2040) conditions analysis using the City’s Travel Demand Model (TDM). The Near Term forecasts include significant approved and pending land use projects such as San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch, and Froom Ranch but exclude planned improvements to the US 101/Prado Road interchange, the Prado Bridge Replacement and related intersection improvements at the Higuera Street/Prado Road (#8) intersection, or any other major network changes. This is conservative since it assumes all the major approved projects in the City are built and occupied prior to completion of key improvements along Prado Road which will reduce travel demand along portions of the Higuera Street corridor.

Exhibit 3 shows planning-level peak hour volume forecasts along the corridor under Near Term conditions compared to the road diet threshold. The northern portion of the corridor in the Near Term is expected to carry fewer than 1,750 vehicles per hour. The segment from Madonna Road to South Street is above this level, then volumes drop below the threshold until Margarita Avenue through Los Osos Valley Road. This indicates that the road diet is expected to perform acceptably under the highest volume scenario.

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 10 Exhibit 3: Near Term PM Peak Hour Volumes
The Cumulative forecasts reflect buildout of City General Plan and regional land uses and include the Prado Road overcrossing of US 101 (with northbound ramp access) as well as the extension of Prado Road to Broad Street. These new connections will shift travel patterns in the City and reduce travel demand along Higuera Street between Madonna Road and Prado Road. The Prado Road bridge west of Higuera Street is assumed to be widened in this scenario, along with implementation of a protected intersection at the Prado Road/Higuera Street intersection.

Exhibit 4 shows planning-level peak hour volume forecasts along the corridor between Higuera Street/South Street (#3) and Higuera Street/Margarita Avenue (#7) under Cumulative conditions compared to the road diet threshold. The segment from South Street to Madonna Road is expected to carry more than 1,750 vehicles per hour, but volumes drop below the threshold between Madonna Road and Margarita Avenue. This indicates that the road diet is expected to perform acceptably through buildout of the General Plan.

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 11 Exhibit 4: Cumulative PM Peak Hour Volumes between South Street and Margarita Avenue Project Analysis
The proposed project would affect vehicular capacity at the study intersections on Higuera Street from Madonna Road to north of Margarita Avenue where the road diet begins as well as the Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) intersection. Accordingly, the project analysis and evaluation of future conditions is limited to the locations where vehicular capacity will change (geometric changes or modified signal phasing).

The remainder of the corridor has been studied extensively as a part of the City’s Circulation Element and multiple transportation impact studies.

Table 4 shows the peak hour auto level of service (LOS) at the study intersections under Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Conditions. The Near Term and Cumulative traffic volumes are shown in Attachment A.

The Synchro output sheets are included in Attachment C.

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 12 Table 4: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service All study locations operate acceptably at LOS D or better under all scenarios except Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) during the PM peak hour under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the project and the addition of the southbound bicycle signal phase, northbound protected left turn phase, eastbound right turn overlap phase, LPI, time of day plans, and no right turn on red (RTOR) for southbound and eastbound.

The proposed Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) project signal phasing is shown in Exhibit 5.

Exhibit 5: Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) Proposed Signal Phasing With the northbound protected left turn phase, eastbound right turn overlap phase, LPI, time of day plans, and no bike phase, the intersection would operate at LOS C (26.3 seconds of average delay) and D (54.9 seconds of average delay) during the AM and PM peak hour under Cumulative Conditions with the project, respectively.

With a bicycle and pedestrian phase, the intersection would operate at LOS F during the PM peak hour. Note that the analysis software reports conditions with the bicycle and pedestrian phases actuated (e.g. the worst case); when not actuated the operations would be better.

Intersection Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS Delay1 LOS AM 19.6 B 33.5 C 25.1 C 46.3 D 25.6 C 46.5 D
PM 25.4 C 42.3 D 32.9 C 51.9 D 33.2 C 52.1 D
AM 11.5 B 12.0 B 15.2 C 15.0 C 20.5 C 17.7 C
PM 15.7 C 15.4 C 21.8 C 19.9 C 26.6 D 21.4 C
AM 17.3 C 8.9 A 22.6 C 10.4 B 25.0 D 10.7 B
PM 59.5 F 16.8 B 83.9 F 18.4 B 120.3 F 19.0 B
AM 17.2 B 30.7 C 27.7 C 36.1 D 21.5 C 35.9 D
PM 52.7 D 54.9 D 55.0 E 61.1 E 55.0 E 61.1 E
AM 15.4 B 30.5 C 21.5 C 36.2 D 21.9 C 36.9 D
PM 25.5 C 36.7 D 26.5 C 39.0 D 28.4 C 42.9 D
AM 9.4 A 24.9 C 10.3 B 25.5 C 10.7 B 25.6 C
PM 21.5 C 28.7 C 25.3 C 36.9 D 26.1 C 37.4 D
AM 12.9 B 15.7 C 15.0 C 19.3 C 15.8 C 20.8 C
PM 14.5 B 17.2 C 15.4 C 18.4 C 16.2 C 19.7 C

5. Higuera St/
Bridge St2
Existing +
Project

6. Higuera St/
Elks Ln2

1. HCM 6th or HCM 2000 average control delay in seconds per vehicle. For side-street-stop controlled intersections, the worst approach's delay is reported. A 500' initial southbound queue was added to #12 for the HCM 6th Edition methodology based on intersection observations. The addition of a bicycle phase requires the use of HCM 2000 and the initial queue is not used.

Therefore, the delay in Plus Project columns may be longer than shown in the table.

Note: Unacceptable operations at City intersections shown in bold text.

Existing Cumulative
+ Project
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service Peak
Hour
Cumulative

15. Higuera St/
Chumash Dr2
Near Term Near Term
+ Project

12. Higuera St/
LOVR

13. Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB

14. Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB

4. Higuera St/
Madonna Rd

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 13 Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) operates acceptably with the addition of a southbound bicycle and pedestrian phase, restriction of southbound left turns, conversion of a northbound through lane to a left turn lane, LPI, time of day plans, and no RTOR for southbound, eastbound, and northbound. A traffic signal with a northbound protected left turn vehicle phase and bicycle refuge for northbound left turning cyclists would operate acceptably at Higuera Street/Elks Lane (#6). The Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12) project signal phasing is shown in Exhibit 6.

Exhibit 6: Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4) Proposed Signal Phasing The Higuera Street/Bridge Street (#5) and Higuera Street/Chumash Drive (#15) intersections would also operate acceptably with the road diet.

The existing signal timing on the Madonna Road Overpass is coordinated during the PM peak hour and the cycle length does not accommodate the southbound pedestrian movement at Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13). The southbound pedestrian flashing don’t walk time continues with eastbound left and northbound right turning vehicles prior to eastbound left turning vehicles which cannot be fully modeled in Synchro. The analysis assumes signal timing updates at the intersections consistent with the CAMUTCD as well as LPI, and no RTOR for the eastbound and westbound Madonna Road phases as well as the Madonna Inn driveway. Note that with the existing signal timing and removal of a westbound through lane at Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13), the intersection delay would increase by less than one second over the no project conditions.

Table 5 and Table 6 summarize the vehicular queuing for key movements at City and Caltrans intersections.

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 14 Table 5: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (City) AM 231 278 #357 382 #357 382 -
PM #314 380 #408 #484 #408 #484 -
AM 33 318 125 #749 131 #749 -
PM 47 347 61 347 61 347 -
AM 124 94 181 136 181 136 -
PM 207 140 #397 #246 #397 #246 -
AM 72 244 110 394 110 394 -
PM 112 303 168 470 185 532 -
AM 135 171 196 243 219 271 -
PM 196 202 240 238 #267 263 -
AM 106 97 172 202 172 202 -
PM 230 228 281 290 281 302 -
AM -
PM -
AM 8 40 10 46 13 47 -
PM 110 168 138 169 168 170 -
AM 0 6 0 16 0 17 -
PM 0 22 0 30 3 34 -
AM 0 425 0 588 0 654 -
PM 0 668 0 754 0 852 -
AM 0 26 0 26 0 26 -
PM 0 39 0 40 0 41 -
AM #369 467 #485 610 #442 556 436
PM #463 #584 #496 #585 #496 #585 #550
AM 102 128 111 127 131 157 53
PM 166 242 194 274 194 274 174
AM 58 185 78 257 78 257 191
PM 80 #292 #107 #333 #107 #333 #368
AM 159 280 173 321 195 363 285
PM 387 613 455 #734 455 #734 683
AM 92 152 126 214 94 159 141
PM 415 #713 409 #719 409 #719 611
AM -
PM -
Existing
No
Project
Plus
Project
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
Near Term
No
Project
Plus
Project
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (City)1 Intersection Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
Cumulative
No
Project
No Bike
Phase

4. Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
EBL 850
EBR 140
NBL 160
NBT -
SBT 220 (375)
SBR 330 (375)

1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Bold indicates queue length longer than storage or block length. # indicates that 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. m indicates volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

2. Existing storage length (Project storage length) in feet.

12. Higuera St/
LOVR
EBL -
SBR -
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle
SBT -

5. Higuera St/
Bridge St
≤ 1
vehicle

EBL/R -
NBL 175
SBT -
SBR 50

6. Higuera St/
Elks Ln
EBR 100
WB -
NBL

15. Higuera St/
Chumash Dr WB -
≤ 1
vehicle
200
Plus
Project
≤ 1
vehicle
≤ 1
vehicle

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 15 Table 6: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (Caltrans) Queue deficiencies are noted at the following locations:
• Higuera Street/Madonna Road (#4): The eastbound right and northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during one or more peak hours with the project. The northbound queue would also reach Bridge Street during one or more peak hours with the project. Implementation of the project would substantially shorten the forecast northbound left turn queue by adding an additional lane. We recommend installing “KEEP CLEAR ” pavement markings at Bridge Street and extending one of the northbound left turn lanes to Bridge Street.
• Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road (#12): The eastbound right and northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during one or more peak hours with or without the bike phase and the addition of a northbound protected left turn phase, eastbound right turn overlap phase, LPI, and time of day plans. We recommend restriping the northbound left turn lane storage to 375 feet or as feasible within the existing roadway width.
• Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps (#13): The westbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during the PM peak hour under Existing Conditions with the project. We recommend the project reduce the westbound ten-foot bike lane width to increase the westbound left turn lane storage to the existing length or longer as feasible.
• Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps (#14): The northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during the PM peak hour under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the AM 119 157 163 #222 175 #227
PM 191 #246 m168 m#186 m159 m154
AM 109 290 138 366 153 366
PM 165 418 197 #554 m194 m#500
AM 162 205 197 227 256 #300
PM #302 #387 #334 #426 #389 #489
AM 137 56 235 119 230 119
PM 48 30 67 32 67 32
AM 187 157 #252 #305 #252 #305
PM 257 #206 #321 #406 #321 m#392
AM 193 61 295 541 295 541
PM 196 31 254 46 253 46
AM 231 276 306 363 332 397
PM #482 479 #651 #683 #708 #759
AM 104 146 109 147 109 147
PM 138 168 168 206 168 206
AM 66 70 110 136 110 136
PM 45 51 46 54 46 54

2. Existing storage length (Project storage length) in feet.

1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Bold indicates queue length longer than storage or block length. # indicates that 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. m indicates volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

14. Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB
EBL
410 &
900
EBT 950
WBT 850
NBL 170
Near Term Cumulative
No
Project
Plus
Project
No
Project
Plus
Project
No
Project
Plus
Project

NBT/R -

13. Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
WBL 250 (235)
WBT 950
NBL 700
NBR 240
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues (Caltrans)1 Intersection Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
Existing

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project - Traffic Operations Evaluation 16 project. However, the queue can be accommodated in the bay taper and would not likely block the adjacent lane.

CONCLUSIONS
The project will substantially improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians by improving delineation, increasing separation from vehicular traffic, improving traffic signal timing, and implementing a road diet on a portion of the corridor, all measures that have been proven to improve cyclist comfort and reduce frequency and severity of collisions. Vehicular queueing and delay will increase along the constrained portions of the corridor.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Traffic Volume Figures
B. Traffic Count Data
C. Synchro Output Sheets

REFERENCES
City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. Circulation Element of the General Plan. _______. 2020. Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. _______. 2021. Active Transportation Plan.
_______. 2022. Active Transportation Program Higuera Complete Streets Grant Application.

Crash Modification Clearinghouse. 2023. Accessed via https://www.cmfclearinghouse.org/.

Federal Highway Administration Safety Program. 2014. Road Diet Informational Guide. _______. 2007. Desktop Reference for Crash Reduction Factors.

MADONNA RD
US 101 SB RAMP

CITY R/W

CALTRANS R/W

EXISTING CLASS I PATH

WITH BLENDED CURB RAMP

CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE LANE
10' 10'
12'
11' 10' 10.5' 9.5'
149+00 150+00 151+00 152+00 153

CONSTRUCT BLENDEDCURB RAMP TO

ACCOMODATE BICYCLISTSAND PEDESTRIANS

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALK WITHGREEN MARKINGS
TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH CONCRETE CURB AND 1.5' GUTTER

PAVED SHOULDERS
CONST. CL

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALK ANDGREEN BIKE LANECONFLICT MARKINGS

ENSURE PEDESTRIAN PUSH

BUTTONS COMPLY WITH

ADA AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL

MAST ARM IS LONG

ADJUST SIGNAL ENOUGH

HEADS ON MAST ARM

82.6'
6'

PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. FENCE
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. FENCE
41'

75.5'
6'
2' 11' 11' 11' 11' 11' 12.5' 13.5'
8' 2'

34.5'

3.5'
CONST. CL MADONNA RD
+00 154+00 155+00 156+00 157+00 158

CLASS II BIKE LANE

2.4'
11' 10.5' 10.5' 10.5' 10.5' 10.5' 5'

CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE LANE

TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH

CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER

PAVED SHOULDER

CITY R/W

CALTRANS R/W

RELOCATE FIRE

HYDRANT
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. BARRIER

WITH RAILING
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. BARRIER;UPGRADE RAILING

71.5'
49' 21.5'

PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. FENCE
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. FENCE

MADONNA RD OVERPASS
US 101
2'
8'

10.4'
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:

PROJECT TITLE:

SHEET TITLE:
of
SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION 85 DIAL TOLL FREE
1-800-422-4133

AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG
Underground Service Alert
MATCHLINE - "M" STA 153+00, SEE BELOW LEFT
MATCHLINE - STA 158+00, SEE SHEET 2
MATCHLINE - STA 153+00, SEE ABOVE RIGHT

SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
20 20 0 10 40

HIGUERA CORRIDOR

COMPLETE STREETS
DVDVSFJan. 10, 251"=20'
2021-206_Concept Plans.dwg
1 3
x CONCEPT DESIGNS PROVIDED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES ONLY. PLANS ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
x EXISTING STRIPING CONFLICTING WITH NEW STRIPING TO
BE REMOVED.

GENERAL NOTES:

MADONNA ROAD

TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

MADONNA RD OVERPASS
CONST. CL
US 101 NB

ON-RAMP
US 101 NB OFF-RAMP

CITY R/W

CALTRANS R/W

HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK

TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALK WITH

GREEN MARKINGS
+00 159+00 160+00 161+00 162+00 163

HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK AND

GREEN BIKE LANE CONFLICT MARKINGS

CLASS II BIKE LANE

CLASS II BIKE LANE
2' 8'

3.5'
12' 10.5'

10.5' 10.5'
5'

CONSTRUCT BLENDEDCURB RAMP TO

ACCOMODATE BICYCLISTSAND PEDESTRIANS

CONSTRUCT CURB RAMP TO

ACCOMODATE BICYCLISTSAND PEDESTRIANS CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER

CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER

TWO-WAY

CLASS I

PATH ENSURE PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTONS

COMPLY WITH ADA

INSTALL PEDESTRIAN

PUSH BUTTON ANDPEDESTRIAN SIGNAL
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. BARRIER WITHRAILING

PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. BARRIER;UPGRADE RAILING
26' 22.5'

55.5'

13.5'
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. BARRIER;UPGRADE RAILING
PROTECT IN PLACEEXIST. BARRIER WITHRAILING

SAN LUIS
OBISPO
CREEK
US 101 PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. GUARDRAIL

PROTECT IN PLACE
EXIST. POLE
7'
8'

10.4'

4.5'
4'

22.9' 46'
11' 10.5' 10.5'

2.4'

10.5' 10.5' 10.5' 4.6'
PAVED

SHOULDERS

MADONNA RD
CONST. CL

CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE LANE

TWO-WAY CLASS I
PATH

RESTRIPE LEFT

TURN LANE

RESTRIPEMERGING LANE
+00 164+00 165+00 166+00

HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK

AND GREEN BIKE LANE

CONFLICT MARKINGS

CLASS II BIKE LANE
10'
2'
10'

CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER
PAVED

SHOULDERS
57'
PROTECT INPLACE EXIST.

BARRIER WITH

RAILING

PROTECT

IN PLACE
EXIST.

BARRIER;

UPGRADERAILING

SAN LUIS
OBISPO
CREEK 5' 10' 7.2' 12' 10.5' 10.2'

26.3'

1.1' 56'
EXIST. STREET

LIGHTS TO BE

RELOCATED
10' 10' 10' 12'

3.5'
8'
2'
10' 12' 10' 10' 5'
2'

7.8'
PAVED

SHOULDERS
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:

PROJECT TITLE:

SHEET TITLE:
of
SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION 85 DIAL TOLL FREE
1-800-422-4133

AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG
Underground Service Alert

SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
20 20 0 10 40

HIGUERA CORRIDOR

COMPLETE STREETS
DVDVSFJan. 10, 251"=20'
2021-206_Concept Plans.dwg
2 3

SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
20 20 0 10 40
MATCHLINE - STA 163+00, SEE BELOW LEFT
MATCHLINE - STA 166+50, SEE SHEET 3
MATCHLINE - STA 163+00, SEE ABOVE RIGHT MATCHLINE - STA 158+00, SEE SHEET 1 x CONCEPT DESIGNS PROVIDED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES ONLY. PLANS ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
x EXISTING STRIPING CONFLICTING WITH NEW STRIPING TO
BE REMOVED.

GENERAL NOTES:

MADONNA ROAD

TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

MADONNA RD
CONST. CL

CLASS I CROSSWALK

WITH UPDATED

DRIVEWAY REMOVE BIKE RAMP AND

RECONSTRUCT AREA TO TIE

INTO RAISED CLASS I PATH
110+00
111+00
112+00
113+00
167+00 168+00 169+00 170+00 171+00 171+23

HIGUERA ST
5' 10' 10' 10' 10' 12'
10' 2'
2'
8' 3.5'
3' 11'

12.5' 11.7'
11' 11' 6' 11' 11'

14.9' 14.4'

TRANSITIONTWO-WAY CLASS I

PATH WIDTH FROM
10' TO 8'
2' 10'

3.5'

15.5'
18'

CONCRETE CURB
AND 1.5' GUTTER

RESTRIPE CLASS II BIKE LANE

AND BIKE BOX

CLASS II BIKE LANE

POTENTIAL BICYCLE SIGNALPHASE TO PROVIDE SIGNALIZED

CROSSING FOR EASTBOUNDCYCLISTS FROM PATH TOCONTINUE TOWARDS

NORTHBOUND HIGUERA ST OR

EASTBOUND TO MEADOW PARK

NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH

PACIFIC COAST CENTER

RESTRIPE GREEN BIKE LANE

CONFLICT MARKINGS

BIKE BOX FOR BICYCLISTS

TRAVELING WESTBOUNDTO ACCESS CLASS I PATH

CLASS II BUFFERED BIKE

LANE CONTINUES

SOUTHBOUND

CLASS II BIKE LANE

TRANSITIONS TO CLASS III

FACILITY NORTHBOUND

BIKE RAMP FOR WESTBOUNDBICYCLISTS FROM HIGUERA ST

TO ACCESS CLASS I PATH

15.5'

15.5'

16.8'
RELOCATE EXIST.

DRAINAGE CATCHBASIN

64.5'

32.5' 22'

CONNECT TO
EXIST. WALKWAY

3.5'

13.5'
PAVED

SHOULDERS
CITY SPECIFICATION NO.DATE:

PROJECT TITLE:

SHEET TITLE:
of
SHEET NO.DESIGNED BY:DRAWN BY:CHECKED BY:APPROVED BY:SCALE:PLAN FILE NO. / LOCATION 85 DIAL TOLL FREE
1-800-422-4133

AT LEAST TWO WORKING DAYS

BEFORE YOU DIG
Underground Service Alert

SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
20 20 0 10 40
2021-206_Concept Plans.dwg
3 MADONNA ROAD

TWO-WAY CLASS I PATH

SCALE PLAN SCALE FEET
20 20 0 10 40
MATCHLINE - STA 166+50, SEE SHEET 2

HIGUERA CORRIDOR

COMPLETE STREETS
DVDVSFJan. 10, 251"=20'
3 x CONCEPT DESIGNS PROVIDED FOR DISCUSSION
PURPOSES ONLY. PLANS ARE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.
x EXISTING STRIPING CONFLICTING WITH NEW STRIPING TO
BE REMOVED.

GENERAL NOTES:

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

(805) 316-0101
895 Napa Avenue, Suite A-6, Morro Bay, CA 93442

MEMORANDUM
Date: January 2, 2025
To: Luke Schwartz and Adam Fukushima, City of San Luis Obispo From: Joe Fernandez and Michelle Matson, CCTC
Subject: Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation This memorandum evaluates the operational effects of the Higuera Complete Street project with a future Class I path on the north side of Madonna Road from the US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street. The Class I path is under consideration as a future alternative to the Class II buffered bike lanes currently included in the Higuera Complete Streets plans. The Class I future alternative would also include an eastbound Class II bike lane.

SUMMARY
The Higuera Complete Street project will enhance pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in the City of San Luis Obispo along the Higuera Street corridor between Los Osos Valley Road and Marsh Street, on Madonna Road from the US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera Street, and on Bridge Street, Corrida Drive, and Woodbridge Street east of Higuera Street with neighborhood greenway improvements. Highlights of the current project include:
• A road diet on Higuera Street between Bridge Street and Margarita Avenue. • Reconstruction of the northwest corner of Higuera Street/Madonna Road. • Removal of a westbound through lane at Higuera Street/US 101 Southbound Ramp • Class II buffered bike lanes on Madonna Road.
• Bicycle signal phases at Higuera Street/Madonna Road and Higuera Street/Los Osos Valley Road. • Installation of accessible pedestrian signal (APS) push buttons, countdown pedestrian signal heads, leading pedestrian intervals (LPI), and high-visibility signal backplates throughout the corridor where such features do not currently exist.

A future project may include reconstruction of the existing overcrossing to accommodate an eastbound Class II bike lane and a Class I path on the north side of the overcrossing and removing the Class II buffered bike lanes as evaluated in this memorandum.

The Madonna Road intersections with the US 101 Ramps and Higuera Street would operate acceptably at level of service (LOS) D or better with the Higuera Complete Street project and the installation of a Class I path on the north side of the Madonna Road interchange and a southbound bicycle and pedestrian phase at Higuera St/Madonna Road. However, Higuera St/Madonna Road operates at LOS E under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions during both peak hours with a bicycle phase serving the Class I path on the northwest corner. Note that the analysis software reports the worst-case conditions when the bicycle phase is actuated, and cycles without bicycle phase actuation would operate with less delay.

We recommend coordinating data and analysis needs (notably current count data and the evaluation approach for the existing non-standard signal timing) with Caltrans and considering updates to the travel demand forecasts if the City pursues the Class I path.

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation 2

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS
Traffic operations were analyzed at the following intersections using the Synchro 11 software package applying the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methods and 2022 counts. • Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps
• Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps
• Higuera Street/Madonna Road
Peak hour turning movement forecasts were developed for the Near Term (2030) and Cumulative (2040) conditions analysis using the City’s Travel Demand Model (TDM). The Near Term forecasts include significant approved and pending land use projects such as San Luis Ranch, Avila Ranch, and Froom Ranch, but exclude planned improvements to the US 101/Prado Road interchange, the Prado Bridge Replacement and related intersection improvements at the Higuera Street/Prado Road intersection, or any other major network changes.

This is conservative since it assumes all the major approved projects in the City are built and occupied prior to the completion of key improvements along Prado Road which will reduce travel demand along portions of the Higuera Street corridor.

The City’s Circulation Element specifies a performance standard of level of service (LOS) D or better for arterials like South Higuera Street and Madonna Road. The City’s Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines identify thresholds for local policy consistency, noting that a project may have a significant impact if it causes or exacerbates 95th percentile turning movement queues exceeding available turn pocket capacity and presents a contextually significant safety hazard.

Table 1 summarizes the peak hour auto level of service (LOS) and Table 2 summarizes the queues at the study intersections under Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Conditions without the Higuera Complete Street (CS) Project, with the Higuera Complete Street Project and the addition of a Class I path on the overpass, as well as the addition of a bicycle phase for the northwest corner of Higuera Street/Madonna Road. The Synchro output sheets are included in Attachment A.

Table 1: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service Intersection
AM 15.4 B 30.5 C 30.5 C 21.5 C 36.2 D 36.2 D 21.9 C 36.9 D 36.9 D PM 25.5 C 36.7 D 36.7 D 26.5 C 39.0 D 39.0 D 28.4 C 42.9 D 42.9 D AM 9.4 A 24.5 C 24.5 C 10.3 B 25.0 C 25.0 C 10.7 B 25.1 C 25.1 C PM 21.5 C 28.3 C 28.2 C 25.3 C 33.9 C 33.8 C 26.1 C 34.6 C 34.6 C AM 19.6 B 33.5 C 41.3 D 25.1 C 46.3 D 57.6 E 25.6 C 46.5 D 57.8 E PM 25.4 C 42.3 D 50.6 D 32.9 C 51.9 D 60.8 E 33.2 C 52.1 D 60.1 E Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB

1. HCM 6th or HCM 2000 average control delay in seconds per vehicle and level of service (LOS).

Note: CS = Higuera Complete Street Project. Unacceptable operations at City intersections shown in bold text.

CS w/
Class I
w/Bike
Phase
Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
LOS1
w/Bike
Phase
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Levels of Service Peak
Hour
Existing CS w/
Class I
Near
Term
CS w/
Class I
Cumulativew/Bike
Phase
LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1 LOS1

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation 3 Table 2: Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues AM 119 160 160 163 #226 #226 175 #232 #232
PM 191 #259 #259 m168 m#193 m#193 m159 m167 m167
AM 109 290 290 138 368 368 153 369 369
PM 165 421 421 197 #556 #556 m194 m497 m497
AM 162 205 205 197 227 227 256 #300 #300
PM #302 #387 #387 #334 #426 #426 #389 #489 #489
AM 137 56 56 235 119 119 230 119 119
PM 48 30 30 67 32 32 67 32 32
AM 187 137 137 #252 207 207 #252 207 207
PM 257 156 156 #321 #389 #389 #321 m#375 m#375
AM 193 56 56 295 73 73 295 72 72
PM 196 28 28 254 42 42 253 42 42
AM 231 273 273 306 358 358 332 394 394
PM #482 474 474 #651 #674 #674 #708 #750 #750
AM 104 155 155 109 156 156 109 156 156
PM 138 179 179 168 218 218 168 218 218
AM 66 58 58 110 133 133 110 133 133
PM 45 54 54 46 55 55 46 55 55
AM 231 278 312 #357 382 426 #357 382 426
PM #314 380 418 #408 #484 #535 #408 #484 #535
AM 33 318 369 125 #749 #860 131 #749 #860
PM 47 347 #355 61 347 #355 61 347 #355
AM 124 94 102 181 136 #152 181 136 #152
PM 207 140 155 #397 #246 #279 #397 #246 #279
AM 72 244 290 110 394 469 110 394 469
PM 112 303 390 168 470 603 185 532 681
AM 135 171 196 196 243 280 219 271 312
PM 196 202 247 240 238 291 #267 263 322
AM 106 97 129 172 202 246 172 202 246
PM 230 228 288 281 290 356 281 302 348

2. Existing storage length (Project storage length) in feet.

WBT 850
NBL 170

NBT/R -
Class I Class I
Higuera St/
Madonna Rd
EBL 850
EBR 140
NBL 160
NBT -
SBT 220 (375)
SBR 330 (375)

1. Queue length that would not be exceeded 95 percent of the time. Bold indicates queue length longer than storage or block length. # indicates that 95th percentile volume exceeds capacity, queue may be longer. m indicates volume for 95th percentile queue is metered by upstream signal.

Existing Near Term Cumulative
No
Project
w/Bike
Phase
No
Project
w/Bike
Phase
No
Project Class I
w/Bike
Phase
Existing, Near Term, and Cumulative Intersection Queues1 Intersection Movement
Storage
Length2
Peak
Hour
Madonna Rd/
US 101 NB
EBL
410 &
900
EBT 950
Madonna Rd/
US 101 SB
WBL 250 (235)
WBT 950
NBL 700
NBR 240

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation 4 Higuera Complete Street with Class I Path Operations
All study locations operate acceptably at LOS D or better with the phasing shown in Exhibit 1 and 2 for the Class I path. There are no modifications to the existing signal phasing at Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps and it was assumed bicycles on the Class I path would use the pedestrian phase.

Exhibit 1: Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps Proposed Signal Phasing with Class I Path Exhibit 2: Higuera Street/Madonna Road Proposed Higuera Complete Streets Signal Phasing Higuera Street/Madonna Road operates acceptably with the addition of a southbound bicycle and pedestrian phase, restriction of southbound left turns, conversion of a northbound through lane to a left turn lane, LPI, time of day plans, and no RTOR for southbound, eastbound, and northbound. The eastbound right and northbound left turn queues exceed the storage length during one or more peak hours with the project. The northbound queue would also reach Bridge Street during one or more peak hours with the project.

Implementation of the project would substantially shorten the forecast northbound left turn queue by adding an additional lane. We recommend installing “KEEP CLEAR ” pavement markings at Bridge Street and extending one of the northbound left turn lanes to Bridge Street.

The existing signal timing on the Madonna Road Overpass is coordinated during the PM peak hour and the cycle length does not accommodate the southbound pedestrian movement at Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps. The southbound pedestrian flashing don’t walk time continues with eastbound left and northbound right turning vehicles prior to eastbound left turning vehicles which cannot be fully modeled in Synchro. The analysis assumes signal timing updates at the intersections consistent with the CAMUTCD as well as LPI, and no RTOR for the eastbound and westbound Madonna Road phases as well as the Madonna Inn driveway. Note that with the existing signal timing and removal of a westbound through lane at Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps, the intersection delay would increase by less than one second over the no project conditions.

At Madonna Road/US 101 Southbound Ramps, the westbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during the PM peak hour under Existing Conditions with the project. We recommend the project extend the westbound left turn lane storage to the existing length or longer as feasible. At Madonna Road/US 101 Northbound Ramps, the northbound left turn queue exceeds the storage length during the PM peak hour under

Central Coast Transportation Consulting January 2, 2025 Higuera Complete Street Project – Madonna Road Class 1 Traffic Operations Evaluation 5 Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the project. However, the queue can be accommodated in the bay taper and would not likely block the adjacent lane.

Higuera Complete Street with Class I Path and Bicycle Signal Operations With the proposed phasing shown in Exhibit 2, eastbound cyclists using the Class I path at Higuera Street/Madonna Road would need to cross the intersection using multiple phases to travel northbound on Higuera Street. The proposed phasing shown in Exhibit 3 was used to evaluate the Class I path with a bike phase which would reduce cyclist delay for the eastbound to northbound movement. No additional changes were made to the phasing at the US 101 Ramps.

Exhibit 3: Higuera Street/Madonna Road Proposed Signal Phasing with Class I Path and Bike Phase The phasing shown on Exhibit 3 would operate at LOS F during both peak hours under Near Term and Cumulative Conditions with the Class I path and a bicycle phase. In addition, the eastbound right turn queue would reach the US 101 Northbound Ramp intersection during the AM peak hour.

A crosswalk on the north leg of the intersection would also result in AM peak hour queues reaching the Northbound Ramp intersection and LOS E operations during the PM peak hour.

CONCLUSIONS
The Higuera Complete Streets project will substantially improve conditions for cyclists and pedestrians by improving delineation, increasing separation from vehicular traffic, improving traffic signal timing, and implementing a road diet on a portion of the corridor, all measures that have been proven to improve cyclist comfort and reduce frequency and severity of collisions.

A Class I path on the north side of the Madonna Road overpass would further improve conditions for cyclists.

We recommend coordinating data and analysis needs (notably current count data and the evaluation approach for the existing non-standard signal timing) with Caltrans and considering updates to the travel demand forecasts if the City pursues the Class I path.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Synchro Output Sheets

REFERENCES
City of San Luis Obispo. 2014. Circulation Element of the General Plan. _______. 2020. Multimodal Transportation Impact Study Guidelines. _______. 2021. Active Transportation Plan.
_______. 2022. Active Transportation Program Higuera Complete Streets Grant Application.

1 Overview: Over the last two years, staff has held a series of community outreach activities for the Higuera Complete Streets project. The purpose of the outreach was to gain community input on (a) barriers to walking and bicycling along the Higuera corridor and its connection to other parts of the city, and (b) the types of improvements that are desired by the community. Participants provided recommendations on topics such as the types of walking and bicycling improvements they would like to see more, desired locations for pedestrian crossing improvements and curb ramps, as well as measures to calm traffic in the Meadow Park neighborhood.

While some community members are
frequent attendees at formal weeknight
public meetings and events, many
residents are often unable to attend
these activities due to work or family
commitments or do not feel comfortable
participating in standard “town hall
style” meeting formats. The public
engagement strategy for the project
consisted of a combination of both
formal, and less-formal outreach
activities (from weekend afternoons to
week nights) to maximize opportunities
for feedback and to ensure that input
reflects the diverse voices of the full
San Luis Obispo community. For those
who were not able or willing to attend
in-person events, staff also collected
input via email and phone.

Activities:

1. Neighborhood Pop-ups: Consisted of two afternoon pop-up events over a weekend along the project corridor
Higuera Complete Streets Community
Outreach Summary

Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
2 Locations:
 Food4Less/Trader Joe’s Shopping Center on
Higuera Street (Saturday, April 23, 2022)
 Meadow Park for a Safe Routes to School
bike safety event for the students and parents
of Hawthorne Elementary School (Sunday,
April 24, 2022)

2. Open House Workshop: This event was held at
the City/County library in the early evening of
Thursday, June 8, 2023 featuring stations where
stakeholders could learn about the project, provide
input on a set of conceptual design plans, and ask
questions. Activities included boards to provide
input through post-it ideas or dots and a kids
coloring book station. The workshop was well
attended with approximately 100 persons in
attendance

3. Meadow Park Pop-up Workshop: An
additional workshop was held on Thursday,
September 16, 2023 to invite input from
residents of the Meadow Park neighborhood on
the improvements proposed for the Meadow
Park neighborhood as well as the larger project
overall. The workshop was well attended with
over 50 persons in attendance.

4. Resident Forum at the Chumash Village: The
residents of Chumash Village invited city staff to a resident forum on Wednesday, June 19, 2024 to provide information on the Higuera Complete Streets project and answered questions.

5. Active Transportation Committee Meetings: Preliminary concept designs were first shared with the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) on February 16,2022. Updated project plans were then shared with the ATC on May 16,2024, where their formal recommendation included:
a) Pursue developing a two-way bikeway on the Madonna overpass b) Pursue developing the intersection of Higuera / Los Osos Valley Road with a southbound bike lane on Higuera Road next to the curb face with a bike signal

Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
3 Project Webpage:

A project webpage describing the project with access to documents and opportunities for input has been provided at Higuera Complete Streets Project.

Community Input
The following is a summary of major points expressed through community input and the response from staff:
 Automobile Traffic, Speeding, and Distracted Driving: Among a number of barriers expressed, top concerns among respondents related to interaction with automobile traffic or concerns about motorist speeding or distracted driving. o Response: Several elements to reduce illegal speeding are incorporated into the design including a road diet on Higuera Street between Margarita and Bridge Streets, reducing lane widths where possible, and adding hi-vis cross walks and other striping elements.
 Gaps or stress Points in the Network: Other significant barriers included gaps or stress points in the bicycle and pedestrian network especially around the intersection of Higuera/Madonna/South streets, South / King streets, and the lower Higuera area between Tank Farm Rd and Los Osos Valley Road 
o Response: Elements to reduce stress points in the bicycle and pedestrian network including hi-vis crosswalks, protected bike lanes, and intersection improvements including new signals.
 Improved Connections to Other Parts of the City: Several comments mentioned the need for improved connections to Higuera Street from the Broad Street area to the western part of the City via Madonna Road especially the route to Laguna Middle School as well as to the east and Hawthorne Elementary School. o Response: New connections have been added to the study area including Madonna Road from Higuera to the Madonna Inn and a crossing of South and King Streets
 Upgrading Pedestrian Infrastructure: Many comments expressed the need to upgrade curb ramps, complete a sidewalk gap on Higuera near Chumash Village as well as add more cross walks along Higuera.

Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
4 o Response: Over 70 curb ramp upgrades have been added. A project to complete a sidewalk gap on Higuera near Chumash Village is also envisioned as part of the project.
 Preference “Gentle Touch” with traffic calming Along Neighborhood Greenway: Many residents of the Meadow Park neighborhood displayed a preference for a minimal approach to traffic calming along the neighborhood greenway segment.
o Response: All traffic circles as well as speed humps where speeds are lower than 25 mph have been removed from plans but included where they exceed 25 mph.
 Desire for Stop Sign at Woodbridge/Meadow Streets: A number of residents also expressed a desire for a stop sign at Woodbridge/Meadow along the Neighborhood Greenway to help improve crossing comfort and promote safety in the neighborhood.
o Response: An all-way stop with high-visibility crosswalks has been added to the plans at Woodbridge/Meadow
 Crosswalk Connecting Meadow Park to Bridge Street Shared Use Path: Given the connectivity between the path and Meadow Park, many residents requested a cross walk at this location across Exposition Rd.
o Response: Crosswalk is in proposed plans
 Protected Bike Lanes
on Higuera with Gaps:

Input from a dot exercise
showed a preference by
many attendees for
protected bike lanes on
Higuera Street as the
preferred style of
bikeway. Many residents
also expressed a need to
have sufficient gaps in
the bikeway to facilitate
left turns to destinations
and cross streets. Many
expressed a desire to
improve the transition

Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
5 points where cars must make right turns into driveways and streets. o Response: Protected bike lanes with gaps at select locations where left turns are anticipated are included in the plans.
 Upgrade to the Higuera / Madonna and Higuera / South Intersections: A significant number of comments expressed the challenge of riding a bike through these two intersections especially the eastbound Madonna approach to Higuera and the southbound Higuera approach to the Madonna intersection and desired for bikeway separation as much as possible.
o Response: New design concepts are proposed for the Higuera / Madonna intersection that improves bicycle access to the intersection. Staff is continuing to study the Higuera / South intersection for opportunities to improve bicycle access along the NB Higuera approach.
 Ingress/Egress at Chumash Village: Many residents expressed concern for turning into and out of the driveway at Chumash Village with the proposed addition of a road diet.
o Response: The traffic analysis concluded that the driveway would operate within the city’s adopted thresholds for vehicle delay with addition of the road diet. Based on national data and local experience with previous projects, the proposed road diet is anticipated to reduce illegal speeding on Higuera Street, which can have a positive benefit for drivers attempting to judge gaps in traffic when exiting driveways, such as Chumash. In addition, the proposed project will increase the width of the center two-way left-turn lane at this location, improving use of this lane for two-stage left turns. With all this said, staff is still exploring other possible enhancements during final design to improve the experience for drivers at this location, such as additional warning signage, striping refinements and other speed reduction measures.

Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
6  Access across Higuera at Las Praderas: Residents of the Las Praderas neighborhood expressed difficulty in crossing Higuera to access the Trader Joe’s / Food4Less shopping center.
o Response: Staff studied the possibility of adding a signal at the location but it did not meet required signal warrants. The project does include hi-visual crosswalks to improve visibility at Tank Farm and Suburban Roads.  Crossing at South and Bee Bee Streets: Some residents requested a crossing at this location
o Response: While this proposed project in the Active Transportation Plan, it is currently outside of the scope of this project and will need to be considered as part of future Financial Plan projects.
 Two-Way Protected Bike Lane Between Bridge and Elks Streets: A request was made for a two-way protected bike lane at this location to help transitioning to the neighborhood greenway.

Higuera Complete Streets
Community Outreach Summary
7 o Response: Given policy 6.8 in the Active Transportation Plan Design Guidelines that two-way facilities should be avoided along higher speed facilities, staff is not recommending this option.
 Improve Access to Silver City Mobile Home Lodge: Residences of the Silver City development expressed concern for left turns in to the driveway. o Response: Project plans will replace worn off pavement markers and restrict left turns
 Lighting on Higuera near the Chumash Village: residents of the Chumash Village requested additional lighting at this location
o Response: The City has filed a request to PG&E to add lighting to this location