City of San Luis Obispo, Council Memorandum
City of San Luis Obispo
Council Agenda Correspondence
DATE: June 16, 2026
FROM: Madeline Kacsinta, Assistant Director of Public Works Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
VIA: Whitney McDonald, City Manager
SUBJECT: ITEM #7d - SOUTH STREET AND KING COURT CROSSING PROJECT MODIFICATION, SPECIFICATION NO. 2001059
Staff received the following questions regarding the South & King Crossing Project. The questions are below with staff’s response shown in italics:
1) Can we also reduce the speed limit on this section of South Street? Currently, the speed limit on South Street (35 mph) is posted as low as legally allowed; however, the traffic study used to establish the limit for this street is due for an update within the next year and staff will explore the opportunity to lower the limit, if allowed per the California Vehicle Code.
If a speed limit reduction is not feasible, staff can still pursue speed reduction tools such as radar speed feedback signs. If desired by the Council, radar speed signs could be explored as part of the current project, if project contingency funding allows following installation of the signal/hybrid beacon, or as a separate project or through future implementation of the Vision Zero-San Luis Obispo’s Safe Streets Action Plan.
2) Could a pedestrian/bicycle crossing also be considered at the intersection of South Street and Meadow Street and/or the intersection of South Street and Beebee Street?
The Active Transportation Plan identifies potential for a future pedestrian crossing along South Street at Meadow Street, and staff has received previous comments from the community and members of the Active Transportation Committee (ATC) expressing interest in a pedestrian/bicycle crossing at the intersection of South Street and Beebee Street. Future crossings at these locations would require separate funding, design, and analysis and would need to be prioritized through a future Financial Plan.
Item #7d –South & King Crossing Project Modification, Specification No. 2001059 Page 2 It should be noted that based on initial review of these locations and experience with the South & King intersection, more robust crossing treatments may be required to achieve an appropriate level of driver compliance and crossing comfort for pedestrians and bicyclists at these locations (i.e. pedestrian hybrid beacon, traffic signal, intersection turn restrictions, new/modified median refuges, streetlighting, etc.). In addition, the proximity of these intersections to adjacent high-traffic signalized intersections at South/Higuera and South/Broad Street add further complexity that would need to be analyzed in further detail to better understand potential for unintended consequences with placing new traffic control devices (i.e. vehicle queues backing up into South/Higuera or South/Broad intersections, conflict with westbound two-to-one lane merge at South/Meadow, etc.). Future crossings may be feasible at these locations, but further analysis is need to confirm viability and guide future design details. 3) Does the current design limit pedestrian/bicycle crossings to the east side of the South Street & King Street/Court intersection, or will crossings be allowed on the west side of the intersection as well (crossing South Street)? As previously approved, the pedestrian hybrid beacon design included crossings on both the east and west sides of the intersection, and the proposed traffic signal design would also provide crosswalks on both sides of the intersection as well, consistent with the City’s Active Transportation Plan Design Guidelines (See Policy 4.9).
4) Would the new traffic signal (replacing the pedestrian hybrid beacon) allow for cyclists and pedestrians to “trigger” the signalized crossing phase, or will the side street signal phases be triggered only by cars, or based on a timed or actuated cycle?
The proposed traffic signal design would allow pedestrians and cyclists to activate the signal to cross South Street, in addition to vehicles. The main difference with the proposed signal is that bicyclists and motor vehicles would activate the signal using passive video detection cameras, where with the previous pedestrian hybrid beacon design, the bicyclists would use a curbside push button to call the pedestrian signal phase, similar to the existing beacon at Broad/Woodbridge.
The proposed traffic signal design would use video detection cameras with the latest in bicycle detection capabilities and staff is proposing to also include new Bicycle Detection Indicator devices to visually convey to bicyclists that they have been detected by the signal when waiting for a green light.
Item #7d –South & King Crossing Project Modification, Specification No. 2001059 Page 3 5) What is the expected typical delay for a pedestrian activating the push button and then getting a pedestrian crossing signal?
Whether a pedestrian hybrid beacon or traffic signal is advanced, pedestrian delay would generally range from 30–60 seconds depending on the timing of prior crossings or signal phases. Both systems require a minimum clearance interval between pedestrian activations to allow traffic to clear South Street.
The City typically sets this minimum time at 30-60 seconds between side street crossings activations during peak times of day, with flexibility for a shorter duration during off-peak times. The Broad/Woodbridge pedestrian hybrid beacon is currently programmed to require 45 seconds between activations. If a pedestrian pushes the button directly after a previous pedestrian crossing phase, the longest they would wait to cross is 40-60 seconds. If a pedestrian pushes the button a minute or longer after the previous pedestrian crossing or King Street/Court vehicle green phase, the main street green light would immediately terminate to serve the pedestrian crossing (after the yellow and all red transition). 6) Which of the intersection design options (signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon) provides the greatest safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists?
Safety performance is difficult to rank definitively because each option shifts different tradeoffs. There are advantages and disadvantages in terms of intersection crossing comfort, convenience, and conflict avoidance between the signal and hybrid beacon design options, which vary for each road user. However, it is staff’s opinion that the proposed traffic signal design option provides the greatest overall benefit to all road users, improving access for vehicles turning to/from King Street/Court, while still providing a high-quality experience for bicyclists and pedestrians crossing South Street.
The pedestrian hybrid beacon would provide an increased benefit to pedestrian and cyclist crossing comfort by restricting conflicting vehicle turns from King Court/Street during the crossing phase using illuminated “NO LEFT/RIGHT TURN” signs; however, the hybrid beacon option would not address challenges for King Court/Street drivers navigating gaps in fast-moving traffic to turn onto South Street, and may slightly increase these driver delays during certain times of day. The hybrid beacon is also likely to have greater potential for driver confusion/compliance concerns compared to a full signal.
A traffic signal would improve access for King Court/Street drivers and pedestrian/bicycle crossings and likely provide a more intuitive design and greater driver compliance. While a signal would permit concurrent left-right turns from King Court/Street drivers when pedestrians are crossing South Street, the conflicting vehicle volumes would be low and conflicts could be partially managed with signal programming/timing strategies and warning signage. See answers to the next question below, and the attached concept design illustration of the traffic signal for more information on these design details.
Item #7d –South & King Crossing Project Modification, Specification No. 2001059 Page 4 7) Will the full traffic signal option include a bike signal, leading pedestrian interval, or any other enhancements for bicycle and pedestrian safety and convenience?
The proposed traffic signal design option is proposed to include the following design features for bicycle and pedestrian safety and convenience:
Accessible pedestrian signals, with audible push buttons and countdown pedestrian signal displays
Bicycle Detection Indicator to notify northbound/southbound King Court/Street cyclists when they have been detected by the signal when waiting to cross South Street.
Leading Pedestrian Interval phases for all pedestrian crossings, which bicyclists can also use to get a “head start” crossing the intersection per recent changes to the California Vehicle Code.
Electronic “NO RIGHT TURN ON RED” blank-out signs that illuminate during the Leading Pedestrian Interval walk phase to reduce right-turning conflicts with pedestrians during the pedestrian signal phase crossing South Street.
High-visibility yellow school crosswalks and new streetlighting covering all legs of the intersection.
“Left Turn Yield to Pedestrian” warning signs at all intersection approaches. Flashing yellow arrows for vehicle left turn phases from South to King Court for added driver awareness of left-turning conflicts
8) If the pedestrian hybrid beacon were installed, would all car movement be stopped during the bike/ped crossing phase or is there a way that left turns for cars could be allowed exiting from King Court?
As originally designed, all left/right turns from King Court/Street would be prohibited using a combined “NO LEFT/RIGHT TURN” illuminated sign during the pedestrian crossing sequence for the pedestrian hybrid beacon. There are two minor design revisions to the previous hybrid beacon design that could be explored to allow left turns for cars exiting King Court during the crossing phase:
Item #7d –South & King Crossing Project Modification, Specification No. 2001059 Page 5 PHB Modification Option 1: The crosswalk on the west leg of the intersection could be removed all together, which would eliminate the need to restrict left turns from King Court during the pedestrian crossing phase.
PHB Modification Option 2: Instead of a combined “NO LEFT/RIGHT TURN” illuminated sign, two separate “NO LEFT TURN” and “NO RIGHT TURN” signs could be used to control King Court/Street movements. This would allow more flexibility to activate one or both illuminated signs, depending on whether there is a pedestrian crossing the west crosswalk, east crosswalk or both. For example, when a pedestrian activates the east crosswalk only (no pedestrian at west crosswalk), the “NO LEFT TURN” illuminated sign facing King Court would stay dark, allowing King Court drivers to make left turns onto westbound South Street.
If the Council chooses to continue progress with the pedestrian hybrid beacon project as originally planned, staff would recommend that Option 2 above (separate “NO LEFT” and “NO RIGHT” turn signs) be incorporated into the project designs. This option reduces potential delays for King Court drivers compared to the original design, while retaining convenient crossings for pedestrians and bicyclists.
If the Council is interested in exploring Option 1 above, it should be noted that this would provide greater benefit to access for King Court vehicles making left turns, but would provide a less intuitive/convenient crossing design for cyclists crossing South Street in the southbound direction (towards Meadow Park), as they would be required to travel out of direction to cross at the east leg of the intersection only. 9) For the full traffic signal option, will any of the intersection approaches include a protected left turn phase for cars?
Based on the Traffic Signal Analysis Study prepared for this intersection (Attachment A), protected only left turn phasing was not recommended for any of the intersection approaches based on review of site conditions, traffic volumes, pedestrian conflicts, and analysis of vehicle and pedestrian delays. The study recommended permissive left turn phasing to minimize potential for congestion and queues on South Street but suggested using flashing yellow arrows for added driver visibility.
For the final traffic signal design (Attachment B), staff is recommending use of “permissive+protected” left turn phasing for the South Street left turns. Using this configuration, the left turn sequence for South Street would begin with permissive flashing yellow arrows (drivers must yield to oncoming traffic, but may turn left when gaps allow), and provide a lagging protected green left turn arrow only when there are still vehicles that are queued awaiting a gap to make a left turn from South to King. This strategy minimizes added congestion on South Street, while still providing a dedicated left turn arrow for added capacity for left-turning drivers during peak times of day, such as the AM school start at nearby Hawthorne Elementary School. For context, the “permissive+protected” left turn phasing is currently in use at the Santa Rosa/Monterey and Orcutt/Sacramento intersections and is illustrated below.
Item #7d –South & King Crossing Project Modification, Specification No. 2001059 Page 6 10)Are there concerns that the proposed pedestrian hybrid beacon or full signal on South Street will increase cut-through traffic along Exposition Drive? While there is always potential that some drivers may choose to use alternate routes to bypass perceived delays on a major street with the addition of a new traffic signal (or hybrid beacon), staff believes that the risk of significant increases in cut-through traffic along Exposition Drive to be low, as it is likely to take longer to cut through these neighborhood streets to travel between South and Broad Street than to remain on South Street.
The attached Traffic Signal Analysis Study did not explicitly analyze potential for added cut-through traffic along Exposition in association with a potential hybrid beacon or traffic signal at the South and King intersection; however the analysis does present the average peak hour traffic delays and queues for drivers on eastbound South Street, which informs staff’s assessment of cut-through potential.
Currently, it would take an eastbound driver approximately one additional minute to travel eastbound from South Street to Broad Street on average when cutting through Exposition Drive and Woodbridge Street rather than remaining on South Street. A new signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon would stop eastbound traffic on South Street for an additional 30-40 seconds maximum when activated to serve a pedestrian crossing from King Court/Street. When a vehicle or bicycle is crossing South Street, the signal would require less green time for King Court/Street users, resulting in delays of 10-15 seconds on average for South Street drivers.
Further, the Higuera Complete Streets Project, slated to begin construction in the coming months, will be adding speed humps along Exposition Drive and portions of Woodbridge Street, which should further discourage cut-through traffic in the neighborhood. In addition, the forthcoming corridor planning work for South Broad Street will include detailed analysis and planning of neighborhood traffic management within the Meadow Park Neighborhood, which could include further consideration for traffic calming following completion of the South and King Crossing Project, if warranted.
Item #7d –South & King Crossing Project Modification, Specification No. 2001059 Page 7 If desired by the Council, staff can collect traffic volume and speed data along potential cut-through routes following installation of the pedestrian hybrid beacon or signal to confirm any potential increases in neighborhood cut-through traffic. If cut-through traffic increases are confirmed, staff would identify further traffic calming measures, conduct outreach with the adjacent neighborhood, and return to Council at a future date if further traffic calming measures are proposed.
ATTACHMENTS
A – Traffic Signal Analysis Study
B – Traffic Signal Design Concept
Advanced Mobility Group | 2999 Oak Rd. Suite 420, Walnut Creek, Ca. 94597 | P: 925.476.5426 www.amobility.com
Attn: Mr. Justin Wong, Transportation Planner/Engineer II City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
October 1, 2024
Subject: Traffic Engineering Study: Evaluation for Traffic Signal Installation and Preliminary Phasing Consideration at South Street and King Court, San Luis Obispo – Deliverable No.1 Dear Luke,
This traffic engineering study is conducted by AMG in accordance with the 11th edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) to evaluate the need for a traffic signal at the intersection of South Street and King Court in the City of San Luis Obispo. The study aims to assess traffic volumes, safety concerns, and other operational characteristics to determine whether the installation of a traffic signal is warranted at this intersection. It is also to present preliminary phasing considerations which will be verified and justified in the next deliverable.
This study is to satisfy Task 1 in the project scope of work.
Data Sources
1. Traffic Volumes (ADT): Average Daily Traffic (ADT) data was collected over a two-day period starting on April 19, 2022, from South Street between Higuera Street and Broad Street. This data reflects current vehicular traffic volumes that travel through the South Street corridor near the study intersection.
2. Turning Movement Counts: Data was collected at the study intersection by Metro Traffic Data Inc. for the City of San Luis Obispo on May 11, 2022. The counts were collected for vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles. The morning peak period included two hours between seven and nine AM. The afternoon period included five hours between one PM and six PM.
3. Collision History: Data covering collision history at the intersection of South Street and King Court was reviewed for the years 2014-2023 to assess safety and accident patterns at this location.
4. Site Observations: Virtual site observations were conducted to evaluate any factors that could potentially influence engineering judgement related to the intersection traffic control at this location. This included gaining local knowledge through
communication with City staff related to bicycle and pedestrian demographics, pedestrian behaviors, traffic flow, and peak hour conditions.
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis
In accordance with the MUTCD, traffic signal warrants are used to determine whether a signal is needed at the intersection based on several criteria, including traffic volume, pedestrian activity, and safety concerns. The following are key warrants that have been considered in this study:
1. Warrant 1: Eight-Hour Vehicular Volume
o This warrant is met if traffic volumes exceed a certain threshold for at least eight hours of a typical day.
o Data Review: Based on TMC data for South Street and King Street, the average daily traffic volumes are compared against the thresholds specified in the MUTCD, which vary based on intersection geometry and number of lanes. The side street data were obtained from the seven hours collected with the turning movement counts.
2. Warrant 2: Four-Hour Vehicular Volume
o This warrant applies if traffic volumes exceed thresholds for four hours of a typical day, typically used in areas with higher traffic flow during peak times. o Data Review: Four-Hour volumes were analyzed to assess if four-hour traffic patterns satisfy this warrant.
3. Warrant 3: Peak Hour
o This applies if traffic volumes during the peak hour exceed thresholds that indicate significant congestion or delay during rush hours. o Data Review: Analysis of peak-hour traffic from the TMC data indicate whether delays or congestion warrant signalization.
4. Warrant 4: Pedestrian Volume
o This warrant assesses whether pedestrian volumes crossing South Street would justify the installation of a signal. Typically, a signal is recommended if pedestrian volumes reach a certain level and there are difficulties in crossing. o Site Observation: Pedestrian counts indicate a heavy demand during the morning peak and moderate demand in the afternoon peak. The vehicular volumes during this heavy pedestrian demand are also high.
5. Warrant 5: School Crossing
o While not conducted with AMG's analysis, City staff conducted an evaluation of School Crossing Warrant and confirmed that the warrant was not satisfied, as there were only 15 school children observed crossing during the highest crossing hour, where the warrant requires 20 minimum.
6. Warrant 7: Crash Experience
o This warrant is triggered if there is a history of frequent collisions that could be mitigated by the installation of a traffic signal. The criteria most suitable for this area is summarized in Tables 4C-2 and 4C-3. There are two considerations for a one-year and Three-year periods. The data reviewed from the City’s database does not meet the threshold required to meet this warrant.
Intersection Characteristics and Issues
• Geometry: The intersection is a two-way stop-controlled intersection with South Street being the major roadway and King Court being the minor approach. South Street has one through lane lanes and one left turn lane, in each direction. King Court operating as a single-lane approach.
• Posted Speed: The posted speed limit on South Street is 35 MPH.
• Traffic Flow: South Street experiences moderate to high vehicular flow during peak periods, with significant east-west movements. King Court, as a minor road, sees lower traffic volumes but often experiences long delays in making left or right turns due to heavy traffic on South Street.
• Pedestrian Activity: Pedestrian movements are sporadic, but at morning and afternoon peak times pedestrians experience delays in crossing South Street. The combination of relatively high pedestrian demand (44 pedestrians and about 1381 vehicles), in all directions, during the morning peak hour, leaves limited gaps for crossings. Most morning pedestrian traffic is school age. The proximity of the intersection to Hawthorne Elementary School elevates the delay concerns. While the thresholds for a pedestrian traffic signal warrant is not met, engineering judgement suggests great benefits that could be realized with a signalized crossing. • Bicycle Traffic: King Court is an active bicycle traffic during the morning (18) and afternoon (11) peak periods. The intersection has been augmented with green bicycle crossing pavement markings.
• Visibility and Line of Sight: Field observations indicate that while visibility is generally adequate, turning movements from King Court are occasionally hindered by parked vehicles or vegetation near the intersection.
Collision Analysis
The review of the collision history for the intersection revealed no reported injury crashes in the past three years. No recurring patterns of broadside or rear-end collisions on South Street.
The frequency of these crashes does not meet the Crash Experience Warrant in the MUTCD, Warrant 7. However, the time-period in review coincides with the COVID Pandemic period in which collisions were lower than usual. A traffic signal could enhance safety and reduce the likelihood of crashes.
Preliminary Phasing Analysis
A closer look at the turning movement counts, the product of the volumes of through traffic on the major street times the opposite left turning traffic (+/- 39K) do not suggest the installation of protected left turn phasing on the major Street, South Street. As a preliminary recommendation the left turns on the major street should remain permissive only. A flashing yellow arrow option will be considered.
The heaviest turning movement (EBLT) had 87 vehicles turning left during the morning peak.
This movement coincided with 7 pedestrians in the northerly crosswalk. We believe this conflict is minimal and could be accommodated with permissive phasing and Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI).
While the volumes do not suggest splitting the side street traffic, there is no physical room to make north and south left turns from the side street. Therefore, the side street will have to be split.
Our goal is to provide crosswalks on all legs of the intersection. However, delay analysis will inform this decision in the next deliverable, that is signal phasing.
Striped bicycle lanes will also be considered. The removal of the existing striped bike lane to accommodate additional lanes might be beneficial to the overall operation. A more detailed phasing diagram with phase assignments will be submitted in the next deliverable.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Based on the analysis of traffic volumes, safety concerns, and operational conditions at the intersection of South Street and King Court, the following conclusions and recommendations are made:
1. Warrants Met:
o The traffic volumes on South Street during peak hours, combined with the observed delays for vehicles on King Court, satisfy the criteria for Warrant 3 (Peak Hour).
o No other warrants were satistified.
2. Additional Considerations:
o While pedestrian volumes do not currently meet Warrant 4 (Pedestrian Volume), future development in the surrounding area could increase pedestrian traffic, further justifying the installation of a signal. o The proximity of the intersection to an elementary school and the majority of pedestrians and bicycle traffic composed of school-aged users suggests the installation of a more commanding traffic control at this intersection. A traffic signal could be a potentially effective solution for enhancing safety at this intersection.
3. Recommendation:
o It is recommended that a four-phase traffic signal be installed at the intersection of South Street and King Court. This would improve the safety of turning movements, reduce crash occurrences, and facilitate smoother traffic flow during peak hours. Signalization would also enhance pedestrian safety, particularly during busy times of the day when crossing South Street becomes difficult.
We are glad to discuss, revisit and/or elaborate on any aspect of this study. If we don’t hear back from your staff, we will proceed with the evaluation of the best phasing and sequence for the signalization.
Best Regards,
Advanced Mobility Group (AMG),
Rafat Raie, TE
Principal
Cc: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
Advanced Mobility Group | 2999 Oak Rd. Suite 420, Walnut Creek, Ca. 94597 | P: 925.476.5426 www.amobility.com
Attn: Mr. Justin Wong, Transportation Planner/Engineer II City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Subject: Signal Phasing Traffic Study for the South Street and King Court Intersection – Task 1.2 Dear Justin,
We are pleased to submit this letter report detailing the results of the Signal Phasing Traffic Study for the intersection of South Street and King Court as part of Task 1.2 in our ongoing project. The purpose of this task is to utilize the Synchro software to perform a comprehensive Level of Service (LOS) analysis and present signal phasing, lane configuration, pedestrians and bicycle considerations.
Geometric Layout
The first step is to validate the possibilities of concurrent and no-conflicting left turn movements from King Court. The current layout of the intersection does not allow for two concurrent left turns from King Court onto South Street. We investigated the possibility of shifting the centerlines on King Court.
Finding the shifts are not sufficient to create the non-conflicting movements for the Single-Unit truck template, we explored with shortening the median island to accommodate the turns. The following exhibits show the level of improvements needed to provide concurrent left turns out of King Court.
EXHIBIT 1.1
Passenger Car Movements with Modified Median Islands
EXHIBIT 1.2
Single-Unit Truck Movements with Modified Median Islands In communicating with City staff, the city is willing to initiate the median island improvements and the phasing options presented in this communication assumes the modifications of the median islands on South Street and the striping changes on King Court.
Synchro Study Approach
Using the turning movement counts provided by the City of San Luis Obispo, we conducted a detailed Synchro analysis. We also conducted simulations which produce a more accurate queuing results. The objectives of the analysis were:
• Minimize traffic queues and delays: By optimizing the signal timing and phase sequencing, we aimed to reduce overall delays and improve intersection performance. • Determine the required lane configurations: Our study assessed the current traffic volumes to recommend appropriate lane assignments, including through and turn lanes. • Assess queuing lengths: We analyzed the left-turn lane queuing lengths (with the necessary shortenings) for all approaches. The existing left turn lane will be sufficient for the average simulation. The 95th percentile condition shows the queue length will be exceeded during a limited number of cycles in the morning peak hour. This operation under the permissive phasing scenario is acceptable. The alternative is to extend the storage bay which could be costly and beyond the scope of the project.
Although the initial study did not justify the need for a protected left turn on South Street, we chose to analyze it to investigate the effects of the protected phasing on queueing and overall delay.
The following table shows performance indicators of the comparison between permissive, protected/permissive and protected phasing at the intersection. All these scenarios include crosswalks on all legs of the intersection, modifications of the median islands and using LPI for all pedestrian
phases. In addition, striped bicycle lanes at the signal approaches on King will have to be removed to make room for the turning vehicles. The bicycle striping could be converted to Sharrows.
Table 1.1
Signal Performance Indicators Comparison
Synchro Simulation
Option 1:
Permissive
Phasing
Option 2:
Protected
Permissive
Phasing
Option 3:
Protected
Phasing
Actuated Cycle Length 55 50 60 55 60 55
Time of Day AM PM AM PM AM PM
Intersection Vehicular Delay
(s) 14.3 12.2 15.4 13.3 17.4 15.7
Overall LOS B B B B B B
Pedestrian Delay (s) 25 35 30 40 30 40
Approach
Vehicular Delay (s)
EB Left 21.6 19.0 17.8 16.7 33.6 32.6
EB Thru 14.1 10.1 14.1 10.2 13.5 13.3
WB Left 16.4 20.0 14.4 17.9 36.5 33.8
WB Thru 10.6 10.4 13.6 12.5 16.4 13.0
NB 19.4 9.5 7.5 14.3 16.0 17.3
SB 4.9 9.2 15.8 11.4 6.4 11.9
50th Percentile
Queue Length (ft)
EB Left* 49 25 46 31 59 34
EB Thru 165 137 165 149 173 172
WB Left* 3 15 2 15 3 18
WB Thru 107 144 133 162 140 169
NB 16 14 22 16 21 18
SB 27 17 26 15 28 17
95th Percentile
Queue Length (ft)
EB Left* 98 60 90 77 102 79
EB Thru 323 281 308 287 332 360
WB Left* 21 44 16 48 17 49
WB Thru 187 297 245 338 255 323
NB 41 34 51 39 50 46
SB 52 42 57 41 56 40
*Storage Capacity: EBLT is 73 Ft and WBLT is 56 ft.
Key Findings and Recommendations
• Intersection Level of Service (LOS): Based on the analysis, the intersection operates at LOS A with Option Number 1. This option seems to be the most reasonable as it produces the least delays and yields shorter queues, in general.
• Other options are displayed for the city to evaluate and consider. • The permissive phase could be designed with a Flashing Yellow Arrow (FYA). • Lane Configuration Recommendations: To minimize delays and improve traffic flow, we recommend the following configurations:
o Southbound Approach (King Court): One shared through and right lane and one dedicated left turn lane. Parking will be prohibited on both sides of the street. o Northbound Approach (King Court): One shared through and right lane and one dedicated left turn lane. Parking will be prohibited on both sides of the street. o Eastbound and Westbound Approaches (South Street): Maintain a through lane and a left turn lane for each approach and maintain the Class II bicycle lane. • Bicycle striping on King Court and crossing South Street should be eliminated. • Left-Turn Queuing Lengths: The analysis suggests that the existing left-turn lane on South Street can accommodate the projected queuing lengths without major modifications, except for minor lane striping improvements.
• The intersection should have four crosswalks. The color of the crosswalk should be yellow as the intersection is within the allowable distance from an elementary school. Added visibility features such as crosshatching the crosswalk will be considered.
Proposed Improvements
Based on our findings, the following improvements are recommended at the intersection:
• The median islands on South Street should be shortened by about 15 on the west side and 10 feet on the east end,
• Signal timing optimization to reduce delays and improve traffic flow efficiency, especially during peak hours.
• Minor geometric improvements to the lane striping to better accommodate the turning movements and queuing demands.
We are confident that the recommended improvements will significantly enhance traffic flow and safety at the intersection of South Street and King Court. We’ll continue to work with your Civil consultant to ensure consistency of design elements for the most safe and efficient operation of the traffic signal.
If you have any questions or would like to discuss any aspect of this study further, please feel free to contact me at 925-525-1113 or via email at [email protected].
Best Regards,
Advanced Mobility Group (AMG),
Rafat Raie, TE
Principal
Advanced Mobility Group
[email protected]
925-525-1113
Cc: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
SOUTH ST KING ST KING CT
South Street & King Court/Street Traffic Signal Conceptual Design High-visibility school crosswalks provided at all
intersection legs
Video detection for vehicles and bicyclists,
including bicycle detection indicators for South
Ct/St approaches
Pedestrians signals provided with accessible
push buttons, countdown signal heads, and
Lead Pedestrian Intervals to provide "head
start" crossing intersection at all crosswalks.
"NO RIGHT TURN" illuminated blankout signs
provided for King Ct/St crosswalks to prohibit
right turns on red during Pedestrian Lead
Interval
Flashing yellow left turn arrows used on
South Street approaches and "LEFT
TURN YIELD TO PEDESTRIAN" signs
placed at all intersection approaches
Item 7d
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 9501
For Agenda of: 6/16/2025
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: 30 Minutes
FROM: Aaron Floyd, Public Works & Utilities Director
Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager
SUBJECT: SOUTH STREET AND KING COURT CROSSING PROJECT
MODIFICATION, SPECIFICATION NO. 2001059
RECOMMENDATION
1. Approve a modification to the South Street and King Court Crossing Project (Specification No. 2001059), authorizing installation of a standard traffic signal in lieu of a pedestrian hybrid beacon; and,
2. Authorize the City Engineer to approve modifications to project plans and specifications and approve associated construction Contract Change Orders as needed to facilitate project modifications up to the available project budget and consistent with California Public Contract Code, including any amendments authorized by the City Manager.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The South Street and King Court Crossing Project is currently in early phases of construction and includes installation of a new controlled crossing at the intersection of South Street and King Street/Court. Construction activities are currently on pause pending PG&E electrical work and delivery of materials. During the original planning and design process, both a pedestrian hybrid beacon and a full traffic signal were evaluated for this location. While a fully signalized intersection was identified as the preferred longterm configuration due to its ability to improve both pedestrian safety and vehicle access, the project advanced with a pedestrian hybrid beacon due to concerns regarding emergency response operations along South Street.
To preserve future flexibility, the hybrid beacon project was intentionally designed to incorporate much of the infrastructure necessary to support a future traffic signal, allowing for a relatively straightforward conversion should conditions warrant. However, following recent implementation of upgraded emergency vehicle pre-emption technology and renewed coordination with City emergency service providers, staff have confirmed that those emergency response concerns can now be effectively addressed. As construction is currently paused awaiting utility work and equipment delivery, staff is recommending modification of the project to install a full traffic signal in lieu of the previously approved pedestrian hybrid beacon. Because the project was designed with future signalization in
Item 7d
mind, staff anticipates limited schedule impacts and modest additional costs that can be accommodated within the existing project budget.
The proposed modification does not represent a change in the overall purpose or vision of the project; rather, it advances a traffic control alternative that was evaluated during the original design process and intentionally accommodated within the project design.
The purpose of this item is to provide an opportunity for community members to provide input on this proposed project modification, and for the Council to take formal action to approve this proposal, if supported.
POLICY CONTEXT
The City’s 2021 Active Transportation Plan (ATP) recommends installation of pedestrian crossing improvements at the intersection of South Street and King Court as a Tier 1 (highest-priority) project. Installation of this crossing also supports the City’s overarching Vision Zero objective to improve traffic safety and eliminate traffic fatalities, as well as the specific recommendation to upgrade and modernize emergency vehicle pre-emption (EVP) equipment for the San Luis Obispo Fire (SLO Fire) and Police (SLO PD) Departments, as identified in City’s 2026 Vision Zero Action Plan (See Post-Crash Care Recommended Action #1).
DISCUSSION
Background
On October 7, 2025, the City Council approved plans and specifications, and authorized staff to advertise the South Street & King Court Crossing (Project) for construction bids.
On January 13, 2026, the City Council approved award of the construction contract to JJ Fisher Construction Inc. This action also authorized purchase and installation of new/upgraded emergency vehicle preemption equipment for the City Police and Fire Department vehicles, which has since been completed.
Since January 2026, the construction contract has been awarded and work has begun, including procurement of traffic signal poles and installation of a new electrical meter box for the beacon/signal system. The City is currently awaiting installation of electrical service by PG&E (expected summer 2026), and delivery of traffic signal poles (expected delivery late August 2026) before commencing with remaining phases of construction in the fall.
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon Crossing vs. Full Traffic Signal As currently approved, the Project includes installation of a new pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) crossing at the intersection of South Street and King Street/Court, with the primary purpose of improving pedestrian safety on a safe route to school. As discussed in the October 7, 2025 staff report, a full traffic signal was also explored as a design alternative earlier in project development, as a signal would improve access and safety for both pedestrians/cyclists and drivers navigating this intersection. Drivers attempting to make left turns from King Court onto South Street currently experience lengthy delays during
Item 7d
peak traffic periods, with the northbound left-turn movement operating at level of service (LOS) F during the AM commute period.
While the South & King intersection currently meets warrants for both signalization and/or installation of a pedestrian hybrid beacon per the design guidance in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD), a traffic signal was not recommended when this project was initially designed due to concerns from the City Fire Department that a full signal may increase delays for emergency response along South Street, a primary response route near Fire Station #1. Thus, a pedestrian hybrid beacon was advanced as the preferred near-term solution at that time. However, because a fully signalized intersection was viewed as a desirable long-term configuration, the project was intentionally designed to incorporate much of the infrastructure necessary to support future signalization. Signal foundations, conduit, electrical infrastructure, and other intersection improvements were designed to accommodate either treatment, allowing the intersection to be converted to a full traffic signal in the future with minimal redesign, limited additional construction, and comparatively low cost.
Proposed Project Modifications
Since project approval, the City has received significant correspondence from residents regarding the proposed pedestrian hybrid beacon, particularly concerning vehicle access and delays experienced by drivers exiting King Court onto South Street. While vehicle access concerns were considered during the original project development process, the recent volume of community feedback highlighted the importance of revisiting whether the original emergency response concerns that drove the project recommendation could now be addressed.
During the original evaluation of alternatives, emergency response considerations were the primary factor that led staff to recommend a pedestrian hybrid beacon rather than a fully signalized intersection. Since that time, upgraded emergency vehicle preemption equipment has been installed for City Fire and Police Department vehicles, providing enhanced capability for emergency vehicles to communicate with traffic signals and clear intersections more efficiently during emergency response.
Based on renewed coordination with City emergency service providers, consideration of the operational benefits provided by the upgraded emergency vehicle preemption technology, and recognition of the access concerns raised by nearby residents, emergency service representatives have indicated support for installation of a full traffic signal at this location. Staff is now requesting Council approval to proceed with a modification to this project to advance construction of a traffic signal in lieu of a pedestrian hybrid beacon.
Impacts on Project Schedule, Costs, and Grant Funding
Because the project was intentionally designed to accommodate future signalization and construction is already underway, this may be an appropriate opportunity to advance the full traffic signal alternative that was previously evaluated during project development.
The proposed modification would improve pedestrian and bicycle safety, address vehicle
Item 7d
access concerns at the intersection, and can be accomplished with limited additional cost and minimal impact to the overall project schedule.
The proposed design modifications do not represent a substantial change or expansion in project scope or type of construction activities. The vast majority of the construction tasks and equipment (i.e. new signal poles, conduits, electrical wiring, signal cabinet, lighting, sign and striping work) remain the same with a signal or pedestrian hybrid beacon. Modifications primarily include minor revisions to signage and striping and minor adjustments to some signal equipment, such as use of standard signal heads instead of hybrid beacon indicators.
While construction has already begun, work is currently on pause as the contractor awaits PG&E scheduling and delivery of traffic signal poles (6-8 month typical lead time between order and delivery). Therefore, the proposed modification can be accommodated with relatively minor delays to the overall project schedule. Currently, construction is expected to resume this fall and a target completion date of late 2026 may still be possible if the project modification to a full signal is advanced.
The majority of the Project funding ($500,000) is provided via a grant secured by the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments—these funds must be expended by end of the 2026 to receive full reimbursement. Staff have determined that the proposed modification to the project may be advanced within this time frame, without risking forfeiture of grant funding.
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
On October 7, 2025, the City Council authorized staff to advertise for construction bids for the South Street and King Court Crossing Project. On January 13, 2026, the City Council approved award of the Project construction contract.
The City Active Transportation Committee (ATC) has received updates on the Project in numerous meetings over the past several years. The Project was identified as a high priority in the ATC’s 2025-27 budget priority recommendations (approved November 21, 2024), and discussed again during the ATC’s September 18, 2025, meeting. The Committee consistently expressed support for improving safety and accessibility at this crossing location, and no concerns were raised regarding future signalization of the intersection.
While there was not an opportunity to schedule a focused agenda item with the ATC regarding the proposed modification from a hybrid beacon to full traffic signal at the South & King intersection prior to this City Council meeting without risking further delays (and grant funding)—during previous staff updates to the ATC during Project planning and design, there were discussions on potential for a full traffic signal in lieu of a hybrid beacon and there were no specific concerns or objections raised by the committee on this alternative. It is staff’s opinion that the modified project—a full traffic signal—provides equivalent benefit to pedestrian and bicycle crossing access and safety as the pedestrian hybrid beacon design and may provide superior benefits to overall road user safety and
Item 7d
user understanding/compliance. Members of the ATC have received notification of this proposed modification. While no concerns have been reported by members following this notification, they will have the opportunity to comment on this agenda item as individuals.
For a detailed summary on previous City Council and Advisory Body actions related to the Project, see the October 7, 2025 Council Agenda Report.
Public Engagement
A detailed summary of public outreach and engagement activities conducted to date on the Project prior to construction advertisement is provided in the October 7, 2025 Council Agenda Report.
To provide additional notice to community members ahead of this hearing on the proposed Project modification, staff provided advanced notification to representatives of the home owners associations for the two residential communities located on King Court (Parkside and The Villages), direct email notice to residents who recently contacted City staff and Council expressing concerns for the previous project designs, sent post cards via mail to all properties within 1,000 feet of the project location, and placed notices on sandwich boards at the South & King intersection the week prior to this meeting date.
Both this current agenda item and the previous Council Agenda items on the Project followed all required postings and notifications, and the public has had an opportunity to comment on this topic at or before these meetings.
CONCURRENCE
The proposed Project modification and staff report have been reviewed and have concurrence from the City Public Works Department, Fire Department, Police Department, City Attorney’s Office, and City Administration.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Project qualifies for an Exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 Class 1 (Existing Facilities) and 15302 Class 2 (Replacement or Reconstruction). A Notice of Exemption has been filed through the Community Development Department with the County Clerk-Recorder for the previous project design (pedestrian hybrid beacon) and the proposed design modifications do not present any material changes that would affect this CEQA determination.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2025-26
Funding Identified: Yes
Item 7d
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding Sources
(Project Account 2001059)
Total Budget
Remaining
Unencumbered
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
SLOCOG Grant (State REAP Funds)* $0 $0 $0
General Fund - Capital Outlay LRM* $3,357 $0 $3,357
General Fund - Capital Outlay LRM* $149,999 $0 $149,999 Total $153,356 $0 $153,356
*Above totals reflect remaining funding in the South & King Crossing Project account, which has already been approved for the project. Totals exclude $632,816 in project funds that have already been encumbered in a purchase order for the project construction contract, including $500,000 in SLOCOG grant funds.
Prior to start of construction, approximately $970,000 was appropriated to the Project account (No. 2001059), comprised of $500,000 in State REAP grant funding administered by SLOCOG, and local general funds. This total included funding for construction of the Project, purchase and installation of emergency vehicle preemption equipment for the City Fire and Police Departments, and contingencies.
To date, $632,816 has been encumbered for the construction contract and all emergency vehicle preemption expenditures have been completed, leaving $153,356 in remaining funds in the project account for construction contingencies. This remaining funding is sufficient to accommodate the potential cost increases related to the proposed Project modifications (estimated at an approximately $35,000 in additional costs), while retaining sufficient contingency funds through the remainder of project construction.
ALTERNATIVES
Deny the request to modify the project. City Council could deny the request to modify the Project designs to advance a traffic signal in lieu of a pedestrian hybrid beacon. Under this alternative, staff would move forward with plans as previously approved to install a pedestrian hybrid beacon, while conversion to a full traffic signal or other intersection modifications to address vehicle access concerns could be pursued at a later date when prioritized for funding and approved by Council through a separate budget action.