Coast Highway hearing June 10

Today’s Planning Commission hearing on the Coast Highway Corridor (road diet and incentive district) is postponed to June 10. From an email this afternoon to those on their mailing list:

---

Highway Corridor Study:  Status Update

Three components of the Final EIR for the Coast Highway Corridor Study – the Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP), Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Considerations – were inadvertently not included in the online posting for this project. Consequently, the Planning Commission public hearing on the Corridor Study will be continued from May 20th to June 10th in order to afford both the Planning Commission and the general public sufficient time to review these materials. The Final EIR and associated materials can be accessed here. The MMRP, Findings of Fact, and Statement of Overriding Considerations will be posted to this link by Wednesday, May 22nd. Questions regarding these materials and their role in the environmental review process can be directed to Principal Planner Russ Cunningham at rcunningham@oceansideca.org. Public Hearing Schedule    1. Planning Commission (RESCHEDULED): Monday, June 10, 2019 at 6pm 2. City Council: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 2pm Both meetings will take place in the City Council Chambers at 300 North Coast Highway.

Additionally, the Fact Sheet is included again with this announcement to help answer continuing questions on the proposed Incentive District along Coast Highway. Please click on the image to the right for a copy of the fact sheet.

For more information on the Incentive District, please contact Russ Cunningham, Principal Planner at 760-435-3525 or you can send an e-mail to RCunningham@oceansideca.org.

If you have any questions, please contact John Amberson, Transportation Planner, City of Oceanside, 760-435-5091 or you can send an e-mail to Jamberson@oceansideca.org.

 

Coast Highway hearing delayed

The May 20 Planning Commission hearing on the Coast Highway Corridor project has been delayed. We will update you when we have the revised date.

Urgent: Fight Coast Highway Road Diet in next five days

On Monday at 6pm, the Planning Commission hearing will consider the revised Coast Highway Plan. Residents need to

• Testify against the road diet at the May 20 hearing
• Email the Planning Commission to express your opposition.

The city staff recommendation ignores three years of opposition from South O:

• It imposes the Road Diet citywide, shrinking Coast Highway from 4 lanes to 2
• It imposes the Density Incentives citywide, including the maximum density “transit Node” replacing the North County Times building at the NE corner of Cassidy and Coast Highway with something 55′ tall (with parts up to 65′ tall).

South O opposition has included

• An overwhelmingly negative response (90+%) in January to the latest EIR.
• A strong turnout of South O opposition at the January community meeting.
• Impassioned public testimony before the 2016 city election
• A petition of opposition signed by more than 400 Oceanside residents that was submitted to the city council

Save South O — working with and through other community groups such as the South Oceanside Business District — is working to instead present a positive vision of how to improve the Coast Highway corridor in South O.

As residents, merchants and visitors will tell you, South O is not downtown, and so South O needs a development strategy that reflects this reality — not one that imposes a one-size-fits all mandate from City Hall in defiance of the community’s clearly articulated wishes.

Coast Hwy: impact on South O neighborhoods

Little understood is the impact that the city’s proposed development incentives will have on South O. It turns out this increased density will dump more traffic into South O residential neighborhoods between Coast and Interstate 5, according to a new analysis of the city’s numbers.

South O residents have mobilized against the proposed “Road Diet”, reducing Coast from 4 lanes to 2 despite Coast Highway being too busy under federal guidelines for a road diet.

However, the impact of the increased density is buried in the 4,700 pages of the July 2017 and November 2018 EIRs. (Note: Monday 5pm is the deadline for comments on the latter). We have previously noted that having development incentives south of Morse Street would change the character of the business district. Particularly troubling is demolishing the block formerly owned by the Blade-Tribune (aka North County Times) at Cassidy and Coast, for a “transit-oriented node” that is no where near any real mass transit.

Dumping Traffic Into Neighborhoods

The development incentives would increase density along Coast Highway. For the highest density zoning, this would mean residential housing on 3-6 upper floors. The plan envisions increasing apartments/condos on the Coast Highway corridor by 9x (from 621 to 5,871 units) and hotel rooms 7x (from 425 to 3,074 rooms).

What does that mean for South O? Let’s look at the traffic projections for one intersection, Coast and Morse Street.

With or without changes, there will be considerable northbound and southbound traffic through this intersection. At the evening rush hour, today Morse  is the 4th busiest intersection on Coast (after Vista Way, Oceanside and Cassidy).

However, what is not so obvious is how the development incentives increase the traffic entering/leaving the intersection from the residential neighborhoods to the east. Here is what the relevant diagrams (Fig 4-1,5-5,5-7,5-9) say about the hourly traffic at evening rush hour in 2035 with three of the four alternatives:

	Westbound	Eastbound	Total Traffic
Existing (2013)	114	156	1,679
Alternative 1	232	319	2,149
Alternative 2	232	319	2,149
Alternative 3	322	443	1,911

In other words, Alternatives 1 and 2 double the traffic onto Morse, and Alternative 3 triples the traffic (No traffic models were done for #4). The differences are driven by the incentive districts.

The city’s Alternatives 1,2,3 all have an incentive district: citywide for #1 and #2, and from Harbor to Morse St. for #3. In terms of road diet, #1 stops at Oceanside Blvd., while #2 and #3 extend south to Morse.

Alternative #3 (stopping diet and incentives at Morse) was proposed by the council as a compromise — and an alternative to what the community asked for (stopping both at Oceanside Blvd.) which was not studied. By this this measure, it is worse not better than the other alternatives.

Here is the raw data from Figure 4-1 and 5-9, which report actual data from 2013 and projected 2035 data for Alternative 3:

Providing Feedback

Residents have until 5pm Monday January 14 to provide feedback on the completeness of the EIR in assessing the environmental, traffic and economic impacts of the alternatives on South O and other parts of Oceanside. For example, the city still has not released data from more than two years of the “temporary” road diet between Oceanside and Morse.

At Save South O, we believe the residents and merchants of South O still overwhelmingly favor no road diet and no development incentives South of Oceanside Blvd. To avoid confusion, we encourage those contacting city to explain their position in these terms.

Feedback on the EIR should be sent to John Amberson (JAmberson@ci.oceanside.ca.us) by 5pm January 14.

Residents may also want to send their feedback to the city council at Council@ci.oceanside.ca.us

Now that the council is back to five votes, the city council is expected to vote to select one of the Coast Highway alternatives (or no project) at a council meeting in Spring 2019. We will keep South O posted on all developments between now and then.

Why a Road Diet won’t work in South O

The city is nearing a  final decision about the “Road Diet”, its proposal to shrink some or all of Coast Highway from 4 lanes to 2 lanes. This is a project that’s been discussed and studied for more than a decade.

Today the city is considering four Alternatives (see here), all of which include a Road Diet with roundabouts. Alternatives 1-3 also include development incentives that could increase residential units 9x and hotel rooms 7x. In July 2017, the city issued a 2,309 page Environmental Impact Report studying Alternatives 1,2,4. In November 2018, it issued a 2,406 page supplemental EIR that studied its new Alternative 3; feedback on the 2018 EIR is due by January 14.

However, neither of the city’s EIRs acknowledge the official “Road Diet” guidance of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), as reflected by its November 2014 Road Diet Information Guide. The guide has been available on their website since then, but it is not mentioned in either EIR. According to the Federal guidelines, the existing (and future) traffic levels on Coast Highway are too great for a Road Diet to work here.

What the Guide Says

After reviewing the history of Road Diets over the past 40 years, the FHWA guide talks about the reasons for a diet (Ch. 2), whether a local context is suitable (Ch. 3), how to design a diet (ch. 4) and to measure its success (ch. 5). Only 3 paragraphs of the 72 pages discuss roundabouts; one paragraph recommends against introducing a road diet with roundabouts at the same time due to potential public opposition.

Section 3.3 talks about the operational factors that make a diet suitable or not suitable, based on vehicles per day (VPD) and vehicles per hour per day (VPHPD):

3.3.5 Average Daily Traffic (ADT)

The ADT provides a good first approximation on whether or not to consider a Road Diet conversion. If the ADT is near the upper limits of the study volumes, practitioners should conduct further analysis to determine its operational feasibility. … The FHWA advises that roadways with ADT of 20,000 vpd or less may be good candidates for a Road Diet and should be evaluated for feasibility.

3.3.6 Peak Hour and Peak Direction

The peak hour volume in the peak direction will be the measure of volume driving the analysis and can determine whether the Road Diet can be feasibly implemented. …The Iowa guidelines suggest, from an operational point of view, the following volume-based Road Diet feasibility conclusions (assuming a 50/50 directional split and 10 percent of the ADT during the peak hour):

• Probably feasible at or below 750 vehicles per hour per direction (vphpd) during the peak hour.
• Consider cautiously between 750 – 875 vphpd during the peak hour.
• Feasibility less likely above 875 vphpd during the peak hour and expect reduced arterial LOS during the peak period.

Finally, the guide also says that “Road Diets can cause some diversion of traffic to parallel routes.” In the original EIR, South O and Seaside residents both complained to the city that the Road Diet would cause frustrated drivers to leave Coast for streets paralleling Coast. The 750 vphpd standard means 1,500 vehicles/hour in both directons.

How This Applies to Oceanside

How does this apply to Oceanside? If you look at the November 2018 EIR, Coast Highway peak evening traffic is already above the FHWA’s peak recommended level for Oceanside Blvd. and points south.

Road Diet	none	to Oside Blvd	to Morse	to Morse
Incentives	none	all Coast	all Coast	to Morse
Year	2013	2035	2035	2035
Alternative	Existing	Alt. 1	Alt. 2	Alt. 3
Harbor & Coast	579	704	704	579
Mission & Coast	1,047	1,845	1,845	1,047
Wisconsin & Coast	1,379	1,422	1,422	1,379
Oceanside & Coast	1,638	1,570	1,570	1,638
Morse & Coast	1,510	1,847	1,847	1,510
Cassidy & Coast	1,572	1,646	1,646	1,572
Vista Way & Coast	1,664	1,947	1,947	1,664

 

Economic impact of the “Road Diet”

The city’s proposed “Road Diet” proposes eliminating half of the trafic lanes lanes on Coast Highway, reducing Coast from 4 lanes to 2 from Oceanside Blvd. north to the Harbor. Of the four options, two options (Alternative 2,3) also narrow traffic lanes south to Morse Street, and one (Alternative 4) cuts it citywide, including all of South O.

Local businesses fear that the reduced access will put them out of business. However, the city has not released the data from its test “Road Diet”, nor does its latest EIR talk about the potential economic impacts of the road diet. (Comments on this EIR are due by 5pm January 14).

The 33 Month Pilot Study

For nearly three years — since March 31, 2016 — the city has experimented with a “temporary” road diet on Coast between Morse and Oceanside. At the time, city staff said the data would support the city’s proposed road diet citywide:

“I hopes this will prove we can do a two lane Coast Highway,” David DiPierro, city traffic engineer, said. “The public can see what a two lane Coast Highway would look like. If it does not work, as we intend it to work, we can revert back and study it more.”

When the “pilot program” was approved, the city said

[Scott] Smith said part of the pilot design would track changes in vehicles speeds and traffic patterns, including use of side streets.

A Traffic Measurement System would be installed in the study area between Oceanside Boulevard and Morse Street to measure vehicle travel time, speed and origin of destination. This would allow analysis of road changes on drivers’ commute times.

While the city has gathered the data, no report has been issued to the public. Individual council members have said they also have not received the data.

However, residents have experienced increased traffic congestion on this stretch between Oceanside and Morse, with traffic jams common on weekday afternoons and summer weekends. The city is aware of these effects.

Coast Highway crossing Loma Alta Creek, before pilot project (Source: Bing Maps).

Coast Highway crossing Loma Alta Creek, during pilot project (Source: Google Maps).

Studying Economic Impacts

When it comes to economic impacts, the November 2017 EIR only talks about the historic impacts of the Coast Highway, not the impact of the proposed changes. This phrase appears three times:

From the early to mid-20th century the Coast Highway was a major economic driver in the City of Oceanside and was largely responsible for the City’s growth from the 1920s through the 1950s.

Under the CEQA guidelines (14 CCR § 15131b in the California Code of Regulations) says

Economic or social effects of a project may be used to determine the significance of physical changes caused by the project. … Where an EIR uses economic or social effects to determine that a physical change is significant, the EIR shall explain the reason for determining that the effect is significant.

The discussion of economic impacts in the July 2017 EIR mainly focuses on the temporary disruption due to construction. However, it does say the proposal is consistent with the county’s strategy for increased residential density and reliance on alternative transit as a path towards “reduced congestion”:

Sustainable Communities Strategies

In October 2015 the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) adopted the 2015 Sustainable Communities Strategies (SCS), which builds on the previous 2011 SCS and directs investments within existing urbanized areas to encourage growth within existing higher-density urban boundaries and discourages urban and suburban sprawl. Elements of the 2015 SCS that have been implemented include the completion of bicycle and pedestrian projects and the expansion of transit with new rapid bus service. The goals of the 2015 SCS include increasing the number of homes and jobs near transit, reducing transit travel time, and achieving economic benefits due to reduced congestion and the construction of transportation infrastructure, as well as reducing air pollutant emissions.

Potential Impacts

At the January 3 meeting hosted by Save South O, local businesses (particularly those in the dip) complained about the disruption of the existing (temporary) road diet, as well as the greater harm of reducing lanes and increasing density, potentially citywide.

The fear of negative impact on local businesses is real. In the eight months of the “road diet” on Venice Blvd. in Los Angeles, 15 businesses have closed their doors. The remaining businesses are struggling with angry and frustrated customers.

With only about 50 businesses in South O along Coast Highway, losing 15 businesses here would be very damaging both to the community and to business confidence in Oceanside more generally.

A clear message from South O

More than 70 people turned out this evening for Save South O’s community workshop about the Coast Highway EIR. Those attending heard about

• The history of the Coast Highway Vision process that began in 2007
• How the city’s process seemed geared towards generating a specific result (the road diet), rather than listening to what the community wanted
• The differences between the five proposed alternatives as they would impact South O
• The negative impacts of the proposed road diet and development incentives on South O — including (with some options) more traffic from increased density with fewer traffic lanes
• The impact the “temporary” road diet between Morse and Oceanside Blvd. has already had on merchants there
• The potential for the traffic circles (not normally used on such narrow streets) to slow emergency vehicle access, and resident concerns about their negative impact on pedestrian safety
• The strong and consistent opposition of South O residents and business owners to the proposed changes
• The plans of the South Oceanside Business District to push for lighted crosswalks across Coast Highway, particularly at Kelly and Whaley, and better speed enforcement on Coast
• The better bicycle safety provided by completing the Rail Trail (or having cyclists continue to use Pacific Street)

Charlie Anderson addresses the Save South O meeting at Beach Break Cafe, January 3, 2019

Those present also heard about the positive vision that South O leaders have to maintain and (incrementally) improve the character of the community, a process that has been going on without (or despite) city hall intervention. As Charlie Anderson said, we want to keep South O “authentic”, which will keep Oceanside attractive to both locals and out of town visitors.

We met at Beach Break Cafe, founded 30 years ago in South O and now the anchor of the business district. Co-owner Zell Dwelley talked about how they invested first to create the business, and then to move to their current, much larger location in 2010 — without developer incentives. It is this sort of organic, community-driven growth that we believe will preserve the character of South O that drew us all to this unique North County neighorhood.

Our Recommendation

For all the reasons summarized (and linked) above, Save South O believes what is best for South Oceanside is for city to keep the Road Diet and Development Incentives north of Oceanside Blvd., with no Coast Highway changes south of Oceanside Blvd.

Despite the community’s consistent position, the council did not study this option in their EIR; instead, the options are:

• No Project Alternative: no change from today
• Alternative 1, Road Diet on Coast Highway from Harbor Drive to Oceanside Blvd., and development incentives throughout the city, including South O
• Alternative 2, the same as #1 except it extends the Road Diet to Morse (through the “Dip”), with the Incentive District throughout the city
• Alternative 3, Road Diet and Incentive District from Harbor Drive to Morse Street
• Alternative 4, a Road Diet for the entire city, with no development incentives

Therefore, the only two options we can recommend are

• No Project Alternative: the only option the city studied that leaves South O alone
• Alternative 1, but modified with no Development Incentives south of Oceanside Blvd.

Note that Save South O takes no position on what happens north of Oceanside Blvd. For the same reason that we believe South O deserve autonomy for what happens here, we hope the council decision will reflect the will of the majority of the impacted residents and businesses in North coastal Oceanside.

Submitting Feedback

After issuing the revised EIR in November 2018, the city has set a deadline for submitting feedback: 5 p.m. Monday January 14. Feedback should be sent to John Amberson (JAmberson@ci.oceanside.ca.us). Residents may also want to send their feedback to the city council at Council@ci.oceanside.ca.us

Given our clear arguments, several outside visitors — as well as newcomers to South — said they found it hard to imagine why the city would oppose this position. At this point, our biggest enemy is complacency.

We encourage all South O residents to contact both city staff and the council to let them know your position. You should not only state your position, but also any specific aspect on your, your family or your business that the proposed changes might have.

Please also contact your friends and neighbors — not only those who live in South O, but anyone else who lives in the city who shares your concerns. A change to the character of South O will impact those who visit our community as well.

Feel free to contact Save South O if you have any questions or concerns.

Comparing the Coast Highway options

At Thursday’s meeting, Save South O will host an event discussing the impact of the city’s five Coast Highway alternatives upon Oceanside south of Oceanside Blvd., in advance of the January 14 feedback deadline.

Alternatives Being Considered

• No Project Alternative, which would be no change from today
• Alternative 1, puts the Road Diet on Coast Highway (cutting 4 lanes to 2 lanes) from Harbor Drive to Oceanside Blvd., and development incentives throughout the city, including South O.
• Alternative 2, the same as #1 except it extends the Road Diet to Morse (through the “Dip”), with the Incentive District throughout the city.
• Alternative 3, Road Diet and Incentive District from Harbor Drive to Morse Street.
• Alternative 4 (former Alternative 3), a Road Diet for the entire city, with no development incentives.

These alternatives are summarized in this table:

	No Proj	Alt 1	Alt 2	Alt 3	Alt 4
Road Diet
Harbor-Oside Blvd	no (4 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)
Oside Blvd-Morse	no (4 lanes)	no (4 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)
Morse-Vista Way	no (4 lanes)	no (4 lanes)	no (4 lanes)	no (4 lanes)	YES (2 lanes)
Density increases
Harbor-Oside Blvd	–	YES	YES	YES	–
Oside Blvd-Morse	–	YES	YES	YES	–
Morse-Vista Way	–	YES	YES	–	–

Road Diet

The proposed “road diet” for Coast Highway has two major elements:

• Reducing the traffic lanes from four lanes to two
• Replace various traffic lights and unprotected intersections with traffic circles (rotaries)

Two years ago, with their concern about increased traffic congestion and reduced access to South O, more than 400 Oceanside residents petitioned against having the road diet in South Oceanside (as later reported by Union-Tribune and Coast News and San Diego Union-Tribune).

Development Incentives

A major aspect of the Coast Highway plan is creating a “Development Incentive Overlay”.  The major aspects of these incentives are:

• Increased residential density for mixed use projects, up to 63 units/acre
• Increased heights (up to 55′ average or 65′ maximum height)
• Little or no public input (e.g. Planning Commission hearings) for many applications

This highest density development (63 units/acre, 55-65′ max) is known as a “Node” in the city’s parlance and is shown in purple in the map above. It would be found in two places in South O:

• The Sprinter Node, including all land between Loma Alta and Oceanside Blvd., plus Paradise-by-the-Sea.
• The northeast corner of Cassidy — the former Blade-Tribune (North County Times) block. Any redevelopment of this block would affect several existing businesses: Anita’s, Bob’s Gas, Central Autobody, Privateer, and Raen.

Bicycle Safety

The Road Diet envisions painting a stripe along Coast Highway to reserve the right lane for bicycles. Save South O believes that rather than a Class II bike lane on Coast Highway — next to heavy traffic and with the risk of accidents from cars entering from driveways and side streets — a safer (and for almost all cyclists, faster) option is to finish the Class I (dedicated right-of-way) bike path, the Coastal Rail Trail.

What remains to be done is completing a bridge across Loma Alta Creek. Last June, city received a $400k SANDAG grant for planning this crossing:

The first grant, Environmental Study for the Coastal Rail Trail across Loma Alta Creek  … would extend the existing Coastal Rail Trail limits in the City of Oceanside by creating a Class I bicycle and pedestrian path that spans across the Loma Alta Creek between Oceanside Boulevard and Morse Street. This connection would improve pedestrian and bicycle mobility and create a relatively safe route for pedestrians and bicyclists between North and South Oceanside.

Meeting Info

The meeting will be Thursday, January 3, at 6pm, at Beach Break Cafe, 1802 S Coast Highway (cross street Cassidy).

Providing Feedback

After issuing the revised EIR in November 2018, the city has set a deadline for submitting feedback: 5 p.m. Monday January 14. Feedback should be sent to John Amberson (JAmberson@ci.oceanside.ca.us). Residents may also want to send their feedback to the city council at Council@ci.oceanside.ca.us

Jan. 3: Impact of Coast Highway on South O

Next week —  at 6 p.m. Thursday January 3 —  Save South O will be sponsoring a community forum. The subject is the impact of the proposed Coast Highway Corridor plan on those who live in, shop in or visit South O.

The event is intended to help inform South O and other Oceanside residents about two Coast Highway Environmental Impact Reports. We believe it will be last public discussion of the Coast Highway EIR prior to the city’s January 14 deadline for submitting comments on the most recent EIR.

The event will be held at Beach Break Cafe, 1802 S. Coast Highway, Oceanside. It is scheduled to last 90 minutes.

The topics to be covered will include:

• The history of the city’s proposed Coast Highway plan and South O
• An overview of the five options being considered
• The impacts of each option on traffic and development south of Oceanside Boulevard
• How these will affect to local businesses
• The city’s approval process and how residents can get involved

Depending on the option selected, the EIRs predict that the Coast Highway plan will

• Increase congestion on Coast Highway by reducing the street from 4 lanes to 2
• Shift other traffic into neighborhoods parallel to Coast Highway
• Reduce public input into development projects on Coast Highway, while increasing their height and density of residential units
• Through increased density, increase traffic congestion on Coast, major East-West streets (including Cassidy and Vista Way), and at freeway on-/off-ramps

All residents of South O and Fire Mountain — as well as others who visit South O — are encouraged to attend.

Revised Coast Highway Plan

On Wednesday, the City of Oceanside released the revised plan for the Coast Highway Corridor that it promised in May. This month’s Environmental Impact Report is an update of the 2017 EIR, one that South O residents asked the city to revise.

The city has created a 60 day deadline for public comments on the new plan:

The revised sections of the 2018 DEIR will be recirculated for public review and comments starting on Wednesday, November 14th 2018 through Monday, January 14th 2019, for a 60-day public review and comment period.

July 2017 EIR

The 2017 EIR had 4 alternatives

• No Project Alternative, which would be no change from today
• Alternative 1, puts the Road Diet on Coast Highway (cutting 4 lanes to 2 lanes) from Harbor Drive to Oceanside Blvd., and development incentives throughout the city, including South O.
• Alternative 2, the same as #1 except it extends the Road Diet to Morse (through the “Dip”), with the Incentive District throughout the city.
• Alternative 3, a Road Diet for the entire city, with no Incentive District at all.

November 2018 EIR

This month’s EIR has 5 alternatives. No project, 1, and 2 are unchanged. The city has

• Alternative 3, Road Diet and Incentive District from Harbor Drive to Morse Street.
• Alternative 4 (former Alternative 3), a Road Diet for the entire city, with no development incentives.

Other than the No Build, all alternatives have disadvantages for South Oceanside. After Save South O has a chance to discuss the alternatives, we will post updated recommendations for residents to contact the city.

However, of the five council votes, with the new district elections, only three council members (directly) care about the concerns of Coast Highway communities.

• District 1 (North of Oceanside Blvd.: Seaside east to Rancho Del Oro)
• District 3 (South of Oceanside Blvd.: South O east to the city limits)
• The mayor, with votes from the entire city.

Thus, South O residents will need to build alliances with residents in the rest of the city, so that Oceanside will pick the plan the best for the city.