HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7c. Tank Farm Roadway Striping Modifications & Authorization to Advertise 2025 Paving Project Item 7c
Department: Public Works
Cost Center: 5010
For Agenda of: 5/6/2025
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: 60 Minutes
FROM: Matt Horn, Public Works Director
Prepared By: Luke Schwartz, Transportation Manager; Hai Nguyen, Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: DISCUSS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION ON TANK FARM ROAD STRIPING
MODIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT OF THE 2025
PAVING PROJECT (SPEC. NO. 2000616) FOR CONSTRUCTION
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive staff presentation, provide input and policy direction regarding roadway
striping modifications for Tank Farm Road for implementation with the 2025 Paving
Project designs; and
2. Authorize the City Engineer to approve final plans and specifications for the 2025
Paving Project, Specification No. 2000616, including incorporation of designs for Tank
Farm Road pursuant to City Council direction, prior to advertising the project for
construction; and
3. Authorize staff to advertise for bids for the 2025 Paving Project; and
4. Authorize the City Manager to award the construction contract for the 2025 P aving
Project pursuant to Section 3.24.190 of the Municipal Code for the bid total, if the
lowest responsible bid is within the publicly disclosed funding amount of $7,720,000;
5. Adopt a Draft Resolution entitled, “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, Authorizing Appropriation of Capital Projects Reserve Funds
to Support the 2025 Paving Project, Specification Number 2000616”; and
6. Authorize the Finance Director to make the following appropriation s and funding
transfers to the 2025 Paving Project Account (2000616):
a. Appropriate $1,404,530 of Capital Outlay LRM funds from the FY24/25 Capital
Reserve of the Capital Outlay Fund; and
b. Transfer $2,100,000 of Capital Outlay LRM funds from the Roadway Sealing
2024 Project Account (No. 2000615); and
c. Transfer $100,000 of Capital Outlay LRM funds from the Arterials 2023 Project
Account (No. 2001065); and
d. Transfer $199,200 of Water funds from the Water Valve Cover Adjustments
Account (No. 2001005); and
e. Transfer $76,800 of Sewer funds from the Sewer Valve Cover Adjustments
Account (No. 2000084); and
7. Authorize the City Engineer to issue Contract Change Orders for the 2025 Paving
Project up to and in excess of $200,000 if within available project budget, and up to
any amended budget subsequently approved by the City Manager per City Purchasing
Policy approval thresholds.
Page 347 of 625
Item 7c
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
Staff are requesting City Council authorization to advertise the 2025 Paving Project for
construction. In accordance with the City’s Pavement Management Plan, the project
includes reconstruction of existing pavement, along with additional improvements such
as ADA curb ramp upgrades, replacement of roadway striping, and features that advance
the City’s transportation safety and mobility goals.
To maximize potential project benefits while maintaining flexibility within the City’s
financial constraints, the 2025 Paving Project will be advertised with a Base Bid and two
Bid Additive Alternatives. The bid documents will specify that the City intends to award
the Base Bid and as many Bid Additive Alternatives as can be funded within the available
project budget. The contract is to be awarded based on the lowest base bid price
received.
The project’s Base Bid includes:
Roadway Reconstruction
a. Tank Farm Road (Broad Street to Wavertree)
b. Sacramento Drive (Industrial Way to Via Esteban)
Roadway Striping Refresh (no paving work or other improvements)
a. Broad Street (Orcutt Road to Tank Farm)
b. Santa Rosa & Mill Street Crosswalks
c. Madonna Road (US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera)
d. Prado Road (Higuera to Serra Meadows)
e. Tank Farm Road (Santa Fe to Broad Street)
The project’s Additive Alternatives include Roadway Reconstruction on:
A. Orcutt Road (Tank Farm Road to City/County Line)
B. Calle Joaquin (Motel 6 to City/County Line)
Typically, staff would include a recommendation for the Council to approve the final plans
and specifications concurrently with authorization to advertise for construction. However,
specific direction from the Council is needed to guide final design for the Tank Farm Road
portion of the project. For this reason, staff is requesting that Council provide design
direction for Tank Farm Road, and delegate authority to the City Engineer to approve the
final project plans and specifications based on Council input, prior to advertising the
project for construction.
After reviewing policy recommendations in the City’s General Plan, the ATP, the Draft
Vision Zero Action Plan1, input from emergency service providers (including San Luis
Obispo Fire Department or “SLO Fire”), and feedback from the City’s Active
1 The Final Vision Zero Action Plan is planned to be presented for City Council approval late summer/early
fall of 2025.
Page 348 of 625
Item 7c
Transportation Committee (ATC) and the community, staff is presenting the following
design alternatives for Tank Farm Road (Broad Street to Wavertree Road) for Council
consideration:
Tank Farm Alternative 1 (Road Diet) – Proposes a five-lane to three-lane road
diet on Tank Farm between Poinsettia Street and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR)
bridge.
o Benefits: Greater potential to reduce high vehicle speeds, increase
separation between bicyclists/pedestrians and vehicles, and more
effectively improve pedestrian crossing exposure. Includes the addition of a
new enhanced crosswalk at the Tank Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose
intersection.
o Disadvantages: Potential for some increases in driver delay above existing
conditions (though not expected to trigger policy or level of service
deficiencies), less familiarity for existing road users, and reduced flexibility
for future growth or emergency evacuation needs (though not considered a
substantive impediment to evacuation by SLO Fire).
Tank Farm Alternative 2 (No Road Diet) – Maintains the existing five-auto-lane
configuration on Tank Farm between Broad Street and the UPRR bridge.
o Benefits: No change in road configuration, vehicle delays, or driver
experience; retains excess road capacity for future growth and emergency
evacuations.
o Disadvantages: Limited potential to reduce high vehicle speeds, less
separation between vehicles and bicycles /pedestrians, and minimal
improvement to pedestrian crossing safety. A new crosswalk at Tank
Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose would not be recommended under this
alternative.
The differences between these alternatives are limited to the western segment of Tank
Farm, between Broad Street and the UPRR bridge. To the east of the UPRR Bridge, both
designs are identical and include the addition of striped bike lane buffers, radar speed
feedback signs, and pedestrian crossing improvements at the Tank Farm/Righetti Ranch
Road roundabout but otherwise retain the existing road configuration.
Neither of these alternatives include installation of protected bike lanes on Tank Farm .
While protected bike lanes are recommended in the ATP, were explored in preliminary
concept designs for this project, and are supported by the ATC, staff does not recommend
installation of protected bike lanes on Tank Farm at this time based on detailed design
review between Public Works and SLO Fire staff, with consideration given to emergency
vehicle access and potential evacuation needs, as guided by recent updates to the Cal
Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps. See additional discussion later in this report.
As discussed in the Fiscal Impact section of this report, a portion of the funding needed
to construct the 2025 Paving Project is expected to be appropriated in Fiscal Year 2025-
Page 349 of 625
Item 7c
26. This funding will be identified in the forthcoming 2025 -27 Financial Plan, with
construction initiation contingent on approval of the Financial Plan and availability of the
2025-26 funding after July 1, 2025. In addition, staff is recommending that Council
authorize the Finance Director appropriate approximately $1.4 million fr om the Fiscal
Year 2024-25 Capital Projects Reserve Fund to support project construction. A draft
resolution supporting this appropriation is provided as Attachment A.
Project construction is slated to begin in late summer/early fall 2025. If the above-listed
staff recommendations are approved, the anticipated schedule moving forward would be
as follows:
i. Council Direction on Tank Farm Road & Authorization to Advertise – May 6, 2025
ii. Project Advertisement (following City Engineer Approval of Plans) – June 2025
iii. Project Bid Opening & Contract Award – July 2025
iv. Start of Construction – Late August/Early September 2025
v. Construction Completion – December 2025
POLICY CONTEXT
The 2025 Paving Project directly supports several key City plans, policies, and goals. The
project supports the ongoing maintenance of City streets outlined in the Pavement
Management Plan. Proposed improvements on Tank Farm Road and Sacramento Drive
support several of the recommendations of the City’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
and the City’s adopted Vision Zero Goal to eliminate severe injury and fatal traffic
collisions (Resolution No. 10746 (2016 Series)). The active transportation components of
the project also support efforts to achieve the General Plan mode share targets,
recommendations of the City’s Climate Action Plan , the current Sustainable
Transportation and Climate Action Major City Goal, and the FY 2025-2027 Infrastructure
and Sustainable Transportation Major City Goal.
General Plan Circulation Element Policy 8.1.4(b) and Safety Element Program OP-7.15
are also relevant to this item, as these policies require that the City ensure traffic
management projects accommodate emergency response needs and that the City
evaluate emergency response and evacuation needs in high-risk hazard areas, including
areas near Fire Very High Hazard Severity Zones.
In June 2021, the City Council established the Fund Balance and Reserve Policy
(Resolution No 11250, 2021 Series). This policy established the Capital Projects Reserve
Fund and committed a reserve of 20% of capital improvement plan budget from the Local
Revenue Measure for the purposes of offsetting unanticipated cost increases, unforeseen
conditions, and urgent unanticipated projects to provide continued investment in
infrastructure maintenance and enhancement. The Capital Projects Reserve funding is
requested to fund the project’s construction costs.
DISCUSSION
Page 350 of 625
Item 7c
Background
Per the City’s Pavement Maintenance Plan, roadway pavement maintenance projects are
implemented each year, generally alternating each year between work within local
neighborhood areas and pavement repairs on major arterial streets. Pavement
maintenance projects often involve complete removal and replacement of roadway
striping and pavement markings, which provides ideal opportunities to incorporate
planned safety and complete street2 improvements as part of these larger roadway
maintenance efforts.
2025 Paving Project
The 2025 Paving Project is structured with a Base Bid and two Additive Alternatives, A
and B, to maximize the scope of work within available funding. The project plans and
Special Provisions are provided as Attachment B and C of this report. The project’s Base
Bid includes pavement maintenance work, striping, curb ramp improvements and
complete street features on Tank Farm Road and Sacramento Drive, as well as
refreshment of roadway markings on several streets where existing markings are badly
faded and beyond what City maintenan ce staff can restore. Base Bid components
include:
Roadway Reconstruction
a. Tank Farm Road (Broad Street to Wavertree)
b. Sacramento Drive (Industrial Way to Via Esteban)
Roadway Striping Refresh (no paving work or other improvements)
a. Broad Street (Orcutt Road to Tank Farm)
b. Santa Rosa & Mill Street Crosswalks
c. Madonna Road (US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera)
d. Prado Road (Higuera to Serra Meadows)
e. Tank Farm Road (Santa Fe to Broad Street)
The project’s Additive Alternatives include Roadway Reconstruction on:
Additive Alternate A - Orcutt Road (Tank Farm Road to City/County Line)
Additive Alternate B - Calle Joaquin (Motel 6 to City/County Line)
Figure 1 below shows the locations identifies in the 2025 Paving Project for roadway
reconstruction. Areas identified to receive striping refresh only are not shown.
2 A complete street is a transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide
safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, trucks, and motorists,
appropriate to the function and context of the facility. In California, per the California Complete Streets
Act of 2008 (Assembly Bill 1358), all cities and counties are required to include complete streets policies
as part of the circulation element of general plans.
Page 351 of 625
Item 7c
Figure 1: 2025 Paving Project Map
Pavement Reconstruction and Maintenance Methodology
A pavement analysis conducted in December 2024 confirmed that existing pavement
surfaces on Tank Farm, Orcutt, Sacramento, and Calle Joaquin are all structurally
deficient and unable to support the current and projected traffic loads. Many sections of
these roadways exhibit moderate to severe cracking, rutting in the wheel paths, and
potholes, indicating they are nearing the end of their useful life. The pavement
management treatments that are proposed to be implemented with this project are Full
Depth Hot Mix Asphalt Reconstruction and Full Depth Reclamation.
Page 352 of 625
Item 7c
Full Depth Hot Mix Asphalt Reconstruction
Full-depth Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) reconstruction is recommended for Orcutt,
Sacramento, and Calle Joaquin to restore the roadway to a like -new condition. This
process involves milling or grinding the existing pavement to a depth that matches the
new asphalt section, creating a smooth and even base for repaving. In some areas, both
the surface and base layers may be removed to reach the necessary depth for the new
pavement. The reconstructed section is designed to provide long-term durability and
support expected traffic loads. Once milling is complete, a fresh layer of asphalt will be
placed, resulting in a smooth roadway surface.
Full Depth Reclamation
Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) is a more comprehensive pavement rehabilitation method
that addresses both the surface and base layers of a roadway. This process involves
grinding up the existing pavement and mixing it with the underlying base soil to create a
stronger, more stable foundation. By recycling the existing materia ls in place, FDR not
only corrects structural deficiencies but also offers significant cost and environmental
benefits by reducing the need to haul away old pavement.
One of the key advantages of FDR is the improved strength of the reconstructed base,
which allows for a thinner layer of new, high-quality asphalt on the surface. This can result
in substantial cost savings—up to $1 million—by reducing the asphalt section from 14
inches (as required with Full Depth HMA reconstruction) to 8.5 inches.
FDR is recommended for Tank Farm Road due to its wider roadway width, which allows
for phased construction that helps minimize traffic disruptions. In preparation, staff
completed subsurface investigations and confirmed that there are no shallow utilities that
would interfere with the pulverization depth.
However, FDR is not suitable for all roadway conditions. It is not being considered for
Orcutt, Sacramento, and Calle Joaquin due to site -specific constraints. On Sacramento,
for example, the roadway is too narrow to accommodate phased construction, and the
shallow depth of utility laterals conflicts with the required pulverization depth. In these
cases, mill and fill is the more practical and cost-effective approach.
Construction Phase Impacts and Mitigations
While Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) is a highly effective and cost-efficient method for
rehabilitating pavements, it is important to recognize the potential challenges that can
arise. The most notable concern is the curing time needed for the treated base l ayer
before installing new asphalt, which can extend the project timeline and increase
inconveniences during construction. The length of this curing time can vary based on the
stabilizing agent used, environmental conditions, and the mix design. For instan ce,
cement stabilization typically requires anywhere from 7 to 28 days to achieve full strength,
depending on factors such as moisture, temperature, and the mix proportions. In colder
conditions, this curing process may take even longer, further extending project timelines.
This project is expected to be constructed in late summer / early fall, and the warmer
temperatures are expected to help reduce curing timeframes.
Page 353 of 625
Item 7c
To mitigate the impact on road users during construction, the FDR paving on Tank Farm
is proposed to be completed in two phases. During Phase 1, half of the roadway will
remain open to traffic on the existing asphalt pavement, allowing for uninterrupted two-
way traffic flow, while the other half undergoes FDR treatment. In Phase 2, work will shift
to the other half of the roadway, where the asphalt will be pulverized, treated, and paved ,
with traffic shifting to the side that received the FDR treatment in Phase 1. This phased
approach ensures that two-way traffic can continue on at least one side while necessary
pavement rehabilitation is carried out on the other side. However, temporary disruptions
or lane reductions may occur during the reclamation and curing process. Construction will
be phased so that traffic is limited on the treated FDR ba se to the maximum extent
possible, with the goal of ensuring that traffic only drives on either the existing HMA or
the new HMA.
Another factor to be aware of with FDR paving is that a greater amount of dust is often
produced during pavement reconstruction during the curing phase of the treated base,
especially when lime or other stabilization agents are applied, which can pose concerns
for the public. To mitigate these concerns, the City will ensure that the paving contractor
implements effective dust control measures during this period to reduce impacts to the
community and preserve environmental quality and safety within the vicinity of the
construction site. Contractors will be required to submit a Construction Phasing Plan and
a Dust Control Plan prior to the start of construction. These plans will outline specific
strategies for dust suppression, such as regular watering, the use of dust suppressants,
and the installation of physical barriers. By carefully planning and implementing these
mitigation measures, the potential impact of dust exposure can be minimized, ensuring
the safety and success of the project while minimizing disruptions to the surrounding
community.
Complete Street Design Elements
The 2025 Paving Project includes complete street enhan cements for several streets,
which are intended to improve mobility and safety for all road users, as guided by the
City’s ATP and Draft Vision Zero Action Plan.
In addition to roadway maintenance and striping improvements, this project will include
pedestrian curb ramp upgrades at 19 locations on Tank Farm Road, eight (8) locations
on Sacramento, and one (1) curb ramp on Orcutt Road to improve accessibility and
comply with current ADA requirements.
Calle Joaquin (Motel 6 to City/County Line)
There are no relevant recommendations in the ATP or notable safety concerns for the
segment of Calle Joaquin. Improvements primarily include pavement rehabilitation,
restriping, and replacing faded traffic signs and object markers. The only notable change
from existing conditions is the addition of striped edge lines for added visibility at night,
as there is little streetlighting on this segment of Calle Joaquin.
Page 354 of 625
Item 7c
Example of Increased Nighttime Visibility with Addition of Edge Lines
Sacramento Drive (Industrial Way to Via Esteban)
Sacramento Drive is designated as a commercial collector and serves both residential
and light industrial uses, including a high level of commercial delivery trucks. The City’s
ATP calls for retaining the existing striped bike lanes on Sacramento, and exploring
potential for a future pedestrian crossing improvement, such as addition of an all-way stop
at Sacramento/Capitolio, which is identified as a Tier 3 (lowest priority) project per the
ATP. Public comments received regarding Sacramento Drive in recent years include the
following:
1. Concerns with poor pavement condition, particularly within the bike lanes.
2. General complaints regarding high speeds and illegal speeding, including from
larger commercial trucks that frequent Sacramento Drive.
3. Concerns with large, parked vehicles/trucks encroaching into southbound bike
lane.
4. Concerns with high vehicle speeds and encroachment into the bike lane along the
curve in the road north of the paving project limits (note that two community
members traveling on foot were tragically killed by a reckless driver along this
curve in November 2022).
To address these concerns, the following design elements are proposed as part of the
2025 Paving project for Sacramento Drive in addition to pavement reconstruction and
ADA curb ramp upgrades:
1. While outside of the paving project limits, plans include sign/striping modifications
along the roadway curve north of Via Esteban to reduce illegal speeds and vehicle
encroachment into the bike lane. Measures include additional curve warning
signage with flashing yellow beacons, addition of striped bikeway buffers,
centerline and bike lane line hardening (ceramic “bots dots” pavement markers
installed along yellow centerline and bike lane edge stripes) to discourage vehicles
encroaching into adjacent lanes.
Page 355 of 625
Item 7c
2. Installation of radar speed feedback signs and additional speed limit signs. (Note
that the speed limit was recently reduced from 35 to 30 mph from Capitolio to
Industrial and is currently posted at 25 mph north of Capitolio).
3. Addition of green bike lane conflict markings at intersections and high-traffic
driveways.
4. Striping refinement to narrow auto lane widths (within City Engineering Standards),
widen parking lane width next to the southbound bike lane, added width to
northbound bike lane, and addition of striped bike lane buffers, where width allows.
5. Moderate expansion of parking restrictions at intersection corners (“daylighting”)
to improve sight distance and safety for all road users pursuant to state law and
City Engineering Standards.
Example of Ceramic Pavement Markers to Reduce Vehicle Departure from Traffic Lanes
Consideration for New Pedestrian Crossing or All-Way Stop at Sacramento/Capitolio
Staff evaluated the intersection of Sacramento/Capitolio for addition of all-way stop signs,
as suggested in the ATP and requested by some community members. However, based
on review of traffic volumes, collision history, and site conditions, the intersection does
not currently meet the thresholds or “warrants” that need to be satisfied per state
engineering standards to legally install an all-way stop. Staff will continue to monitor
potential for this modification in the future at this intersection.
A planning application is currently under review for a potential private school to be located
on Sacramento Drive west of the intersection with Via Esteban. Potential for a new
pedestrian crossing is being evaluated as part of this private development project, and if
warranted, a new pedestrian crossing would be implemented on Sacramento as a
condition of approval of the development with proper features to improve pedestrian
access and safety.
Further Traffic Calming Considerations on Sacramento
Staff initially considered installing speed cushions on Sacramento Drive as part of the
2025 Paving Project as an additional measure to reduce illegal speeding beyond the other
features proposed with the current project designs (radar speed signs and addit ional
Page 356 of 625
Item 7c
speed limit signage). However, staff is recommending that additional physical traffic
calming be considered as part of a planned future speed cushion pilot program instead.
Staff is planning to implement a pilot program to test the effectiveness and ideal
configuration of speed cushions on streets with higher frequency of emergency vehicles,
buses or heavy truck activity—streets that would otherwise not be candidates for speed
humps or other vertical traffic calming options.
Speed cushions are like speed humps, but include cutouts that allow large-axle vehicles,
such as fire trucks, ambulances, and buses, to bypass the humps without slowing
significantly or risking vehicle damage. The pilot program proposes the use of temporary
bolt-down rubber speed cushions to allow staff to test various configurations in
coordination with emergency service providers and transit operators to ensure they can
be used effectively before installing using permanent materials. The speed cushion pilot
program is planned to be implemented during the 2025-27 work program, if sufficient
funding is provided to the Neighborhood Traffic Management and/or Vision Zero capital
improvement project accounts in the upcoming Financial Plan.
Example of Speed Cushion (Future Consideration for Sacramento Dr)
Orcutt Road (Tank Farm Rd to City/County Line)
Proposed improvements for this roadway primarily include pavement rehabilitation,
upgrades to one curb ramp, and replacing existing striping. The ATC did comment on a
portion of this roadway that has experienced recent issues with flooding and sediment
collection within the bike lane. Staff has identified some significant erosion adjacent to the
edge of the roadway along Orcutt Road, which will be remedied as part of this project
through grading and soil compaction along the roadway shoulder for improved drainage.
Striping Refreshment on Various Streets
There are several roadways not planned for resurfacing in the near term where existing
pavement markings have deteriorated significantly and beyond what City maintenance
staff can repair. These locations have been added to the 2025 Paving Project to refre sh
Page 357 of 625
Item 7c
pavement markings only, taking advantage of improved pricing and efficiency of adding
this work to a larger paving project. No pavement repairs or other improvements are
proposed for these streets. These locations include:
Broad Street (Orcutt Road to Tank Farm)
Santa Rosa & Mill Street Crosswalks
Madonna Road (US 101 Southbound Ramps to Higuera)
Prado Road (Higuera to Serra Meadows)
Tank Farm Road (Santa Fe to Broad Street)
Tank Farm Road - Existing Conditions & Policy Context
Currently, Tank Farm Road has five traffic lanes (two lanes in each direction plus a center
median/turn lane) east of Broad Street, before narrowing to three lanes (one lane in each
direction plus center median/turn lane) east of the UPRR bridge. Typical street cross
sections are illustrated below for reference (note that specific dimensions may vary
slightly along these segments compared to illustrative cross section drawings).
Figure 2: Existing Tank Farm Road (Broad to UPRR Bridge)
Figure 3: Existing Tank Farm Road (Righetti Ranch to Orcutt)
The ATP identifies Tank Farm Road as a Tier 1 (highest priority) active transportation
corridor, with recommendations to pursue protected bike lanes and pedestrian crossing
improvements. The ATP notes that potential auto lane reductions (a “road diet”) should
be evaluated to accommodate these improvements, pending further feasibility study. Note
that the ATP also encourages development of lower-stress active transportation routes
parallel to high traffic volume/speed arterial streets such as Tank Farm, where feasible;
however, there are no viable parallel routes existing or planned along this segment of
Tank Farm Road.
Page 358 of 625
Item 7c
Attachment D includes relevant excerpts from the ATP for this segment of Tank Farm
Road for reference.
While this segment of Tank Farm Road does not have sufficient collision history to be
designated as part of the City’s High Injury Network 3, Tank Farm between Broad Street
and Righetti Ranch Road is ranked in the Draft Vision Zero Action Plan as having the 11th
highest crash rate among city arterial streets, with 15 total collisions and one severe injury
collision in the past five years (2019-2023). The most recent severe injury collision
involved a pedestrian hit by a vehicle when crossing Tank Farm near the
Sunrose/Morning Glory intersection. There was also a severe injury collision involving a
pedestrian hit by a vehicle when crossing Tank Farm at Poinsettia in 2014.
City staff receives regular comments from community members regarding the following
concerns on Tank Farm Road east of Broad Street:
1. General concerns about unsafe/illegal speeding, including requests to lower
posted speed limits and add traffic calming (current speed limits are posted as low
as legally allowed per the California Vehicle Code).4
2. Concerns about difficulty making left turns from side street intersections due to
high vehicle speeds on Tank Farm.
3. Concerns with vehicles failing to yield to pedestrians at existing marked crosswalks
on Tank Farm at Poinsettia and at the Righetti Ranch Road roundabout.
4. Requests for the addition of an enhanced pedestrian crossing on Tank Farm
between Poinsettia and Righetti Ranch Road.
Many of these sentiments are echoed in the public comments receive d in the City’s Online
Vision Zero Community Input Map.
Considering the history of public concerns, the policy recommendations of the ATP, and
data included in the City’s Draft Vision Zero Action Plan regarding collision risk on high-
speed, multi-lane arterial streets, staff is recommending that multimodal improvements
be considered along Tank Farm Road as part of the 2025 paving project, where
appropriate and as funding allows.
SLO Fire Review and Input on Tank Farm Road Design Options
Preliminary striping plans for the 2025 Paving Project were reviewed with the San Luis
Obispo Fire Department (SLO Fire) to ensure that designs are consistent with applicable
local and state fire codes and do not present any concerning impediments to emergency
response. Tank Farm Road was a primary focus of this review among the streets included
3 The High Injury Network describes the 10% of city road miles where the majority (75%) of fatal and severe
injuries occur. See the City’s Traffic Safety webpage and Draft Vision Zero Action Plan for additional details.
4 Posted speed limits on Tank Farm currently range from 35 mph (Broad to Righetti Ranch) to 45 mph
(Righetti Ranch to Orcutt), while prevailing speeds range from 42 mph to 45 mph. Where referenced herein,
“prevailing speeds” refers to the 85th percentile speed, a commonly used traffic engineering measurement
which represents the threshold at which 85 of 100 vehicles are traveling at or below this speed. The
California Vehicle Code generally requires speed limits to be set at or near the 85 th percentile speed.
Page 359 of 625
Item 7c
in the 2025 Paving Project, as Tank Farm serves as a major east -west arterial, a primary
emergency response route, and as a likely evacuation route in the case of a wildfire
encroaching from the hills east of the City Limits.
Public Works and SLO Fire staff reviewed potential striping design alternatives for Tank
Farm that include features contemplated in the ATP and Draft Vision Zero Action Plan,
such as (a) a potential five-lane to three-lane road diet between Poinsettia and the UPRR
Bridge, (b) narrower traffic lane widths, (c) addition of protected bike lanes per the ATP,
and (d) potential addition of enhanced pedestrian crossing features. SLO Fire provided
the following recommendations to guide final designs:
1. Recommend retaining traffic lane widths >10 feet for greater fire truck clearance,
with 11’ as a preferred lane width. Where width is constrained, prioritize width in
center turn lane, which may be used to bypass other traffic in an emergency event.
2. Recommend omitting any vertical protected bike lane features, providing greater
flexibility for vehicles to pull to the curbside to clear space for emergency vehicles
or during an evacuation event. If vertical elements are recommended by the City
Council, omit vertical objects within 30’ on either side of any fire hydrants and
locate features to maximize roadway clearances.
3. Ensure the most restrictive City Fire Truck can navigate turning movements to/from
all driveways and intersections with any street design changes.
4. Pedestrian Refuge Medians – While acknowledging the potential safety benefits
of adding raised median refuges at pedestrian crossings5, there is concern that
adding this vertical obstruction in the roadway could impede emergency response
and/or evacuation needs without sufficient clearance on either side of the median.
If two westbound traffic lanes can be retained and a minimum of 20’ cl earance can
be provided in the eastbound direction, SLO Fire would be supportive of adding
potential refuge islands at pedestrian crossings, pending review of the final design
details. (More discussion on this later in the report)
Emergency Evacuation Considerations with Potential Road Diet
Public Works and City Fire Department staff specifically discussed potential effects that
street design changes may pose to evacuation needs in the instance of a large -scale
emergency event in the vicinity of Tank Farm Road. The City has not designated formal
evacuation routes, as evacuation needs are generally incident -specific. However,
evacuation needs are an important consideration when evaluating street design
modifications, particularly on arterial streets and primary emergency response routes.
While there is no recent history of evacuations in the vicinity of Tank Farm Road and no
properties that directly access Tank Farm are currently located within High Fire Hazard
Severity Zones, there are properties in the Moderate Severity Zones and areas east of
Orcutt Road outside of the City Limit that are identified in the recently updated Cal Fire
Hazard maps as High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (see map below).
5 Per the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), adding a median pedestrian refuge island to an existing
uncontrolled marked crosswalk reduces vehicle vs. pedestrian collisions by 46% on average.
Page 360 of 625
Item 7c
Figure 4: Cal Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map (Updated March 2025)
Traffic congestion during large-scale evacuations tends to occur in areas that already
experience heavy traffic during peak periods. In urban street environments, like Tank
Farm Road, this is typically at intersections with traffic signals that also provide access to
primary regional routes and highways. In the instance of a potential large -scale
evacuation along Tank Farm Road, the primary evacuation direction will likely be
westbound on Tank Farm Road, and the signalized intersection at Tank Farm and Broad
Street (State Route 227) will likely be the primary bottleneck point. No changes are
proposed to this intersection as part of the paving project that would reduce traffic capacity
compared to existing conditions.
Based on SLO Fire’s review, neither of the two proposed alternatives to the specific
segment of Tank Farm Road where street design changes are contemplated pose
significant concerns to the ability of the neighborhood to evacuate.
Whether or not any lane capacity changes are pursued with the 2025 Paving Proj ect,
Public Works and SLO Fire staff concur that there is value in developing pre-programmed
traffic signal timing plans along city arterial corridors, such as Tank Farm, which could be
deployed quickly during an emergency evacuation to prioritize traffic movement away
from the incident location. Public Works staff plans to develop these signal timing plans
as staffing resources allow.
Tank Farm Road Design Alternatives
Considering the recommendations of the ATP, Draft Vision Zero Action Plan, community
input, and feedback from emergency service representatives, two striping design
concepts are presented for Tank Farm Road for Council consideration. The alternatives
are intended to advance the City’s transportation safety and mobility goals to the extent
feasible, while also accommodating the needs of emergency services.
Tank Farm Rd
Tank Farm Striping
Design Focus Area
Page 361 of 625
Item 7c
Alternative 1 (Road Diet) – Proposes a five-lane to three-lane road diet on Tank
Farm between Poinsettia Street and UPRR bridge, with additional striped buffered
bike lanes and pedestrian crossing improvements at several intersections.
Alternative 2 (No Road Diet) – Maintains the existing five-auto-lane configuration
on Tank Farm between Broad Street and the UPRR bridge . This alternative
provides an option that prioritizes retaining the existing roadway configuration and
traffic capacity to minimize traffic delays, including in the case of a potential large-
scale emergency evacuation.
Pavement reconstruction and ADA curb ramp upgrades are included under both
alternatives and designs east of the UPRR bridge are the same for both design options.
Note that both alternatives omit any vertical bikeway separation to preserve roadway
clearance and efficiency for emergency vehicle access and evacuation needs. See
discussion later in this report for consistency with Active Transportation Committee (ATC)
recommendations and ATP policy considerations.
Tank Farm Striping Alternative 1 (Road Diet)
Design features include:
1. Five-lane to three-lane road diet between Poinsettia and the UPRR bridge,
retaining five auto lanes between Broad and Poinsettia near the Marigold Shopping
Center.
2. Installation of radar speed feedback signs and additional speed limits signs to
encourage lower auto speeds.
3. Pedestrian safety improvements at Tank Farm/Poinsettia, including relocation of
crosswalk and existing rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs) to east leg of
intersection for improved visibility and reduce conflicts with turning traff ic. High-
visibility crosswalk markings, new streetlighting, advanced warning
markings/signage, and striped corner bulbouts to reduce pedestrian crossing
distance are also proposed.
4. Addition of a new pedestrian crossing at the Tank Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose
intersection, including hi-visibility crosswalks, new streetlighting, RRFBs,
advanced warning markings/signage, and striped corner bulbouts to reduce
pedestrian crossing distance are also proposed.
5. Addition of RRFB beacons at the Righetti Ranch Roundabout for crosswalks
crossing Tank Farm Road, improving visibility for pedestrians. (Note that
vegetation trimming is also scheduled prior to the paving project to improve
visibility at this intersection)
6. Striping modifications to the westbound approach of the Tank Farm/Broad Street
intersection to convert the existing westbound right-turn lane to a combined
through/right-turn lane (reduces vehicle congestion/delays and eliminates need for
westbound cyclists to merge across high-speed/volume right turn lane).
7. Addition of green bike lane conflict markings at intersections and high -traffic
driveways.
Page 362 of 625
Item 7c
Figure 5: Alternative 1 - Tank Farm Road Proposed Road Diet Limits
Figure 6: Alternative 1 Proposed Tank Farm Road (Broad to Poinsettia)
Example Image of Radar
Speed Feedback Sign
Example Image Rectangular
Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
Page 363 of 625
Item 7c
Figure 7: Alternative 1 Proposed Tank Farm Road (Poinsettia to UPRR Bridge)
Figure 8: Alternative 1 Proposed Tank Farm Road (Righetti Ranch to Orcutt)
Attachment E shows preliminary striping plans for Tank Farm Road Alternative 1.
Feasibility of Road Diet Proposed with Alternative 1
A traffic operations study was prepared by an outside transportation engineering firm,
Kimley Horn, for the road diet proposed in Alternative 1. The analysis evaluates motor
vehicle congestion and delays along the segment of Tank Farm Road where lane
reductions are proposed (Poinsettia to UPRR bridge), considering both existing and future
(Year 20406) traffic conditions. The conclusions of the traffic analysis report are
summarized as follows:
The existing (2024) and projected future (2040) traffic volumes on Tank Farm Road
are well within the volume thresholds suggested for a viable five-lane to three-lane
road diet (see Figure 9 below)
Driver delays/congestion at intersections within the road diet limits would remain
within the City’s adopted level of service (LOS) thresholds for existing (2024)
conditions with the proposed lane reductions.
6 2040 Conditions traffic forecasts reflect buildout of the City’s General Plan land use growth and
transportation circulation improvements, including remaining development within the Orcutt
Specific Plan Area and additional growth outside of the city limits pursuant to the SLOCOG
Regional Transportation Plan forecasts. Completion of the Prado Road Interchange and
Extension to Broad Street are assumed in this scenario, but do not substantively affect future
traffic volumes on this segment of Tank Farm Road.
Page 364 of 625
Item 7c
o The most notable change in driver experience would be an increase in
delay of 2-6 seconds per vehicle on average turning left from side streets
to Tank Farm Road during AM and PM peak hours.
Under 2040 conditions, all intersections within the road diet limits would operate
acceptably, except the Tank Farm/Poinsettia intersection, where the northbound
approach would operate at unacceptable LOS E during the PM peak. The traffic
study recommends monitoring traffic conditions and installing a northbound left -
turn acceleration lane before traffic volumes reach 2040 build-out levels. Staff is
recommending including this acceleration lane now as part of the 2025 Paving
Project as a pre-emptive measure to avoid potential for future congestion and
delays. With this acceleration lane, this intersection would be at acceptable LOS
C through 2040 conditions, with less projected delay than if the existing five -lane
road configuration were to be retained.
The intersection of Tank Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose is an appropriate location
to add a marked pedestrian crosswalk with the proposed road diet and additional
safety features (i.e. bulbouts, warning beacons, safety lighting, etc.).
The figure below shows existing and future volumes on Tank Farm compared to Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) recommended thresholds for three-lane road diets. The
largest traffic volumes are anticipated for the 2040 PM peak hour, which remain 37%
below the Federal Highway Administration’s recommended road diet volume threshold.
As noted previously, SLO Fire does not anticipate any significant impacts to typical
emergency response or evacuation needs with the proposed road diet, as currently
proposed.
Figure 9: Tank Farm Rd. Traffic Volumes vs Recommended Road Diet Thresholds
Page 365 of 625
Item 7c
Tank Farm Striping Alternative 2 (No Road Diet)
As discussed in further detail later in this report, staff has received input from some
residents expressing opposition to the road diet proposed in Alternative 1, with a
preference to retain existing lanes and traffic capacity to minimize potential for ve hicle
delays or congestion. The Council may also prefer to retain additional traffic capacity
beyond what is currently needed to maintain day-to-day traffic operations as a
precautionary strategy to accommodate (a) potential future development growth beyon d
current General Plan build-out forecasts, and/or (b) to reduce potential delays in the case
of a future large-scale evacuation incident along Tank Farm Road. Alternative 2 is
presented to provide the Council with a design option that prioritizes these c onsiderations.
Design features include:
1. Retains existing number of traffic lanes on Tank Farm.
2. 11-foot-wide traffic lanes are provided where feasible, per SLO Fire’s preference
for efficient emergency vehicle clearance.
3. Striped bike lane buffers provided where width allows for 11 -foot-wide traffic lanes
(east of Righetti Ranch) and omitted elsewhere.
4. No curb extensions (bulbouts) at intersections due to insufficient street width.
5. Pedestrian safety improvements at Tank Farm/Poinsettia, including relocation of
the existing crosswalk RRFB system to the east leg of intersection for improved
visibility and reduce conflicts with turning traffic. High-visibility crosswalk markings,
new streetlighting, and advanced warning markings/signage are also proposed.
6. Advance pedestrian warning signage approaching the Tank
Farm/Sunrose/Morning Glory intersection and new streetlight installation, but no
addition of a marked crosswalk at this location. (see further discussion on this
below).
7. Radar speed feedback signs in each direction.
8. Green bike lanes through intersection conflicts.
Figure 10: Alternative 2 Proposed Tank Farm Road (Broad to UPRR Bridge)
Page 366 of 625
Item 7c
Figure 11: Alternative 2 Proposed Tank Farm Road (Righetti Ranch to Orcutt)
For the same reasons discussed previously with Alternative 1, no vertical protected
bikeway elements are proposed with Alternative 2.
Alternative 2 Consideration for Pedestrian Crossing at Tank Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose
While some community members have expressed interest in adding a new pedestrian
crossing on Tank Farm between Poinsettia and Righetti Ranch Road—most fittingly at
the Tank Farm/Sunrose/Morning Glory intersection—staff does not recommend installing
a new crosswalk here with Alternative 2. Based on review of engineering design guidance
and transportation safety best practices for uncontrolled crosswalks, it is staff’s opinion
that adding an unsignalized marked crosswalk is not the best strategy at a crossing
location with traffic speeds over 40 mph and five lanes of traffic (64-foot-wide crossing)
without more substantial safety elements.
While Alternative 2 could include some safety features, such as high-visibility crosswalk
markings, additional lighting, warning signage, and flashing beacons (RRFBs), which
could improve the visibility of pedestrians over existing conditions, staff does not
recommend adding a marked crosswalk in order to avoid creating a false sense of security
for pedestrians, as driver compliance is likely to remain low without further crossing
enhancements. For staff to support potential addition of a designated crosswalk at this
location, additional safety measures such as a median refuge, raised crosswalks,
reducing the number of conflicting traffic lanes, adding bulbouts, or installing a pedestrian
hybrid beacon/signal would be needed. Conditions do not currently warrant a pedestrian
signal or hybrid beacon installation. See “Alternatives” section of this report for discussion
on additional modifications to Alternative 2 that may add potential for a median refuge
and crosswalk at this location.
Attachment F shows preliminary striping plans for Tank Farm Road Alternative 2.
Comparison of Tank Farm Alternative 1 and 2
Table 1: Comparison of Design Alternatives
Topic Alternative 1
(Road Diet)
Alternative 2
(No Road Diet)
Traffic Operations
& Emergency
Lane reductions less
familiar to existing drivers
More intuitive to existing drivers
Page 367 of 625
Item 7c
Topic Alternative 1
(Road Diet)
Alternative 2
(No Road Diet)
Response
Considerations
Traffic operates within
adopted thresholds, with
small increase in vehicle
delays above existing
configuration and Alt 2 at
most intersections
Slight improvement for
NBL driver delays at
Poinsettia w/ acceleration
lane above Alt 2 and
existing conditions.
Less excess road capacity
preserved for future growth
and emergency evacuation
(capacity could be restored
in future by restriping to
restore existing traffic
lanes if needed)
Traffic operates within adopted
thresholds with fewer vehicle
delays than with Alt 1 in general
Preserves extra capacity for
additional growth beyond current
build-out projections and
emergency evacuation
Bicycle Facilities
Partially consistent with
ATP – wider buffered bike
lanes added with more
separation from vehicles,
but no physical separation
Slightly higher potential to
attract new cyclists &
increase bike mode share
than Alt 2
Mostly inconsistent with ATP, with
less improvements to bicycle lane
widths and separation from traffic
and no physical bikeway
separation.
Less potential to attract new riders
& increase bike mode share than
Alt 1
Pedestrian
Crossings
Lane reductions reduce
pedestrian exposure &
crossing distance, reduces
number of veh vs.
pedestrian conflict points
Greater potential for driver
compliance at crossings
Road diets are proven
countermeasure to reduce
pedestrian crash rates
Provides new enhanced
pedestrian crossing at
Tank Farm/Morning
Glory/Sunrose
Does not reduce pedestrian
exposure & crossing distance
No change in veh. vs. pedestrian
conflict points
Less potential to increase driver
compliance at crossings
Does not provide a new enhanced
pedestrian crossing at Tank
Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose
Potential to
Reduce
Greater potential to reduce
unsafe/illegal vehicle
Some potential to reduce unsafe
vehicle speeds by adding radar
Page 368 of 625
Item 7c
Topic Alternative 1
(Road Diet)
Alternative 2
(No Road Diet)
Unsafe/Illegal
Vehicle Speeds
speeds with road diet and
radar speed signs
speed signs, but less potential than
with Alt 1
Costs
Approximately $50,000
higher costs than
Alternative 2 by including
enhanced pedestrian
crossing at Tank
Farm/Morning Glory
Approximately $50,000 lower costs
than Alternative 1 by omitting
enhanced pedestrian crossing at
Tank Farm/Morning Glory
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
Preliminary plans for the 2025 Paving Project were presented to the Active Transportation
Committee (ATC) on November 21, 2024. The ATC staff report is available for reference
on the ATC website.
The committee was supportive of the design proposal for Tank Farm featuring a road diet
as shown herein in Alternative 1; however, the ATC majority voted in favor of including
vertical protected bike lane elements on Tank Farm, as recommended in the ATP. Vertical
bikeway features are omitted from the current design alternatives presented for Council
consideration due to a preference from emergency service providers to preserve roadway
clearance for efficient emergency response and evacuation potential. The ATC was also
supportive of including buffered bike lanes along Tank Farm between Broad and
Poinsettia, which are omitted from current plans, as this would require 10’ traffic lane
widths, which are discouraged by emergency response providers for this street. The
following summarizes key recommendations from the ATC on the 2025 Paving Project
designs and staff responses to each recommendation:
Tank Farm Road
1. ATC Recommendation: Include physical bikeway separation, with preference for
concrete barriers.
o Staff Response: Current design alternatives for Council consideration do
not include vertical bikeway separation to preserve roadway clearance for
emergency response priorities. If Council were to direct staff to include
physical bikeway separation on Tank Farm, staff is not recommending
addition of concrete bikeway features at this time—instead rubber flexible
elements would be preferred, such as flex posts only or flex posts
supplemented with rubber curb stops. This is due to funding constraints,
more flexibility for emergency response needs, and an interest to allow for
further monitoring and community adaptation to new street design changes
before installing higher-cost, rigid features.
Page 369 of 625
Item 7c
2. ATC Recommendation: Explore feasibility of center median refuges at Poinsettia
and Morning Glory pedestrian crossings.
o Staff Response: As discussed previously in section on SLO Fire design
coordination, staff is not recommending installation of center median
refuges at pedestrian crossings at this time for Alternative 1 or 2. With
Alternative 1, there were concerns that addition of a center median may
impede the ability of vehicles to use the center turn lane to bypass traffic
during an emergency response event or large-scale evacuation westbound
on Tank Farm. With Alternative 2, there is no available street width for a
median refuge. A potential hybrid design concept is discussed in the
“Alternatives” section at the end of this report, which prese nts a design
configuration that could include a median pedestrian refuge that is
supportable by SLO Fire.
3. ATC Recommendation: Provide gaps in bikeway separation in final plans to allow
for flexible passing and merging out of the bike lane for left turns at driveways and
intersections.
o Staff Response: No vertical bikeway separation is currently proposed with
Alternative 1 or 2. If Council chooses to direct staff to revisit potential
vertical bikeway elements, staff is supportive of incorporating additional
gaps in bikeway separation to improve ability for cyclists to merge and pass
other cyclists.
Sacramento Drive
4. ATC Recommendation: Consider adding a marked pedestrian crossing at
Capitolio intersection or other locations along Sacramento between Orcutt and
Industrial.
o Staff Response: As noted above, a new pedestrian crossing on
Sacramento is currently being evaluated as part of a development proposal
for a private school campus near Via Esteban. Staff is recommending that
a new crossing be considered as part of this development proposal outside
of the 2025 Paving Project scope.
No specific design recommendations were provided by the ATC for Calle Joaquin or
Orcutt Road beyond the features already proposed by staff and reflected in the current
plans for those roadway segments.
Design Alternative 2 was not specifically discussed with the ATC in detail but was created
subsequently as an additional option for Council consideration in response to feedback
from some community members with concerns about potential traffic congestion with a
road diet.
Staff provided a project status update to the ATC on March 20, 2025, which included a
brief update to convey that Tank Farm alternatives with and without a road diet would be
presented to the Council for consideration. The ATC did not take any new action on this
Page 370 of 625
Item 7c
topic at the meeting, but members affirmed the previous committee re commendation
supporting the road diet presented in Alternative 1, and a preference for protected bike
lane elements as recommended in the ATP.
Public Engagement
Staff solicited community input on the 2025 Paving Project over the past several months.
Direct mailers were sent to all properties within the vicinity notifying community members
of the proposed project, planning process and schedule, project website and opportunities
to provide in-person input at forthcoming public meetings. Staff received several
comments from community members at the November 21, 2024 ATC meeting, and via
subsequent emails to staff and City Council, with roughly half of the comments for Tank
Farm Road in support of the proposed road diet and features shown in striping Alte rnative
1 to reduce speeds, and half in favor of keeping the existing five-lane street configuration
and striping-only bike lanes to maintain current traffic capacity and reduce costs. This
divide in public sentiment is a primary reason for requesting Coun cil policy direction for
Tank Farm Road designs.
Agenda correspondence provided on this item at the November, 2024, ATC meeting is
available for review here (see Item 4a correspondence).
Notifications were mailed directly to properties within the vicinity of Tank Farm Road
ahead of this public hearing on May 6th, 2025, and additional notifications will be provided
to community members as project advances to construction.
CONCURRENCE
Plans for the 2025 Paving Project have been reviewed and refined in coordination with
SLO Fire to ensure that these designs are consistent with applicable local and state fire
codes and do not present any concerning impediments to emergency response. SLO
Fire is supportive of the designs currently presented in Alternative 1 or 2. Following
direction from Council from this meeting, staff will provide an additional opportunity for
review by SLO Fire Department prior to finalizing the 2025 Paving Project plans for
construction.
This staff report was reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office, Finance Director, and City
Administration prior to publishing.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The 2025 Paving Project qualifies for an Exemption to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 (Existing
Facilities) because the Project consists of the repair and maintenance of existing
roadways. In addition, the types of complete street improvements proposed as part of this
Project would all be considered categorically exempt from State CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15301(Existing Facilities) and are expected to increase access to sustainable
transportation modes and potentially reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Therefore, no
Page 371 of 625
Item 7c
additional environmental review is triggered. A Notice of Exemption will be filed through
the Community Development Department upon Council approval of the project.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2025-26
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding
Sources
Funding
Availability
Total Budget
Available
Current
Funding
Request
Remaining
Balance
Annual
Ongoing
Cost
General Fund -
LRM (No.
2000616)
7/1/2025 $3,960,000 $3,960,000 $0 $
SB1 Fund (No.
2000616)
7/1/2025 $1,277,312 $1,277,312 $0
Capital
Reserve Fund
(LRM)
Current $1,735,907 $1,404,530 $331,377
Roadway
Sealing 2024
(Account No.
2000615)
(General Fund
LRM)
Current $2,544,144 $2,100,000 $444,144
Arterials 2023
(Account No.
2001065)
(General Fund
LRM)
Current $169,299 $100,000 $69,299
Water Fund
(No. 2001005)
Current $228,948 $199,200 $29,748
Sewer Fund
(No. 2000084)
Current $128,309 $76,800 $51,509
Total $10,043,919 $9,117,842 $926,077 $
Page 372 of 625
Item 7c
2025 Paving Project, Specification No. 2000616
Street
Reconstruction and
Resurfacing –
Annual Asset
Maintenance
Account (2001001)
Water Valve
Cover
Adjustments
(2001005)
Sewer MH
Cover
Adjustments
(2000084)
Project
Total
Costs
General
Fund
SB1
Fund Water Fund Sewer Fund
Base Bid Construction
Estimate 6,212,688 $1,277,312 $166,000 $64,000 $7,720,000
Contingencies 725,342 $0 $33,200 $12,800 $771,342
Construction Management 450,000 $0 $0 $0 $450,000
Materials Testing 100,000 $0 $0 $0 $100,000
Printing & Advertising 1,500 $0 $0 $0 $1,500
Public Relations 75,000 $0 $0 $0 $75,000
Base Bid Total Estimate 7,564,530 1,277,312 199,200 76,800 9,117,842
Additive Alt A Estimate 1,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $1,100,000
Additive Alt B Estimate 550,000 $0 $0 $0 $550,000
Additive Alt A &B
Contingencies 200,000 $0 $0 $0 $200,000
Construction Management 100,000 $0 $0 $0 100,000
Materials Testing 50,000 $0 $0 $0 50,000
Printing & Advertising 500 $0 $0 $0 500
Public Relations 25,000 $0 $0 $0 25,000
Additive Alternative Total
Estimate 2,025,500 0 0 0 $2,025,500
Total Construction
Estimate (Base + Add Alts) 9,590,030 1,277,312 199,200 76,800 11,143,342
Available Project Balance 0 $0 $199,200 $76,800 $276,000
FY 2025-26 Additional
Funding on 7/1/2025 $3,960,000 $1,277,312 $0 $0 $5,237,312
Roadway Sealing 2024
(2000615) 2,100,000 $0 $0 $0 $2,100,000
Arterials 2023 (2001065) 100,000 $0 $0 $0 $100,000
CIP Reserve 1,404,530 $0 $0 $0 $1,404,530
Total Funding After
7/1/2025 7,564,530 $1,277,312 $199,200 $76,800 $9,117,842
Page 373 of 625
Item 7c
The 2025 Paving Project bid plans and specifications are structured with a Base Bid and
two Additive Alternatives, with Additive Alternative A representing work on Orcutt Road
east of Tank Farm, and Alternative B representing work on Calle Joaquin. The st rategy
is to award the contract with the Base Bid and as many of the Additive Alternatives as
funding will allow, up to the Publicly Disclosed amount of $7,720,000 in compliance with
Public Contract Code Section 20103.8(c).
The total project cost is estimated at $11,143,342, including direct construction costs and
contingencies, as well as related soft costs (construction engineering support, materials
testing, communications support, etc.). Excluding the Bid Additive Alternatives, the total
Base Bid project cost is $9,117,842 (construction, contingency and soft costs). Note that
because final designs for Tank Farm Road are pending policy direction from the Council
at this hearing, current cost estimates for this component of the project are based on
staff’s best approximations and are slightly conservative in nature.
A total of $9,117,842 in funding is recommended to support project construction, sourced
from the following:
The project’s funding plan relies on approval of a funding request to the 2025
Roadway Paving account (2000616) in the amount of $5,237,312 in fiscal year
2025-26 which is included in the draft 2025-27 Financial Plan. This amount
includes $3,960,000 from the General Fund and $1,277,312 from the SB1 Fund7.
An additional $2,100,000 is expected to become available within the Streets
Reconstruction and Resurfacing account after the completion of the Roadway
Sealing 2024 project (2000615), which is 95% complete and under budget.
An additional $100,000 is expected to become available within the Streets
Reconstruction and Resurfacing account with the completion of the Arterials 2023
Project (2001065).
Staff is recommending appropriating $1,404,530 of Local Revenue Measure funds
from the Capital Reserve fund to support construction of the Project per the draft
Resolution (Attachment A). Approval of this resolution is required to appropriate
new undesignated funds from the Capital Projects Reserve Fund.
Where asphalt pavement is replaced, the project will incorporate upgrades to water
valve and sewer maintenance hole covers which is funded by the Water Valve
Cover Adjustments Account (2001005) in the amount of $199,200 and Sewer
Maintenance Hole Cover Adjustments Account (2000084) in the amount of
$76,800.
7 Note that the Streets Reconstruction and Resurfacing account (2001001) has a current balance
of $17,766. However, it is recommended that this balance remain within the account to support
minor pavement failures that may arise throughout the year in lieu of committing 100% of available
funds to the 2025 Paving Project.
Page 374 of 625
Item 7c
This 2025 Paving Project is recommended to be awarded prior to the new fiscal year with
work not starting until after July 1, 2025, when the Fiscal Year 2025 -26 funding is
available. If funding is not sufficient to support all of this project’s needs, only portions of
the contract would be awarded to reflect the work than can be completed within the
available budget. In order to allow for project implementation during the summer and early
fall months, and to lessen impacts to the traveling public, staff is recommending this
project be approved for advertisement now rather than waiting until start of Fiscal Year
2025-26.
Project construction will not be initiated unless sufficient funding exists as recommended
to support the total project costs. Actual costs will be known when the project ope ns for
bid.
Fiscal Analysis of Tank Farm Road Striping Alternatives
The estimated construction cost for proposed improvements on Tank Farm Road is
approximately $5,500,000. Costs would be substantially equal for Alternative 1 and
Alternative 2, aside from roughly $50,000 in costs related to pedestrian crossing
improvements at the Tank Farm/Morning Glory/Sunset intersection that would be incurred
under Alternative 1 only.
While the current alternatives for Tank Farm Road do not include vertical bikeway
elements, if Council directs staff to pursue designs that include protected bike lanes, there
would be further cost implications. If only flex posts were used for protected bikeway
separation, an additional $50,000-$75,000 in construction costs would be expected. If
additional hardening, such as rubber or concrete curb stops/medians were pursued, the
construction costs would increase by at least another $50,000-$100,000 above the costs
for flex posts. Ongoing maintenance costs of roughly $30,000 per year would be incurred
if protected bike lane features were to be pursued, including roughly $27,000 per year for
contract sweeping expenses and roughly $3,000 per year for replacement of damaged
bikeway barriers/flex posts.
Staff are currently assessing maintenance costs and funding resources closely with
development of the 2025-27 Financial Plan. If the Council were to direct staff to advance
designs for Tank Farm Road that include vertical bikeway separation, there may not be
sufficient funds in the forthcoming 2025-27 operating budget to fund ongoing
maintenance costs. Under this scenario, staff would likely need to utilize funds from a
capital project account to fund these expenses, such as rem aining contingency funds
from the 2025 Paving Project (once complete), remaining funds from other completed CIP
projects, or from one of the ATP Implementation capital project accounts. Under this
scenario, staff would communicate a funding plan for these ongoing maintenance costs
to the Council prior to completion of the 2025 Paving Project.
Page 375 of 625
Item 7c
ALTERNATIVES
Tank Farm Design Alternatives
1. The Council could direct staff to advance an alternative that includes
modifications to Alternative 1 or Alternative 2, or combines features from each
alternative, such as:
Hybrid Alternative – Road Diet in Eastbound Direction Only
i. Preserve existing two (2) traffic lanes in westbound direction for
emergency evacuation capacity
ii. Road diet to one (1) lane in eastbound direction only from Poinsettia
to UPRR bridge (similar to Alternative 1)
iii. Use available width from eastbound lane reduction to add bike lane
buffers and pedestrian refuges at Tank Farm/Poinsettia and Tank
Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose intersections
iv. Concept designs for this Hybrid Alternative are included as
Attachment G.
Public Works and SLO Fire staff would be supportive of advancing the Hybrid Option
(Road Diet Eastbound Only), if preferred by the City Council. Staff’s current
recommendation is not to include vertical separation for protected bike lanes on Tank
Farm, even with this Hybrid Alternative, to preserve existing roadway clearances for
emergency response and evacuation needs and to reduce ongoing maintenance
costs. Median refuges at Tank Farm/Poinsettia and Tank Farm/Morning
Glory/Sunrose would be feasible and recommended by staff under this alternative and
are shown in the design concepts (Attachment G)—medians would not restrict
westbound access in the case of an evacuation (two lanes would be retained
westbound for evacuation needs).
2. The Council could choose not to recommend a specific design alternative for
Tank Farm Road at this time and direct staff to pursue other designs. The Council
may ask staff to continue to advance multiple design alternatives or to return with
additional alternatives not currently contemplated. This may delay the ability to
advance the 2025 Paving Project in time to solicit competitive construction bids.
Bidding roadway paving projects in the late spring or early summer can result in lack
of competitive bidding, as many roadway contractors are already schedu led for the
peak summer road construction season when many other agencies in the region
schedule similar paving work.
3. The Council could choose not to support either striping alternative for Tank
Farm, directing staff to do neither and simply repave Tank Farm and restore the
existing striping configuration with no added features. The Council may direct staff
to focus resources only on essential maintenance elements of the paving project for
Tank Farm Road, restoring the road configuration and striping to what is currently in
place. Further, Council may direct staff to omit other features proposed in the current
Page 376 of 625
Item 7c
design proposals not related to essential maintenance (pedestrian beacons, new
streetlighting, radar speed signs, etc.). This action would not support the
recommendations of the adopted ATP or address concerns from residents regarding
vehicle speeds and pedestrian crossing safety on Tank Farm Road.
Alternatives to Approving Advertisement of the 2025 Paving Project
1. The Council could direct staff to modify design features for other streets
included in the 2025 Paving Project other than Tank Farm Road. The City Council
may direct staff to modify design elements for Calle Joaquin, Sacramento Drive or
Orcutt Road. Staff invites Council input on these details, as long as the recommended
design refinements can be accommodated within available funding resources and
comply with applicable engineering design standards.
2. Deny authorization to advertise. The City Council may choose not to authorize
project advertisement or direct staff to revise and return to Council with an updated
bid package at a later date. This would delay advertisement of the project for
construction, potentially shifting the project construction schedule into winter months
with higher potential for weather delays.
ATTACHMENTS
A - Draft Resolution Approving Appropriation of Capital Projects Reserve Funds
B - 2025 Paving Project Plans (2000616)
C - 2025 Paving Project Specifications (2000616)
D - Active Transportation Plan Excerpts
E - Tank Farm Road Design Alternative 1 (Road Diet)
F - Tank Farm Road Design Alternative 2 (No Road Diet)
G - Tank Farm Road Hybrid Design Alternative (Eastbound Road Diet Only)
Page 377 of 625
Page 378 of 625
R ______
RESOLUTION NO. _____ (2025 SERIES)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS
OBISPO, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATION OF CAPITAL
PROJECTS RESERVE FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE 2025 PAVING
PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NUMBER 2000616
WHEREAS, on May 6, 2025, the City Council authorized advertisement of the
2025 Paving Project and delegated authority to the City Manager to award the
construction contract if the lowest responsive bid was within the publicly disclosed funding
limit of $7,720,000; and
WHEREAS, the project includes roadway reconstruction on Tank Farm Road , from
Broad Street to Wavertree Street, reconstruction on Sacramento Drive, from Industrial
Way to Via Esteban, and striping in various locations throughout the City; and
WHEREAS, two bid alternates are included to be awarded if within the available
project budget, which include roadway reconstruction on Orcutt Road and Calle Joaquin;
and
WHEREAS, proposed improvements on Tank Farm Road, Orcutt Road, and
Sacramento Drive support several recommendations in the City’s Active Transportation
Plan and the City’s adopted Vision Zero Goal to eliminate severe injury and fatal traffic
collisions; and
WHEREAS, a pavement analysis conducted in December of 2024 confirmed that
Tank Farm Road, Orcutt Road, Sacramento Drive, and Calle Joaquin Road are all
structurally deficient and unable to support the current and projected traffic loads; and
WHEREAS, to provide sufficient funding to proceed with the 2025 Paving Project,
staff is recommending the City Council approve use of $1,404,530 from the FY24/25
Capital Projects Reserve Fund at the close of the 2024-25 Fiscal Year; and
WHEREAS, a balance of approximately $1,735,907 is currently available from the
FY24/25 Capital Projects Reserve Fund.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis
Obispo as follows:
Page 379 of 625
Resolution No. _____ (2025 Series) Page 2
R ______
SECTION 1. The City Council authorizes the Finance Director to appropriate up
to $1,404,530 from the Capital Reserve Fund to the 2025 Paving Project, Specification
No. 2000616 at the close of the 2024-25 Fiscal Year.
Upon motion of _______________________, seconded by
_______________________, 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
Page 380 of 625
Page 381 of 625
Page 382 of 625
Page 383 of 625
Page 384 of 625
Page 385 of 625
Page 386 of 625
Page 387 of 625
Page 388 of 625
Page 389 of 625
Page 390 of 625
Page 391 of 625
Page 392 of 625
Page 393 of 625
Page 394 of 625
Page 395 of 625
Page 396 of 625
Page 397 of 625
Page 398 of 625
Page 399 of 625
Page 400 of 625
Page 401 of 625
Page 402 of 625
Page 403 of 625
Page 404 of 625
Page 405 of 625
Page 406 of 625
Page 407 of 625
Page 408 of 625
Page 409 of 625
Page 410 of 625
Page 411 of 625
Page 412 of 625
Page 413 of 625
Page 414 of 625
Page 415 of 625
Page 416 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
FOR
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
2025 Paving Project
Specification No. 2000616
April 2025
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
ENGINEERING DIVISION
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
(805) 781-7200
Page 417 of 625
2025 Paving Project
Specification No. 2000616
Approval Date: May 06, 2025
Hai Nguyen
May xx, 2025
Brian Nelson
May xx, 2025
Page 418 of 625
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NOTICE TO BIDDERS ..................................................................................................... I
BID SUBMISSION ...................................................................................................................................... I
BID DOCUMENTS .................................................................................................................................... II
PROJECT INFORMATION........................................................................................................................ II
QUALIFICATIONS .................................................................................................................................... III
AWARD ..................................................................................................................................................... V
ACCOMMODATION .................................................................................................................................. V
BID FORMS .................................................................................................................... A
BID ITEM LIST FOR 2025 PAVING PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 2000616 .................................... A
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS ................................................................................................................ G
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10285.1 STATEMENT .............................................................. H
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10162 QUESTIONNAIRE ......................................................... H
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10232 STATEMENT ................................................................. H
LABOR CODE SECTION 1725.5 STATEMENTS ................................................................................... H
NON-COLLUSION DECLARATION .......................................................................................................... J
BIDDER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... K
QUALIFICATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... L
ATTACH BIDDER'S BOND TO ACCOMPANY BID ................................................................................. M
SPECIAL PROVISIONS .................................................................................................. 1
DIVISION I GENERAL PROVISIONS ....................................................................................................... 1
1 GENERAL ........................................................................................................................................... 1
3 CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION ........................................................................................... 1
4 SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................................. 2
5 CONTROL OF WORK ........................................................................................................................ 2
7 LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PUBLIC ....................................................... 2
8 PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS ................................................................................................... 4
DIVISION II GENERAL CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................................... 5
12 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL ................................................................................................ 5
15 EXISTING FACILITIES ..................................................................................................................... 6
DIVISION IV SUBBASES AND BASES .......................................................................... 6
DIVISION V SURFACINGS AND PAVEMENTS ..................................................................................... 20
39 ASPHALT CONCRETE .................................................................................................................. 20
DIVISION VIII MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION ............................................................................ 21
73 CONCRETE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS ....................................................................................... 21
77 LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE .......................................................................................................... 22
DIVISION IX TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES......................................................................................... 22
Page 419 of 625
84 MARKINGS ..................................................................................................................................... 22
DIVISION X ELECTRICAL WORK .......................................................................................................... 24
86 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................... 24
DIVISION XIII APPENDICES .................................................................................................................. 24
ADD SECTION 100 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................... 24
APPENDIX A - FORM OF AGREEMENT ....................................................................... 0
APPENDIX B – SEALMASTER SAFE RIDE DATA SHEET ........................................... 3
APPENDIX C – PAVEMENT EVALUATION REPORT ................................................... 4
Page 420 of 625
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
i
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
BID SUBMISSION
Sealed bids will be received by the City of San Luis Obispo at the Public Works
Administration Office located at 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo California, 93401 until
11:00 a.m. on June xx, 2025
at which time they will be publicly opened and read aloud. Public bid opening may be
accessed via Microsoft Teams video conference and conference call. In person
attendance will be permitted. Use the following link:
https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetup-
join/19%3ameeting_YWJmZTY5ZjctNjQxOC00ODk3LWFhMjctODkyOGI2NjkzODRi%4
0thread.v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid%22%3a%22a78b182d-94e4-4507-a9a9-
330dcb148164%22%2c%22Oid%22%3a%22eec32d58-d6a8-4d68-8923-
9cce58e6b2a9%22%7d
or join by phone with this number: 1 (209) 645-4165 with Conference ID: 438 062 902#
Submit bid in a sealed envelope plainly marked:
2025 Paving Project, Specification No. 2000616
Any bid received after the time and date specified will not be considered and will be
returned to the bidder unopened. Bids received by Fax or Email will not be considered.
By submission of bid you agree to comply with all instruction and requirements in this
notice and the contract documents.
All bids must be submitted on the Bid Item List form(s) provided and submitted with all
other Bid Forms included in these Special Provisions.
Each bid must be accompanied by either a:
1. certified check
2. cashier's check
3. bidder's bond
made payable to the City of San Luis Obispo for an amount equal to ten percent of the
bid amount as a guaranty. Guaranty will be forfeited to the City San Luis Obispo if the
bidder, to whom the contract is awarded, fails to enter into the contract.
The City of San Luis Obispo reserves the right to accept or reject any or all bids or waive
any informality in a bid.
All bids are to be compared based on the City Engineer's estimate of the quantities of
work to be done, as shown on the Bid Item List.
Page 421 of 625
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
ii
Bids will only be accepted from bidders that are licensed in compliance with the provisions
of Chapter 9, Division III of Business and Professions Code.
The award of the contract, if awarded, will be to the lowest responsive bid submitted by a
responsible contractor whose bid complies with the requirements prescribed. If the
contract is awarded, the contract will be awarded within 60 calendar days after the
opening of the bids.
Failure to raise defects in the notice to bidders or bid forms prior to bid opening constitute
a waiver of those defects.
BID DOCUMENTS
A copy of the plans and special provisions may be downloaded, free of charge, from the
City’s website at:
www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/public-works/public-works-bids-
proposals
No printed copies are available for purchase at the City office.
Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards referenced in the Special Provisions
may be downloaded, free of charge, from the City’s website at:
www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/public-works/documents-
online/construction-documents
You are responsible to obtain all issued addenda prior to bid opening. Addenda will be
available to download at the City’s website listed above or at the office of the City
Engineer.
All questions must be submitted through Bidsync and if the City determines that a
response is required, the City will post an addendum on Bidsync. Contact the project
manager, Hai Nguyen at 805-781-7108 / hnguyen@slocity.org or the Public Works
Department at (805) 781-7200 prior to bid opening to verify the number of addenda
issued.
You are responsible to verify your contact information is correct on the plan holders list
located on the City’s website at:
www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/public-works/public-works-bids-
proposals.
PROJECT INFORMATION
In general, the project consists of applying slurry seal, striping, pavement markings, and
signage to various streets as identified in the project plans.
Page 422 of 625
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
iii
The project estimated construction cost and contract time established for the project is a
follows:
BASE BID: $7,720,000 80 working days
ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE “A”: $1,100,000 10 working days
ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE “B”: $550,000 10 working days
TOTAL PROJECT BID (BASE BID + ADD ALT. “A” + ADD ALT “B”): $9,370,000
The fixed liquidated damages amount is established at $1,000 per day for failure to
complete the work within the contract time.
In compliance with section 1773 of the Labor Code, the State of California Department of
Industrial Relations has established prevailing hourly wage rates for each type of
workman. Current wage rates may be obtained from the Division of Labor at:
https://www.dir.ca.gov/oprl/DPreWageDetermination.htm
This project is subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the Department of
Industrial Relations.
QUALIFICATIONS
You must possess a valid Class A or C12 Contractor's License at the time of the bid
opening.
You and any subcontractors required to pay prevailing wage must be registered
with the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to Section 1725.5 of the Labor
Code.
You must have experience constructing projects similar to the work specified for this
project. Provide three similar reference projects completed as either the prime or
subcontractor. All referenced projects must have been completed within the last five years
from this project’s bid opening date.
One of the three referenced projects must have been completed under contract
with a city, county, state or federal government agency as the prime contractor.
Two of the three referenced projects must have included ADA concrete curb ramp
and sidewalk construction within the public right of way.
All referenced projects must be for roadway construction, including Full Depth
Reclamation within the public right of way. If you do not have the necessary Full
Depth Reclamation experience, you may elect to subcontract that work. If you elect
to subcontract that work, you must provide referenced projects for roadway
Page 423 of 625
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
iv
construction as the prime and three additional subcontractor referenced projects
for Full Depth Reclamation within the public right of way.
Failure to provide reference projects as specified in this section and as required on the
qualification form is cause to reject a bid as being non-responsive.
The City reserves the right to reject any bid based on non-responsiveness if a bidder fails
to provide a bid that complies with all bidding instructions.
The City reserves the right to reject a responsive bid based on the non-responsibility of
the bidder if the Director of Public Works or Designee finds, after providing notice and a
hearing to the bidder, that the bidder lacks the
1. knowledge
2. experience,
3. or is otherwise not responsible
as defined in Section 3.24 of the San Luis Obispo Municipal Code to complete the project
in the best interest of the City.
Rejected bidders may appeal this determination. Appeal must comply with the
requirements in this Notice to Bidders.
It is the City of San Luis Obispo’s intent to award the contract to the lowest responsive
bid submitted by a responsible bidder. If in the bidder’s opinion the contract has been or
may be improperly awarded, the bidder may protest the contract award.
Protests must be filed no later than five working days after either:
1. bid opening date
2. notification of rejected bid.
Protest must be in writing and received by the project manager located at:
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401.
Valid protests must contain the following information:
1. the reasons for the protest
2. any supporting documentation
3. the ruling expected by the City to remedy the protest.
Any protest not containing all required information will be deemed invalid and rejected.
The City will consider additional documentation or other supporting information regarding
the protest if submitted in compliance to the specified time limits. Anything submitted after
the specified time limit will be rejected and not be considered.
The Director of Public Works or Designee may request additional information to be
submitted within three days of the request, unless otherwise specified, and will notify the
protester of ruling within ten days of determination.
Page 424 of 625
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
NOTICE TO BIDDERS
v
If the protester is not satisfied with ruling, the protester may appeal the ruling to the City
Council in compliance with Chapter 1.20 of the City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Code.
Pursuant to the Public Records Act (Government Code, § 6250, et seq.), the City will
make public records available upon request.
AWARD
The lowest bidder will be determined in compliance with Public Contract Code Section
20103.8(c) with the Publicly Disclosed Funding Amount of $7,720,000 using either:
TOTAL PROJECT BID, if bid for Base Bid + Add. Alt. “A” + Add Alt. “B” is less than
$7,720,000; or
BASE BID + ADD. ALT. “A”, if bid for Base Bid + Add. Alt. “A” is less than
$7,720,000 and Total Project Bid is greater than $7,720,000; or
BASE BID, if Base Bid is less than $7,720,000 and Base Bid + Add. Alt. “A” is
greater than $7,720,000.
As a condition to executing a contract with the City, two bonds each equal to one hundred
percent of the total contract price are required in compliance with Section 3-1.05 of the
Standard Specifications.
You may substitute securities for moneys withheld under the contract in compliance with
the provisions of the Public Contract Code, Section 10263.
ACCOMMODATION
If any accommodations are needed to participate in the bid process, please contact Allie
Genard at (805) 781-7057 or by Telecommunications Device for the Deaf at (805) 781-
7107. Requests should be made as early as possible in the bidding process to allow time
for accommodation.
Page 425 of 625
BID FORMS
A
BID FORMS
All bid forms must be completed and submitted with your bid. Failure to submit these
forms and required bid bond is cause to reject the bid as nonresponsive. Staple all bid
forms together.
THE UNDERSIGNED, agrees that they have carefully examined:
1. the location of the proposed work
2. the plans and specifications
3. read the accompanying instructions to bidders
and propose to furnish all:
4. materials
5. labor
to complete all the required work satisfactorily in compliance with
6. plans
7. specifications
8. special provisions
for the prices set forth in the bid item list:
BID ITEM LIST FOR 2025 PAVING PROJECT, SPECIFICATION NO. 2000616
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
BASE BID ITEMS
1 7, 12
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION LS 1 --------------
2 7
COMPLY WITH NIGHT WORK
PERMIT LS 1 --------------
3 20 TREE TRIMMING LS 1 --------------
4 30 POTHOLING ON TANK FARM LS 1 --------------
5 77
WATER SERVICE REPAIR
ALLOWANCE EA 5
6 30
CONSTRUCTION PHASING
PLAN (FDR) LS 1 --------------
7 30 DUST CONTROL PLAN (FDR) LS 1 --------------
8 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
BROAD NE LS 1 --------------
9 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
TETRA TECH SE LS 1 --------------
10 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
MARIGOLD NW LS 1 --------------
11 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
MARIGOLD NE LS 1 --------------
12 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
MARIGOLD ALLEY NW LS 1 --------------
13 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
MARIGOLD ALLEY NE LS 1 --------------
14 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
HOLLYHOCK NW LS 1 --------------
Page 426 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
B
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
15 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
HOLLYHOCK NE LS 1 --------------
16 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
POINSETTIA NW LS 1 --------------
17 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
POINSETTIA NE LS 1 --------------
18 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
POINSETTIA SW LS 1 --------------
19 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
POINSETTIA SE LS 1 --------------
20 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
SUNROSE NW LS 1 --------------
21 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
SUNROSE NE LS 1 --------------
22 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
MORNING GLORY SW LS 1 --------------
23 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
MORNING GLORY SE LS 1 --------------
24 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
BROOKPINE SW LS 1 --------------
25 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
BROOKPINE SE LS 1 --------------
26 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
WAVERTREE SW LS 1 --------------
27 15, 73
CURB RAMP TANK FARM AND
WAVERTREE SE LS 1 --------------
28 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND RICARDO NE LS 1 --------------
29 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND INDUSTRIAL NW LS 1 --------------
30 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND INDUSTRIAL NE LS 1 --------------
31 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND VIA ESTEBAN NW LS 1 --------------
32 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND VIA ESTEBAN NE LS 1 --------------
33 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND VIA ESTEBAN SW LS 1 --------------
34 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND CAPITOLIO NW LS 1 --------------
35 15, 73
CURB RAMP SACRAMENTO
AND CAPITOLIO SE LS 1 --------------
36 37 COLD PLANE (13.5 INCHES) SQYD 10,454
37 37 COLD PLANE (8.5 INCHES) SQYD 26,668
38 37 PULVERIZATION (FDR) SQYD 26,668
39 37 LIME TREATMENT (FDR) SQYD 26,668
40 39 3/4 MIX HOT MIX ASPHALT TON 14,953
41 39 1/2 MIX HMA COURSE TON 5,046
42 84
BLUE HYDRANT MARKERS
PER CITY STD 7920 EA 26
Page 427 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
C
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
43 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST
COMMUNICATIONS MANHOLE
TO FINISHED GRADE EA 4
44 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST
COMMUNICATIONS VAULT TO
FINISHED GRADE EA 3
45 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST GAS
VALVE TO FINISHED GRADE EA 2
46 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST
MONUMENT TO FINISHED
GRADE EA 14
47 15
REPLACE STORM DRAIN
INLET EA 1
48 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST STORM
DRAIN MANHOLE TO
FINISHED GRADE EA 4
49 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST SANITARY
SEWER MANHOLE OR
CLEANOUT TO FINISHED
GRADE EA 4
50 15
REBUILD SANITARY SEWER
MANHOLE FRAME AND
COVER EA 13
51 15
UPGRADE/ADJUST WATER
VALVE TO FINISHED GRADE EA 83
52 86
SOLAR FLASHING YELLOW
BEACON EA 4
53 86
REINSTALL RAPID
RECTANGULAR FLASHING
BEACON SYSTEM W/ NEW
POST AND PUSH BUTTONS -
TANK FARM & POINSETTIA LS 1
--------------
54 86
RAPID RECTANGULAR
FLASHING BEACON SYSTEM -
TANK FARM & MORNING
GLORY LS 1
--------------
55 86
RAPID RECTANGULAR
FLASHING BEACON SYSTEM
TANK FARM & RIGHETTI
RANCH LS 1
--------------
56 86
RAPID RECTANGULAR
FLASHING BEACON SYSTEM
SANTA BARBARA & HIGH LS 1
--------------
57 86
RAPID RECTANGULAR
FLASHING BEACON SYSTEM
MONTEREY & TORO LS 1
--------------
58 84 6" WHITE LF 904
59 84 6" YELLOW LF 227
60 84 8" YELLOW LF 285
61 84 12" WHITE LF 2,629
62 84 12" YELLOW LF 1,914
Page 428 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
D
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
63 84 24" WHITE LF 1,311
64 84 DETAIL 2 LF 498
65 84 DETAIL 9 LF 1,506
66 84 DETAIL 22 LF 3,690
67 84 DETAIL 25 LF 1,887
68 84 DETAIL 27B LF 1,884
69 84 DETAIL 29 LF 4,141
70 84 DETAIL 32 LF 1,582
71 84 DETAIL 38 LF 2,335
72 84 DETAIL 39 LF 3,016
73 84 DETAIL 39A LF 3,778
74 84 DETAIL 40 LF 389
75 84 12" WHITE PAINT LF 874
76 84 DETAIL 9 PAINT LF 15,836
77 84 DETAIL 22 PAINT LF 2,662
78 84 DETAIL 24 PAINT LF 1,672
79 84 DETAIL 29 PAINT LF 371
80 84 DETAIL 32 PAINT LF 4,733
81 84 DETAIL 38 PAINT LF 2,112
82 84 DETAIL 39 PAINT LF 12,412
83 84 DETAIL 39A PAINT LF 1,326
84 84 DETAIL 40 PAINT LF 113
85 84 DETAIL 41 PAINT LF 120
86 84 BIKE BUFFER LF 8,262
87 84
BIKE BUFFER WITH
PAVEMENT MARKERS LF 653
88 84 GREEN BIKE LANE CASE 2 LF 2,161
89 84 GREEN BIKE LANE CASE 3 LF 896
90 84 RED CURB LF 292
91 84 BOTS DOTS EA 242
92 82 FLEX POSTS EA 70
93 82 REMOVE (E) POST EA 9
94 82 12' PUNCH POST EA 17
95 82 14' PUNCH POST EA 3
96 86 INSTALL NEW STREETLIGHT EA 2
97 82 R1-1 SIGN EA 3
98 82 R2-1 (35) SIGN EA 1
99 82 R2-1 (35) SIGN EA 1
100 82 R2-1 (35) SIGN EA 1
101 82 R9-3 SIGN EA 9
Page 429 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
E
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
102 82 R9-3B(R) SIGN EA 4
103 82 R9-3B(L) SIGN EA 4
104 82 R10-15 SIGN EA 1
105 82 MODIFIED R10-15 SIGN EA 1
106 82 R26 SIGN EA 12
107 82 R81(CA) SIGN EA 2
108 82 R81B(CA) SIGN EA 1
109 82 W1-1a(R)(25) SIGN EA 1
110 82 W1-8(L) SIGN EA 4
111 82 W1-8(R) SIGN EA 4
112 82 W4-2 SIGN SIGN EA 1
113 82 W8-6 SIGN EA 1
114 82 W9-1 SIGN EA 1
115 82 W11-2 SIGN EA 2
116 82 W16-9P SIGN EA 3
117 82
RADAR SPEED FEEDBACK
SIGN EA 6
118 82 STREET NAME SIGNS EA 7
119 84
WHITE PAINT PAVEMENT
MARKINGS/LEGENDS
(ARROWS, WORDS,
SYMBOLS, ETC.) SQFT 1,473
120 84
WHITE PAVEMENT
MARKINGS/LEGENDS
(ARROWS, WORDS,
SYMBOLS, ETC.) SQFT 1,721
Base Bid $
ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE A BID ITEMS
121 7, 12
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION LS 1 --------------
122 7
COMPLY WITH NIGHT WORK
PERMIT LS 1 --------------
123 20 TREE TRIMMING LS 1 --------------
124 15, 73
CURB RAMP ORCUTT AND
SPANISH OAKS SW LS 1 --------------
125 37 COLD PLANE (8.5 INCHES) SQYD 8,767
126 39 3/4 MIX HOT MIX ASPHALT TON 2,860
127 39 1/2 MIX HMA COURSE TON 1,192
128 39 HMA DIKE LF 2,815
129 20
REGRADE, RECOMPACT AND
INSTALL JUTE NETTING SQFT 7,108
130 84
BLUE HYDRANT MARKERS
PER CITY STD 7920 EA 1
Page 430 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
F
Item Item Unit of Estimated Item Price Total
No. SS(1) Description Measure Quantity (in figures) (in figures)
131
15
UPGRADE/ADJUST
MONUMENT TO FINISHED
GRADE EA 1
132 84 DETAIL 22 LF 1,666
133 84 DETAIL 24 LF 38
134 84 DETAIL 29 LF 181
135 84 DETAIL 38 LF 112
136 84 DETAIL 39 LF 3,702
Additive Alternative A $
ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE B BID ITEMS
137 7, 12
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AND
IMPLEMENTATION LS 1 --------------
138 7
COMPLY WITH NIGHT WORK
PERMIT LS 1 --------------
139 20 TREE TRIMMING LS 1 --------------
140 37 COLD PLANE (6 INCHES) SQYD 6,611
141 39 3/4 MIX HOT MIX ASPHALT TON 1,438
142 39 1/2 MIX HMA COURSE TON 719
143 84
BLUE HYDRANT MARKERS
PER CITY STD 7920 EA 1
144 84 DETAIL 22 LF
paint for
CL?
145 84 DETAIL 39 LF 3,822
146 84 DETAIL 22 PAINT LF 1,856
147 82 DELINEATOR CLASS 1 TYPE E EA 8
148 82 R26 SIGN EA 9
149 82 W1-8(L) SIGN EA 6
150 82 W14-1 SIGN EA 1
Additive Alternative B
Base Bid Total $
Additive Alternative “A” Total $
Additive Alternative “B” Total $
Total Project Bid = (Base Bid + Add. Alternative A + Add. Alternative B) $
Company Name:
(1) refers to section in the Standard Specifications, with modifications in the Special Provisions, that describe required
work.
* Bid item exempt from Section 9-1.06B and 9-1.06C of the Standard Specifications. The unit price will not be adjusted
regardless of the final bid item quantity.
(S) Specialty item per Section 5-1.13A SUBCONTRACTING, General of the Standard Specifications
Page 431 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
G
LIST OF SUBCONTRACTORS
Pursuant to Section 4100 of the Public Contracts Code and section 2-1.33C of the
standard specifications, the Bidder is required to furnish the following information for each
Subcontractor performing more than 1/2 percent (0.5%) of the total base bid. Do not list
alternative subcontractors for the same work. Subcontracting must not total more than
fifty percent (50%) of the submitted bid except as allowed in section 5-1.13 of the standard
specifications.
For Streets & Highways projects, subcontractors performing less than ten thousand dollars
($10,000) worth of work need not be mentioned. Subcontractors required to pay
prevailing wage, must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations
pursuant to Labor Code section 1725.5 to be listed.
NOTE: If there are no subcontractors, write “NONE” and submit with bid.
Name Under Which
Subcontractor is Licensed License Number
DIR Public
Works
Registration
Number
Address and Phone
Number of Office, Mill or
Shop
Specific
Description of
Subcontract
% of
Total
Base
Bid
Attach additional sheets as needed.
Page 432 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
H
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10285.1 STATEMENT
In compliance with Public Contract Code Section 10285.1 (Chapter 376, Stats. 1985), the
bidder hereby declares under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California
that the bidder, or any subcontractor to be engaged by the bidder, has ____, has not
____ been convicted within the preceding three years of any offenses referred to in that
section, including any charge of fraud, bribery, collusion, conspiracy, or any other act in
violation of any state or federal antitrust law in connection with the bidding upon, award
of, or performance of, any public works contract, as defined in Public Contract Code
Section 1101, with any public entity, as defined in Public Contract Code Section 1100,
including the Regents of the University of California or the Trustees of the California State
University. The term "bidder" is understood to include any partner, member, officer,
director, responsible managing officer, or responsible managing employee thereof, as
referred to in Section 10285.1.
NOTE: The bidder must place a check mark after "has" or "has not" in one of the blank
spaces provided. The above Statement is part of the Bid. Signing this Bid on the signature
portion constitute signature of this Statement. Bidders are cautioned that making a false
certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution.
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10162 QUESTIONNAIRE
In compliance with Public Contract Code Section 10162, the Bidder must complete, under
penalty of perjury, the following questionnaire:
Has the bidder, any officer of the bidder, or any employee of the bidder who has a
proprietary interest in the bidder, ever been disqualified, removed, or otherwise prevented
from bidding on, or completing a federal, state, or local government project because of a
violation of law or a safety regulation?
Yes No
If the answer is yes, attach a letter explaining the circumstances
PUBLIC CONTRACT CODE SECTION 10232 STATEMENT
In compliance with Public Contract Code Section 10232, you hereby state under penalty of
perjury, that no more than one final unappealable finding of contempt of court by a federal
court has been issued against you within the immediately preceding two-year period
because of your failure to comply with an order of a federal court which orders you to comply
with an order of the National Labor Relations Board.
LABOR CODE SECTION 1725.5 STATEMENTS
The bidder has delinquent liability to an employee or the state for any assessment of back
wages or related damages, interest, fines, or penalties pursuant to any final judgment,
order, or determination by a court or any federal, state, or local administrative agency,
including a confirmed arbitration award. Any judgment, order, or determination that is
Page 433 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
I
under appeal is excluded, provided that the contractor has secured the payment of any
amount eventually found due through a bond or other appropriate means.
Yes No
The bidder is currently debarred under Section 1777.1 or under any other federal or state
law providing for the debarment of contractors from public works.
Yes No
NOTE: The above Statements and Questionnaire are part of the Bid. Signing this Bid on
the signature portion constitute signature of this Statement and Questionnaire. Bidders are
cautioned that making a false certification may subject the certifier to criminal prosecution.
Page 434 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
J
NON-COLLUSION DECLARATION
I, , declare that
I am of ,
the party making the foregoing bid that the bid is not made in the interest of, or on behalf
of, any undisclosed person, partnership, company, association, organization, or
corporation; that the bid is genuine and not collusive or sham; that the bidder has not
directly or indirectly induced or solicited any other bidder to put in a false or sham bid, and
has not directly or indirectly colluded, conspired, connived, or agreed with any bidder or
anyone else to put in a sham bid, or that anyone refrained from bidding; that the bidder has
not in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement, communication, or
conference with anyone to fix the bid price of the bidder or any other bidder, or to fix any
overhead, profit, or cost element of the bid price, or of that of any other bidder, or to secure
any advantage against the public body awarding the contract of anyone interested in the
proposed contract; that all statements contained in the bid are true; and, further, that the
bidder has not, directly or indirectly, submitted his or her bid price or any breakdown thereof,
or the contents thereof, or divulged information or data relative thereto, or paid, and will not
pay, any fee to any corporation, partnership, company association, organization, bid
depository, or to any member or agent thereof to effectuate a collusive or sham bid.
Executed on , 20 , in __
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
is true and correct.
(Signature and Title of Declarant)
(SEAL)
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this _______day of _________, 20_____
Notary Public
Company Name:____________________
Page 435 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
K
BIDDER ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
By signing below, the bidder acknowledges and confirms that this bid is based on the information contained
in all contract documents, including the notice to bidders, plans, specifications, special provisions, and
addendum number(s) . (Note: You are responsible to verify the number of
addenda prior to the bid opening.)
The undersigned further agrees that in case of default in executing the required contract, with necessary
bonds, within eight days, (not including Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays), after having received a
mailed notice that the contract is ready for signature, the proceeds of the check or bond accompanying his
bid will become the property of the City of San Luis Obispo.
Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of contractors, License No. , Expiration
Date .
The above statement is made under penalty of perjury, and any bid not containing this information "will be
considered non-responsive and will be rejected” by the City.
Signature of Bidder
(Print Name and Title of Bidder)
DIR– Public Works
Registration No:
Business Name (DBA):
Owner/Legal Name:
Indicate One: Sole-proprietor Partnership Corporation
List Partners/Corporate Officers:
Name Title
Name Title
Name Title
Business Address
Street Address
Mailing Address
City, State, Zip Code
Phone Number
Fax Number
Email Address
Date
Page 436 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
L
QUALIFICATIONS
Failure to furnish complete reference information ON THIS FORM, as specified in this
project’s Notice to Bidders and indicated below, is cause to reject the bid. Additional
information may be attached but is not a substitute for this form.
Reference Number 1
Customer Name & Contact Individual
Telephone & Email
Project Name (Site Address):
Did this project include roadway
construction/ reconstruction within the
public right of way.
Yes □ No □
Describe the services provided and how this project is similar to
that which is being bid:
Date project completed:
Was this contract for a public agency?
Yes □ No □
Reference Number 2
Customer Name & Contact Individual
Telephone & Email
Project Name (Site Address):
Did this project include roadway
construction/ reconstruction within the
public right of way.
Yes □ No □
Describe the services provided and how this project is similar to
that which is being bid:
Date project completed:
Was this contract for a public agency?
Yes □ No □
Reference Number 3
Customer Name & Contact Individual
Telephone & Email
Project Name (Site Address):
Did this project include roadway
construction/ reconstruction within the
public right of way.
Yes □ No □
Describe the services provided and how this project is similar to
that which is being bid:
Date project completed:
Was this contract for a public agency?
Yes □ No □
Page 437 of 625
BID FORMS
BID FORMS
M
ATTACH BIDDER'S BOND TO ACCOMPANY BID
Know all men by these presents:
That we ____________________________________________, AS PRINCIPAL, and
_______________________________________________________, AS SURETY, are held and firmly
bound unto the City of San Luis Obispo in the sum of:
____________________________________________________ Dollars (_____________) to be paid to
said City or its certain attorney, its successors and assigns; for which payment, well and truly to be made, we
bind ourselves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors or assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by
these presents:
THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH, that if the certain bid of the above
bounden ______________________________________________________________________
to construct ___________________________________________________________________
(insert name of street and limits to be improved or project)
dated _____________________ is accepted by the City of San Luis Obispo, and if the above
bounden _______________________________________________________, his heirs, executors,
administrators, successors, and assigns shall duly enter into and execute a contract for such construction and
shall execute and deliver the two bonds described within ten (10) days (not including Saturdays, Sundays, or
legal holidays) after the above bounden,
______________________________________________________, has received notice by and from the
said City of San Luis Obispo that said contract is ready for execution, then this obligation shall become null
and void; otherwise, it shall be and remain in full force and virtue.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this ___ day of ______, 20____.
Bidder Principal:
Signature Date
Title:
Surety:
Bidder's signature is not required to be notarized. Surety's signature must be notarized.
Equivalent form may be substituted
(Rev. 6-30-14)
Page 438 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
1
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
ORGANIZATION
Special provisions are under headings that correspond with the main section heading of
the Standard Specifications. Each special provision begins with a revision clause that
describes or introduces a revision to the Standard Specifications. Any paragraph added
or deleted by a revision clause does not change the paragraph number of the Standard
Specifications for any other reference to a paragraph of the Standard Specifications.
DIVISION I GENERAL PROVISIONS
1 GENERAL
Add to Section 1-1.01 GENERAL:
The work must be done in compliance with the City of San Luis Obispo, Department of
Public Works:
1. 2025 Paving Project Special Provisions
2. City of San Luis Obispo Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards –
2020 edition
3. State of California, Department of Transportation Standard Specifications and
Standard Plans – 2015 edition
In case of conflict between documents, governing ranking must comply with section 5-
1.02 of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Standard Specifications.
Failure to comply with the provisions of these sections is a material breach of contract:
1. Sections 5 through 8 of the Standard Specifications
2. Section 12 through 15 of the Standard Specifications
3. Section 77-1 of the Standard Specifications
4. Section 81 of the Standard Specifications
5. authorized working hours
6. OSHA compliance
3 CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION
Add Section 3-1.18B CONTRACT EXECUTION, Caltrans Encroachment Permit:
Compliance with Caltrans Encroachment permit and traffic control shall conform to the
provisions of Section 12 “Temporary Traffic Control”, of the Standard Specifications and
these Special Provisions.
Measurement and Payment
The lump sum contract price paid to comply with Caltrans Encroachment Permit shall
include full compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, personnel,
and for doing all the work involved to comply with all Caltrans encroachment permit
requirements.
Page 439 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
2
4 SCOPE OF WORK
Add to Section 4-1.03 WORK DESCRIPTION:
Comply with the provisions of Sections 3, 7, 12, 13, 15, 20, 37, 39, 73, 77, 82, 84, 86 and
90 for general, material, construction, and payment specifics.
Add Section 4-1.03A WORK DESCRIPTION, Project Specific Signage:
Maintain Revenue Enhancement Funding signage in work area. Return Revenue
Enhancement Funding signs at the end of the project or upon the Engineer’s request.
The Engineer will furnish Sales Tax signs mounted to moveable Barricades. Maintain
Sales Tax signage in work area. Return Sales Tax signs at the end of the project or upon
the Engineer’s request.
Sales Tax signs are stored at the City’s corporation Yard at 25 Prado Road. The
contractor is responsible to load and transport from City Corporation Yard to job site and
return them when the project is completed under direction of project inspector.
5 CONTROL OF WORK
Add to Section 5-1.20B(5) COORDINATION WITH OTHER ENTITIES, Permits,
Licenses, Agreements, and Certifications - Comply with Local, State and Federal
Regulations:
The City applied for an encroachment permit from the State of California, Department of
Transportation for work within and affecting Caltrans public right of way. The Contractor
is required to obtain and pull the pending permit, comply with all conditions, and pay all
associated fees.
7 LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PUBLIC
Add to Section 7-1.03B PUBLIC CONVENIENCE, Traffic Control Plan
WORK HOUR RESTRICTIONS
Unless stated otherwise below, work hours are 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (Monday through
Friday) at all the affected streets. Paving and pulverization operations on Tank Farm
between Broad and Poinsettia must be completed at night.
Two-way traffic circulation with minimum 10’ travel lanes must be retained on Tank Farm,
Orcutt and Sacramento between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. Night work permit will be
necessary if above limitations are not feasible to perform aspects of work.
The contractor must not work two consecutive shifts, day and night, unless approved by
the Engineer.
Page 440 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
3
Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) PHASING
The FDR work on Tank Farm must be performed in two phases to maintain traffic flow:
Phase 1: During this phase, half of the roadway must remain open to traffic while
the other half is closed for pulverization, treatment, and repaving. The portion of
the roadway to be worked on must be properly barricaded and signed to redirect
traffic. The contractor must ensure that the open half of the roadway is fully
accessible to vehicles at all times during Phase 1, with clear signage and traffic
control measures in place to guide drivers safely around the work zone.
Phase 2: The work must shift to the other half of the roadway, where the asphalt
will be pulverized, treated, and repaved. Similar to Phase 1, the contractor must
ensure that at least one side of the roadway remains open to traffic during this
phase as well. Temporary lane reductions or disruptions may occur during both
phases as necessary to accommodate the construction process.
The contractor must carefully manage the traffic flow throughout both phases to
minimize disruptions, with ongoing efforts to ensure that one lane in each direction is
always open to traffic during the project.
CURB RAMPS
Where curb ramp improvements are proposed at multiple corners of the intersection, the
contractor shall provide a phasing plan showing schedule for demolition and construction
of ramps in a manner that retains pedestrian access on at least one side of the street at
all times. The construction phasing approach for these ramps shall be approved to the
satisfaction of the Engineer.
CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS
Two (2) changeable message signs (CMS) must be installed and operational 1 week
prior to the start of construction and be maintained throughout the duration of the project
at locations approved by the Engineer upon review of the submitted Traffic Control Plan.
Changeable message sign shall be programmed for two flashes with the messages to
be approved by the Engineer.
WORK IN CALTRANS RIGHT-OF-WAY
Unless otherwise approved by Caltrans and the Engineer, work within Caltrans Right of
Way must be performed between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. (Monday through
Thursday) and 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Friday.
NIGHT WORK
Night work is permitted separately. Night work shall comply with the restrictions set forth
in the permit by the City of San Luis Obispo Community Development. It is the contractor’s
Page 441 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
4
responsibility to keep track of the Night Work Permit expiration date. Requests to extend
the Night Work Permit must be submitted to the Engineer at least 5 weeks prior to the
permit expiration date.
Night work is defined as work between the hours of 7:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M (Sunday
through Thursday). Night work will not be allowed on Friday, and Saturday.
Prior to commencing the project, the contractor must notify businesses and residences
within 300 feet of the worksite about proposed night work.
Any portable or fixed equipment that produces noise (such as generators, concrete saws,
jack hammers, etc.) must be equipped with sound blankets, temporary sound barriers, or
other attenuating devices so as to limit impacts to adjoining properties.
When not in use, equipment must be kept in its lowest (quietest) idling state or switched
off to limit noise impacts.
Any portable lighting must be shielded and/or directed away from adjacent properties.
Loudspeakers or other similar forms of communication is prohibited.
Contractor will provide lighting for all operations, no exceptions are to be made. Any
contractor personnel working outside the lights will be directed to return to a lighted area
or the operation must be stopped.
All contractor work vehicles, including heavy equipment, backhoes, trenching machines
must have two working headlights and taillights. Vehicles without appropriate lighting will
be kept from working until they are brought to compliance.
Illumination level of 10-foot candles is required for all nighttime operations, which will
normally be achieved with light plants or balloon lights. All lighting fixtures must be
mounted and directed in manner precluding glare to approaching traffic.
TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
Provide traffic control plan and traffic control application at or before the preconstruction
meeting. Traffic control plan must be drawn to scale. Traffic control application may be
obtained on the City’s website:
www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/public-works/documents-
online/construction-documents
Upon approval of the traffic control plan, the City will issue a no-fee Encroachment Permit.
Permittee is responsible to comply with all conditions of the traffic control plan. Complete
work using due diligence to restore free flowing of traffic.
8 PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS
Page 442 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
5
Add to Section 8-1.01A GENERAL, Order of Work:
Unless otherwise approved by the Engineer, roadway restriping work on the following
streets must be scheduled as the first phase of work:
Madonna Road
Prado Road
Broad Street
Tank Farm Road (west of Broad Street)
Santa Rosa Street & Mill Street intersection
Below is the required sequence of work for installation of Rapid Rectangular Flashing
Beacon systems, signs and striping, unless otherwise approved by the Engineer.
1. Unless otherwise approved by the Engineer, the contractor must reinstall the existing
flashing beacon system at the Tank Farm/Poinsettia intersection no later than two
weeks following completion of curb ramp improvements at this intersection. A
temporary crosswalk must be marked in traffic-rated paint in conjunction with
reinstallation of this beacon system, unless otherwise approved.
2. Unless otherwise approved by the Engineer, new crosswalk markings at the Tank
Farm/Morning Glory/Sunrose intersection shall not be installed until the new flashing
beacon system(s) are installed and operational.
3. Contractor will furnish and install all equipment needed for intended operation of Rapid
Rectangular Flashing Beacon system. Contractor shall provide beacon system
equipment submittals for City review and approval prior to procurement.
4. Contractor is responsible for coordination with beacon system manufacturer’s
representative(s) as needed to provide intended operation of beacon systems.
Replace the 1st paragraph in Section 8-1.02A SCHEDULE, General with:
Provide a Level 1 schedule for this work. A one week look ahead schedule shall be
provided to the Engineer before commencing the following week’s work. This requirement
shall be completed in order to continue construction work.
DIVISION II GENERAL CONSTRUCTION
12 TEMPORARY TRAFFIC CONTROL
Add to Section 12-6.01 TEMPORARY PAVEMENT DELINEATION, General with:
You will be assessed Liquidated Damages in the amount of $500 per calendar day for
each day’s failure to complete temporary striping and pavement markings.
Replace Section 12-6.04 PAYMENT with:
The lump sum price paid for “Temporary Striping and Pavement Markings” include
payment for the following:
Temporary striping and pavement markings to match proposed lane configuration
after the roadway paving.
Page 443 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
6
15 EXISTING FACILITIES
Add to Section 15-1.04 PAYMENT
The contract price paid per square yard of cold plane shall be based on the actual area
of surface cold planed irrespective of the number of passes required to obtain the required
depth of the grind as shown on the Plans and shall include full compensation for furnishing
all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and doing all work involved in cold
planning asphalt concrete surfacing and disposing of planed material as specified in the
Standard Specification and these special provisions and as shown on the Plans, and no
additional compensation will be allowed therefore.
DIVISION IV SUBBASES AND BASES
Replace Section 30-4 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION – CEMENT with:
Section 30-4 FULL DEPTH RECLAMATION - LIME AND CEMENT
30-4.01 GENERAL
30-4.01A Summary
Section 30-4 includes specifications for constructing a base using full-depth reclamation
– lime and cement (FDR).
FDR consists of:
1. Pulverizing existing asphalt concrete pavement and underlying materials
2. Mixing with water and lime
3. Mixing with water and cement
4. Spreading, grading, and compacting the mixture
5. Applying asphaltic emulsion
30-4.01B Definitions
OMC: Optimum moisture content determined under California Test 216
lot: 1,000 sq yd of FDR
30-4.01C Submittals
30-4.01C(1) General
At least 20 days before starting FDR work, submit:
1. Quality Control (QC) plan per 30-4.01C(2)
2. Certificate of Compliance for Quicklime (with each delivery)
3. Certificate of Compliance for Portland Cement (with each delivery)
30-4.01C(2) Quality Control Plan
The QC plan must describe the organization, responsible parties, and procedures you
will use for:
1. QC including sampling, testing, and reporting
Page 444 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
7
2. Determining upper and lower action limits when corrective actions are needed
3. Implementing corrective actions
4. Ensuring FDR pulverizing, mixing, compacting, grading, and finishing activities are
coordinated
The QC plan must include copies of the forms that will be used to provide the required
inspection records and sampling and testing results. The form for recording and
reporting the QC measurements must show the cement and water proportions.
The QC plan must include a contingency plan that describes the corrective actions you
will take in the event of equipment break down. The corrective actions must include
repairing and reopening the roadway to traffic using minor HMA under section 39.
30-4.01C(3) Mix Design
The FDR mix design is provided by the City. Refer to Appendix D.
30-4.01C(4) Test Strip
Submit a summary of the determinations made from the test strip.
30-4.01C(5) Quality Control Reporting
For each lot, submit a report daily that includes the following items based on the
frequencies specified in section 30-4.01D(4):
1. General Information:
1.1. Lot number
1.2. Location description
1.3. Beginning and ending stations
1.4. Lane number and offset from centerline
1.5. Weather:
1.5.1. Ambient air temperature before starting daily FDR activities including
time of temperature reading
1.5.2. Road surface temperature before starting daily FDR activities including
time of temperature reading
2. Calculated lime application rate in lb/sq yd and percent dry weight of FDR
3. Calculated cement application rate in lb/sq yd and percent of dry weight of FDR
4. For FDR processing:
4.1. Depth of cut
4.2. Average forward speed
5. FDR quality control test results for:
5.1. Gradation
5.2. Moisture content
5.3. Unconfined compressive strength
5.4. In-place wet density
5.5. Relative compaction
Page 445 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
8
6. For asphalt emulsion used on finished FDR surface:
6.1. Emulsion type
6.2. Emulsion application rate in gal/sq yd
6.3. Emulsion dilution as the weight ratio of added water to asphaltic emulsion
7. Note on the daily report the station limits of any unsuitable materials locations and
when the Engineer was notified
Update each day's submitted report within 24 hours of obtaining test results.
Consolidate all lots completed in a day in one report with each lot reported separately.
30-4.01C(6) Asphaltic Emulsion
With each dilution of asphaltic emulsion used for finishing under section 30-4.03H,
submit:
1. Weight ratio of water to bituminous material in the original asphaltic emulsion
2. Weight of asphaltic emulsion before diluting
3. Weight of added water
4. Final dilution weight ratio of water to asphaltic emulsion
30-4.01D Quality Control and Assurance
30-4.01D(1) General
Schedule a preoperation conference at a mutually agreed time at the job site to meet
with the Engineer. Discuss the project specifications and methods of performing each
item of the work. Items discussed must include the processes for:
1. Mix design requirements
2. Production
3. Compacting
4. Grading
5. Finishing
6. Implementing the approved QC plan
7. Implementing the contingency plan
8. QC sampling and testing
9. Acceptance criteria
Preoperation conference attendees must sign an attendance sheet provided by the
Engineer. The preoperation conference must be attended by your:
1. Project superintendent
2. Project manager
3. QC manager
4. Workers and your subcontractor's workers, including:
4.1. Foremen
4.2. Ground supervisors
4.3. Representative from testing lab
Page 446 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
9
Do not start FDR activities, including test strips, until the listed personnel have attended
a preoperation conference.
Relative compaction must be determined under California Test 231 and the following:
1. Test in 0.50-foot depth intervals from the bottom of the FDR layer regardless of the
layer thickness
2. Correction for oversize material does not apply
3. The asphalt concrete surfacing and underlying base materials shall be pulverized
such that 100 percent of the material will pass a two-inch sieve and a minimum of
90-percent will pass a one and one-half-inch (1 ½) sieve.
4. Use the laboratory wet test maximum density closest in proximity to the lot to
determine relative compaction. If the relative compaction for a lot is less than 97
percent, perform California Test 216 and California Test 226 for each noncompliant
lot and recalculate the relative compaction
Divide the area to receive FDR into lots of FDR produced except the test strip is the 1st
lot and must be at least 2,000 sq yd. A quantity of FDR placed at the end of a work shift
greater than 500 sq yd is considered 1 lot. If a quantity of FDR placed at the end of a
work shift is less than 500 sq yd, you may either count this quantity as 1 lot or include
the test results for quality control in the previous lot.
For any lot including the test strip, stop FDR activities and immediately inform the
Engineer whenever:
1. Any test result shown in the QC Requirements table or the FDR Acceptance Criteria
Testing table does not comply with the specifications
2. Visual inspection shows evidence of:
2.1. Poor dispersion or dry spots
2.2. Segregation, raveling, and loose material
2.3. Variance of more than 0.05 foot measured from the lower edge of a 12-
foot straightedge
2.4. Nonuniform surface texture throughout the work limits
2.5. Repaired areas
If FDR activities are stopped, before resuming activities:
1. Notify the Engineer of the adjustments you will make
2. Remedy or replace the noncompliant lot until it complies with specifications
3. Construct a new test strip of FDR with proposed adjustments demonstrating ability to
comply with the specifications
4. Obtain authorization
30-4.01D(2) Mix Design Sampling and Testing
The Mix Design is provided in Appendix D.
The lime content must be 1.0-percent by dry weight of FDR. The cement content must
be 3.0 percent by dry weight of FDR. For estimating purposes, use a with a dry unit
weight of 130 lb /cu ft. except an increase or decrease in the cement content may be
Page 447 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
10
ordered based on the mix design. During progress of the work, if you encounter an
isolated area that requires more lime or cement than described in the mix design for that
area, notify the Engineer before applying.
30-4.01D(3) Test Strip
On the 1st day of FDR activities and using the same equipment and materials that will
be used during production, construct a test strip of at least 1,500 feet in a single lane
width to determine the:
1. Equipment, materials, and processes can produce FDR in compliance with the
specifications
2. Effect of varying the FDR machine's forward speed and drum rotation rate on the
consistency of the pulverized material
3. Optimal proportions of lime, cement, and water. Changes to the mix design must be
authorized.
4. Rolling method and sequence can comply with the compaction and finishing
specifications
5. Application rate of asphaltic emulsion for opening to traffic
The Engineer tests each test strip under section 30-4.01D(5). Do not proceed with FDR
activities until the Engineer informs you the test strip is acceptable. If QC or Engineer's
acceptance test results are not available, you may proceed at your own risk.
30-4.01D(4) Quality Control, Sampling, and Testing
Designate a ground supervisor whose sole purpose is to monitor the FDR activities,
advise project personnel, and interface with the quality control testing personnel. The
ground supervisor must not have any sampling or testing duties.
Take samples under California Test 125.
Perform sampling and testing for each test strip and at the specified frequency for the
quality characteristics shown in the following table:
Page 448 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
11
Quality Control Requirements
Quality
characteristic
Test
method
Minimum
sampling
and testing
frequency
Requirement Sampling
location
Maximum
reporting
time
allowance
Water sulfates
a
(ppm, max)
California
Test 417
1 per
source 1,300 Source Before
work
starts Water
chlorides a
(ppm, max)
California
Test 422
1 per
source 650 Source
Gradation (%,
passing)b
Sieve Size
3 inch
2 inch
1-1/2 inch
California
Test 202
Test strip
and 1 per
lot 100
95–100
85–100
Loose mix
after
pulverizing
and mixing
24 hours
Moisture
content
(%)
California
Test 226
Test strip
and 2 per
day c
Mix design ±
2 percentage
points
Loose mix
after
pulverizing
and mixing d
24 hours
Unconfined
compressive
strength (psi)
ASTM D
1633e
Test strip
and 1 per 2
lots
Specified in
section 30-
4.01D(2)
Loose mix
after
pulverizing
and mixing d
24 hours
after
testing
specimens
Laboratory
maximum wet
density (lf/cu
ft)
California
Test 216
Test strip
and 2 per
day
Use for
relative
compaction
calculation
Same
location as a
California
Test 231
test
24 hours
Relative
compaction
(%, min) (wet
density) f
California
Test 231
Test strip
and 1 per
lot
97 Compacted
mix 24 hours
Page 449 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
12
a Only required for non-potable water sources.
b Remove solids larger than 3 inches.
c If test fails, minimum test frequency is 1 per lot
d Sample immediately after mixing is complete
e Method A, except:
1. Test specimens must be compacted under ASTM D 1557, Method A or B.
2. Test specimens must be cured by sealing each specimen with 2 layers of
plastic at least 4-mil thick. The plastic must be tight around the specimen. Seal all
seams with duct tape to prevent moisture loss. Sealed specimens must be placed
in an oven for 7 days at 100 ± 5 degrees F. At the end of the cure period,
specimens must be removed from the oven and air-cooled. Duct tape and plastic
wrap must be removed before capping. Specimens must not be soaked before
testing.
f Verify the moisture content reading made under California Test 231 with California
Test 226.
Measure and record the actual cut depth at both ends of the pulverizing drum at least
once every 300 feet along the cut length. Take measurements in the Engineer's
presence.
30-4.01D(5) Acceptance Criteria
FDR acceptance is based on:
1. Visual inspection for the following:
1.1. Segregation, raveling, and loose material
1.2. Variance of more than 0.05 foot measured from the lower edge of a 12-
foot straightedge
1.3. Uniform surface texture throughout the work limits
1.4. Repaired areas
2. Compliance with the quality characteristics shown in the following table:
Page 450 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
13
FDR Acceptance Criteria Testing
Quality
Characteristic
Test Method Requirement
Lime application
rate (lb/sq yd)
Calibrated tray or
equal
Mix design rate ± 5%
Cement application
rate (lb/sq yd)
Calibrated tray or
equal
Mix design rate ± 5%
Relative
compaction (%,
min, wet density)
California Test 231 97
Thickness (ft) a Core measurements ±0.05 of the thickness
shown
a Take 4- or 6-inch diameter cores from random locations the
Engineer selects. The Engineer may require 3 locations per lot;
coring more than 3 locations per lot is change order work. At time of
coring, submit cores to the Engineer for measurement.
30-4.02 MATERIALS
30-4.02A General
Not Used
30-4.02B Lime
Lime shall be quicklime conforming to the chemical requirements in ASTM C977 except
it shall have a minimum of 90 percent available calcium oxide. Quicklime shall be
supplied from a single source. Hydrated lime (dry or slurry), air slaked, by-product or
water lime will not be permitted. Quicklime shall be protected from moisture until
application and be sufficiently dry to flow freely when handled and added.
Quicklime, when delivered to the work site shall conform to the following grading
requirements when tested in accourdance with ASTM C136 (dry sieving only)
Sieve Size: 3/8 inch. Percent Passing: 98-100
A Certificate of Compliance and a certified weighmaster ticket showing the shipping
weight shall be submitted to the Engineer with each delivery.
30-4.02C Cement
Cement must be Type II or Type V portland cement specified in ASTM C 150/150M.
Pozzolanic material shall not be substituted for Portland Cement.
30-4.02D Water
Notify the Engineer if a water source other than potable water is used and perform
testing for chlorides and sulfates.
Page 451 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
14
30-4.02E Mixed Material
The pulverized mixture of asphalt concrete and underlying material, lime, and cement
must comply with the grading requirements for the sieve sizes shown in the following
table:
FDR Gradation
Sieve Size Percentage
Passing
3" 100
2" 100
1.5" 90-100
The moisture content at the time of mixing must comply with the mix design within 2
percentage points.
30-4.02F Asphaltic Emulsion
Asphaltic emulsion must be Grade SS1h or CSS1h.
For dilution, the weight ratio of water added to asphaltic emulsion must not exceed 1 to
1.
30-4.02G Core Backfill Material
Material to fill cored holes for thickness measurements must be packaged rapid-
hardening cementitious material under ASTM C 928, Type R2 or R3.
30-4.03 CONSTRUCTION
30-4.03A General
Do not start FDR activities if the ambient air temperature is below 40 degrees F or the
road surface is below 40 degrees F. If the ambient air temperature falls below 40
degrees F during FDR activities, you may only compact and finish FDR.
Before starting daily FDR activities, sweep the FDR area constructed the previous day
to remove loose material.
30-4.03B Equipment
Do not interrupt traffic while servicing FDR equipment.
The FDR machine must have independent and interlocked systems for water and must
include the following:
1. Digital electronic controller system
2. Pumping system
3. Spray bar system
Storage equipment for water must not leak and must be attached to the FDR machine
with a tow bar and hose.
Page 452 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
15
Grading and compacting equipment must be self-propelled and reversible. The
frequency and amplitude of vibrating rollers must be adjustable and exceed a force of
15 tons in vibratory mode.
Grading equipment must be a motor grader with automatic grade controls for profile
elevation and cross slope.
30-4.03C Surface Preparation
Before FDR activities start, prepare the existing roadway surface by:
1. Clearing foreign matter including vegetation
2. Removing standing water
3. Referencing the profile and cross slope
4. Marking the proposed longitudinal cut lines on the existing pavement as follows:
4.1. Cut lines must coincide with points where the existing cross slope
changes, approximately at the centerline and edge of traveled way
4.2. Cut lines must indicate the sequence of the cuts
If excess material is to be stored adjacent to the shoulder, clear and dispose of the
weeds, grass, and debris from the area.
30-4.03D Pulverizing
Do not leave a wedge where the pulverizing drum cuts into the existing material. The
1st cut width must use the full width of the pulverizing drum. Subsequent cuts must
overlap at least 4 inches. Do not leave a gap of unpulverized material between cuts. If
an overlap is more than 4 inches, immediately adjust. If an overlap is less than 4 inches,
immediately back up and pulverize the deviation along the correct cut line.
Mark the existing pavement where the center of the pulverizing drum stops. Start the
following cut on this alignment at least 2 feet behind the mark.
If you encounter unstable subgrade or rocks greater than 4 inches in the roadway
section, notify the Engineer. The Engineer determines the extent of the problem and the
corrective measures to be taken.
30-4.03E Spreading Materials
Do not spread lime before pulverizing.
Lime shall be in a dry state at the time of spreading. Lime shall not be spread while the
atmospheric temperature is below 35 degrees Fahrenheit or wind conditions are such
that blowing lime will have an adverse effect on traffic or adjacent property. No traffic
other than the reclaimer or other related construction equipment shall be allowed to
pass over the spread lime until completion of the initial mixing. Spread lime uniformly
over the full roadway surface width. The spread rate must be the mix design rate or the
ordered rate in lb/sq yd ± 5 percent.
Spread cement uniformly. Do not spread cement more than 30 minutes before mixing.
Do not apply dry cement in windy conditions that will result in dust outside the FDR
area. The spread rate must be the mix design rate or the ordered rate in lb/sq yd ± 5
percent.
Page 453 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
16
30-4.03F Mixing
30-4.03F(1) General Requirements
The overlap requirements in section 30-4.03D apply to mixing. With each cut, adjust the
amount of water proportionally to the actual cut width. If an overlap is less than 4
inches, immediately back up and pulverize the deviation along the correct line without
adding water or cement.
Water must be injected through the pulverizing machine. The injection rate of mixing
water must be sufficient to produce the FDR material mixing moisture content described
in the mix design.
Mark where the center of the pulverizing drum stops. Start the following cut on this
alignment at least 2 feet behind the mark.
30-4.03F(2) Lime Mixing
After spreading has been completed, the lime shall be mixed with the pulverized base
material to the depth below the bottom of the asphalt concrete pavement to be
constructed, as shown on the Plans. Mixing shall be performed a minimum of 2 times.
At least one of the 2 mixing operations shall be performed while introducing water into
the pulverized base material-lime mixture through operation of the metering/pump
device on the reclaimer. Water shall be added as necessary to provide a moisture
content of at least 3 percent above the optimum moisture content of the pulverized base
material-lime mixture.
Any remaining untreated pulverized base material around or attached to manholes,
valves, vaults, survey monuments or other structures; adjacent or attached to curbs and
gutters; or in areas inaccessible by the reclaimer shall be removed to the depth mixed,
and replaced with the pulverized base material-lime mixture.
30-4.03F(3) Mellowing and Final Mixing (Lime)
The pulverized base material-lime mixture shall be allowed to cure or “mellow” in an un-
compacted state for a period of no less than 16 hours unless otherwise specified in the
mix design or approved by the Engineer. During the mellowing periods, the moisture
content of the mixture shall be maintained above the optimum moisture content. In no
case shall initial and final mixing be performed in the same day.
After the required mellowing period and prior to spreading cement, the pulverized base
material-lime mixture shall be re-mixed. Mixing operation shall be performed in such a
manner as to produce a uniformly blended mixture of lime, water, and pulverized base
material free of streaks and pockets of lime.
Subsequent to the addition of water, sufficient passes of the reclaimer shall be made as
necessary to produce a uniformly treated material. Uniformity will be determined initially
by sampling and testing at variable depths and locations within the mixture. The number
of passes required may be adjusted based upon subsequent sampling and testing.
The depth of mixing shall not vary more than 0.1 foot from the specified depth at any
point. Mixing to a depth that exceeds the specified depth by 10 percent or more shall be
Page 454 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
17
considered as evidence of an inadequate amount of lime and additional lime shall be
added at the Contractor’s expense.
No color reaction of the treated material, exclusive of 1 inch or larger clods, when tested
with the standard phenolphthalein alcohol indicator, will be considered evidence of
inadequate mixing.
Final mixing shall continue until the pulverized base material-lime mixture, exclusive of
rock or aggregate, conforms to the following gradation when testing in accordance with
ASTM C136:
Sieve Size: 1 inch. Percent Passing: 98 min.
Sieve Size: No. 4. Percent Passing: 65 min.
30-4.03F(4) Cement Mixing
Mixing shall be performed in a series of passes parallel to the centerline of the roadway
such that transverse and longitudinal construction joints are minimized. The full depth of
the pulverized base material shall be mixed with cement a minimum of 2 times. At least
1 of the 2 mixing shall be done with introducing water into the pulverized base material
through the metering device on the reclaimer. Water shall be added to the pulverized
base material during mixing to provide a moisture content not less than 1 percentage
point below nor more than 2 percentage points above the optimum moisture content of
the pulverized base material mixture.
Any remaining untreated material around or attached to manholes, valves, vaults,
survey monuments or other structures; adjacent or attached to curbs and gutters; or in
areas inaccessible by the reclaimer shall be removed to the depth mixed, and replaced
with lime and cement base material mixture.
Before compacting, remove solids larger than 3 inches in any dimension by hand.
30-4.03G Compacting and Grading
Immediately after pulverizing and mixing, compact FDR to the minimum relative
compaction. Do not allow more than 2 hours between final mixing of the pulverized
material with cement and completion of compaction with vibratory steel drum rollers.
During grading and final compaction with vibratory steel drum rollers, add water to
maintain the mixing moisture content as described in the mix design.
If the established grade will cause noncompliance with the thickness requirements,
notify the Engineer.
30-4.03H Finishing
The finished FDR surface must not vary more than 0.05 foot from the lower edge of a
12-foot straight edge laid in directions parallel and perpendicular to the centerline.
Immediately after compaction, apply water and roll with pneumatic-tired rollers or steel
drum roller with no vibration. The finished surface must be free of ruts, bumps,
indentations, segregation, raveling, and any loose material.
Page 455 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
18
Keep the compacted surface damp by lightly watering until asphaltic emulsion is
applied.
During the period from 48 to 72 hours after compaction, microcrack the surface by
applying 3 single passes with a 12-ton vibratory steel drum roller at maximum amplitude
travelling from 2 to 3 mph, regardless of whether asphaltic emulsion has been applied.
Apply a coat of asphaltic emulsion to the finished surface when it is damp but free of
standing water. The application rate of asphaltic emulsion must be from 0.15 to 0.25
gal/sq yd. Do not water after applying asphaltic emulsion. Do not open to traffic without
authorization.
While open to traffic and before placing HMA, maintain the FDR surface free of ruts,
bumps, indentations, raveling, and segregation. Repair damaged FDR material with
minor HMA.
Take cores to determine the finished FDR thickness before placing HMA.
If a core indicates FDR thickness is less than the specified thickness by more than 0.05
foot, core in the vicinity of the noncompliant core to determine the extent of the deficient
thickness. Remove the FDR material deficient in thickness by cold planing to a depth of
0.2 foot below the finished FDR grade. Replace the planed FDR with the HMA specified
for the project and compact under the method compaction specifications in section 39-
1.03.
Immediately before placing HMA, apply asphaltic emulsion at a rate from 0.03 to 0.05
percent residual binder content.
Do not place HMA until authorized.
30-4.04 Curing Time
The contractor must account for the curing time required for the treated base layer during
the Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) process. The curing period for cement or lime
stabilization additives must be observed as per the specified requirements. The curing
time must be based on the stabilizing agent, environmental conditions, and mix design.
The contractor must anticipate potential delays due to curing time, which may range from
7 to 28 days, and plan the project timeline accordingly. In colder conditions, curing times
may extend beyond this range.
30-4.05 Dust Control
The contractor must implement dust control measures during the curing phase of the
treated base, particularly when lime or cement stabilization agents are used. Prior to the
start of construction, the contractor must submit a Construction Phasing Plan and a Dust
Control Plan for approval. These plans must detail specific strategies for dust
suppression, including, but not limited to, regular watering, the use of dust suppressants,
and the installation of physical barriers. The contractor must ensure that dust control
measures are effectively implemented throughout the duration of the project to minimize
health and environmental impacts.
Page 456 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
19
30-4.06 Utility Verification and Protection
Bridge Crossing at Tank Farm and Hollyhock:
Shallow utilities exist at the bridge crossing on Tank Farm at Hollyhock. The
contractor must pothole and verify the depth of all existing utilities within 20 feet of
the bridge to ensure proper coordination of the work. The contractor must also take
necessary precautions to avoid damaging the bridge during grinding operations to
remove the Hot Mix Asphalt (HMA) surface. The depth of the existing HMA surface
over the bridge is approximately 3 inches, and the contractor must limit grinding
operations to avoid damage to the bridge structure. After grinding, the contractor
must remove and replace the HMA to meet the existing profile and cross-section
of the roadway.
Traffic Signal Conduits at Broad and Tank Farm Intersection:
Traffic signal conduits exist at the intersection of Broad and Tank Farm. The
contractor must locate these conduits and verify their depth prior to performing any
work in the area to prevent damage to the signal infrastructure.
8" Water Main Crossing Tank Farm from Sunrose and Morning Glory:
The contractor must pothole and verify the exact depth of the 8" water main
crossing Tank Farm from Sunrose to Morning Glory. The contractor must take all
necessary precautions to protect this utility during construction and ensure that no
damage occurs.
No Pulverization within 12 Inches of Existing Utilities:
No pulverization work is allowed within 12 inches vertically of any existing utilities.
In areas with shallow utilities, the contractor will only be required to complete an
8.5-inch mill and fill operation to protect these utilities. The contractor must ensure
that the milling depth in such areas does not exceed this limit to prevent damage
to existing infrastructure.
30-4.07 Payment
Full depth reclamation– lime and cement is measured by the square yardage of FDR.
The contract price for Full Depth Reclamation with lime and cement includes full
compensation for furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment, and incidentals, and
for doing the work involved in all pulverizing and mixing of the existing pavement; for
spreading and mixing lime and cement, compacting and trimming to the proper grade,
for all microcracking, curing, protection and sealing, and furnishing and applying
asphaltic emulsion, all as shown on the plans as specified in the Standard
Specifications and these special provisions and as directed by the engineer.
Lime for Full Depth Reclamation shall be paid for by the ton separately from Full Depth
Reclamation.
Cement for Full Depth Reclamation shall be paid for by the ton separately from Full
Depth Reclamation.
Page 457 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
20
The quantity of lime and cement is subject to increased or decreased compensation and
will be the difference between the specified theoretical quantity of lime and cement and
the quantity of lime and cement used.
Potholing of utilities, as required for verification of utility depths and protection of existing
infrastructure, will be paid for by the lump sum potholing bid item as specified in the bid
item list. Additionally, no extra compensation will be allowed for any intermittent
operations, delays, or adjustments to paving activities that may arise due to the shallow
depth of utilities identified through the potholing process. The contractor is responsible
for planning and executing the work to minimize disruptions but will not be entitled to any
compensation beyond the lump sum bid item for potholing activities. In addition, the
contractor will be liable for repairing any utilities damaged during paving operations if they
fail to accurately identify the location of existing utilities.
DIVISION V SURFACINGS AND PAVEMENTS
39 ASPHALT CONCRETE
Add to Section 39-1.0A GENERAL, Summary
Contractor must phase milling and pavement operations such that public traffic is not
directed to traverse milled surfaces, including remaining asphalt or base material.
Contractor must submit phasing plan for review and approval.
Add to Section 39-1.02B MATERIALS, Tack Coat
All vertical edges and surfaces to be paved against shall be tack coated. These include,
but are not limited to, curb faces, gutter lips, swale edges, cross gutter edges, and asphalt
concrete edges.
Replace Section 39-1.02F MATERIALS, Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) with:
Asphalt concrete with 25% RAP may be used for paving operations.
Add to Section 39-1.03 HOT MIX ASPHALT DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
Mix voids to be targeted at 4.0%. TSR to be minimum 70 in accordance with CTM 371.
Add to Section 39-6 Payment
Payment to remove and replace hot mix asphalt dike shall include full compensation for
furnishing all labor, materials, tools, equipment and incidentals, and for doing all work
involved in removing the existing HMA dike and replacing the dike, complete and in place,
as specified in the Standard Specifications and these Special Provisions and as directed
by the engineer.
Page 458 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
21
DIVISION VIII MISCELLANEOUS CONSTRUCTION
73 CONCRETE CURBS AND SIDEWALKS
Add to Section 73-1.03 CONSTRUCTION
You must meet with the Engineer for an average of 1.5 hours total per ramp to complete
the following coordination tasks:
1. Before saw-cutting to agree on the limits of demolition and removal.
2. After formwork is set, to verify that grades meet those stated on the Plans.
3. Upon completion of new curb ramp installation to verify finished grades.
Curb ramps have been designed to comply with the current Caltrans Standard Plan detail
RSP A88A and City Std. 4440. Field modifications to the design plans, if approved by the
Engineer, must meet the dimensional and slope requirements of Standard Plan RSP
A88A. When measuring the ADA facility’s dimensions and slopes, consider the required
dimension or slope to have been met if the recorded individual measurements comply
with the following:
• Dimensional measurement does not exceed ½-inch from the dimension shown,
i.e. ½-inch less than a minimum dimension, or ½-inch greater than a maximum
dimension.
• Slope measurement does not exceed 0.2 percent from the slope shown.
You must give the City a 24-hour notice for inspection of formwork before pouring the
concrete.
You must calibrate all levels used in construction at the beginning of each work day.
You must ensure that new ramp flowlines do not create any "ponding" areas.
You cannot saw-cut and demolish more than 2 corners at any given intersection in order
to allow pedestrian travel.
Curb ramp spandrel design may vary from Engineering Standards, as directed by the
Engineer, in order to accommodate ramp landing.
You are responsible for storing existing signs and boxes for reuse.
Add to Section 73-1.04 PAYMENT
As shown on the bid item list, each new Curb Ramp will be paid in lump sum for all work
shown on the plans for the individual corner/section. The lump sum price includes all work
shown on the Plans, as specified in the Standard Specifications and these Special
Provisions. It also includes work for:
1. public notices
2. layout
3. elevation control
4. saw-cutting
Page 459 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
22
5. demolition
6. removal and disposal of demolished material
7. formwork
8. installation of ramps, driveway, sidewalk, pavers, curb and gutter.
9. furnishing and installation of new signs, post and sleeves
10. furnishing and installation of guide rail edge protection
11. temporary cold mix
12. adjustment of existing utility boxes, covers, vaults, etc.
13. removal of existing traffic signal detector boxes
14. removal of existing and installation of new traffic signal pull boxes
15. removal of existing and installation of new water meter boxes
16. removal of existing and installation of new sidewalk underdrain
17. tree protection and tree well installation
18. repair of existing irrigation systems, if damaged & modifications as needed
19. landscape replacement, if applicable
20. protection of existing utilities and restoration of existing improvements
21. protection and restoration of existing benchmarks and survey monuments
22. cleanup
Payment for varying widths of “paveouts” shown on plans are included in the applicable
Curb Ramp lump sum price. Remove and replace AC over PCC pavement per Eng. Std.
4110 & 6020.
Full compensation for concrete cross gutters is paid on a square footage basis as shown
in the bid item list and is identified as the portion of the cross gutter between gutter
spandrels.
“Additional Allowance Bid Items” are intended for field changes and additions to work
shown on the plans. The intent of the additional items is to provide additional payment to
conform specified work to existing field conditions on a per unit price basis. Sections 9 -
1.06B and 9-1.06C are waived for these bid items and you are advised that these bid
items may be increased, decreased or deleted in their entirety without any additional
compensation.
77 LOCAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Add to Section 77-1.01 EXCAVATION AND RESTORATION, GENERAL;
Protection and restoration of survey monuments and benchmarks must comply with
Section 5-1.26 and 5-1.36.
DIVISION IX TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
84 MARKINGS
Add to Section 84-2.01A GENERAL, Summary with:
Traffic Striping to be applied shall be per Caltrans Revised Standard Plans 2015.
Page 460 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
23
See Section 84-2.04 of the City Standard Specifications for payment of traffic striping.
Contractor shall layout all temporary and permanent striping and get approval from the
Engineer prior to installing.
Unless otherwise approved by the Engineer, contractor shall install temporary reflective
tape to any existing crosswalks prior to opening to traffic.
New crosswalk markings shall not be installed until all crosswalk warning signage and
flashing beacon systems (if applicable) are installed and operational. Otherwise,
temporary signage must be installed to convey “CROSSWALK CLOSED” to the
satisfaction of the engineer.
Replace Section 84-2.03C CONSTRUCTION, Application of Stripes and Markings
with:
Final Stripes and Pavement Markings must not begin before 5 calendar days and
completed no later than 15 calendar days after placement of asphalt concrete. You must
provide the Engineer a minimum two working day notice to review, modify and approve
striping layout prior placing the final striping. Unless prior approval is obtained for the
Engineer, you will be assessed Liquidated Damages in the amount of $500 per calendar
day for each day’s failure to complete striping and pavement markings within this
specified time.
New stripes and markings must be protected from damage until completely dry. Curb
markings must be paint not thermoplastic.
Add to Section 84-2.04 Payment with:
Bike lane buffer is measured along the linear foot and accounts for all striping and cross
hatching regardless of width of buffer.
Details containing white pavement markings and green pavement paint (bicycle turn box,
greenback sharrow, etc.) will be paid per detail and no additional compensations will be
allowed.
Green bike lane markings (Case 1, 2, & 3) paid by the linear foot include bike lane symbol,
green pavement coating, white markings and striping and no additional compensation will
be allowed.
Unless otherwise mentioned above, green bike lane coating is measured by the square
foot for the area applied.
Add Section 84-6 BIKE LANE MARKINGS
Add Section 84-6.01 Bike Lane Coatings:
Bike lane coating must be SealMaster Safe Ride (Appendix B) or City-approved equal.
Page 461 of 625
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
24
Prior to installation of green bike lane coating, the contractor shall submit a color sample
and manufacturer specifications to the City for approval. Per manufacturer's
specifications, SealMaster Safe Ride installation must include application of two coats
minimum, with three coats provided at high traffic/wear locations (at intersection conflict
areas).
Replace Section 84-9.04 EXISTING MARKINGS, Payment
Full compensation for work specified in Section 84 and applicable Engineering Standards
is included in the payment for other bid items unless a bid item of work is shown on the
Bid Item List.
DIVISION X ELECTRICAL WORK
86 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS
Add Section 86-1.08 RRFB PAYMENT:
As shown on the bid item list, installation of the Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon
(RRFB) systems will be paid by Lump Sum per the limits shown on the plans at each
intersection. The lump sum unit price must include furnishing and installation of all
equipment needed for the operation of beacon system as shown on the plans and
specified in the Standard Specifications and these Special Provisions. Unless otherwise
indicated on plans, each beacon system includes, but is not limited to:
1. Solar engine kit
2. Beacon light bars
3. Battery system
4. Pushbuttons
5. Pushbutton frame and sign placards
6. Mounting hardware
7. Electrical conductors/wiring
Punch posts and signage to be installed at each beacon location are included as
individual bid items.
DIVISION XIII APPENDICES
ADD SECTION 100 APPENDICES
Add Section 100-1.01 GENERAL:
1. Appendix A - Form of Agreement
2. Appendix B - SealMaster Safe Ride Data Sheet
3. Appendix C – Pavement Evaluation Report
4. Appendix D - Full Depth Reclamation Mix Design
Page 462 of 625
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
0
APPENDIX A - FORM OF AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on _____________, by and between the City of San Luis
Obispo, a municipal corporation and charter city, San Luis Obispo County, California
(hereinafter called the Owner) and COMPANY NAME (hereinafter called the Contractor).
WITNESSETH:
That the Owner and the Contractor for the consideration stated herein agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1, SCOPE OF WORK: The Contractor shall perform everything required to be
performed, shall provide and furnish all of the labor, materials, necessary tools,
expendable equipment, and all utility and transportation services required to complete all
the work of construction of
NAME OF PROJECT, SPEC NO.
in strict compliance with the plans and specifications therefor, including any and all
Addenda, adopted by the Owner, in strict compliance with the Contract Documents
hereinafter enumerated.
It is agreed that said labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services shall be furnished and
said work performed and completed under the direction and supervision and subject to the
approval of the Owner or its authorized representatives.
ARTICLE II, CONTRACT PRICE: The Owner shall pay the Contractor as full consideration
for the faithful performance of this Contract, subject to any additions or deductions as
provided in the Contract Documents, the contract prices as follows:
Item
No.
Item Unit of
Measure
Estimated
Quantity
Item Price
(in figures)
Total
(in figures)
1.
2.
3.
BID TOTAL: $ .00
Payments are to be made to the Contractor in compliance with and subject to the provisions
embodied in the documents made a part of this Contract.
Should any dispute arise respecting the true value of any work omitted, or of any extra work
which the Contractor may be required to do, or respecting the size of any payment to the
Contractor, during the performance of this Contract, said dispute shall be decided by the
Owner and its decision shall be final, and conclusive.
Page 463 of 625
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
1
ARTICLE III, COMPONENT PARTS OF THIS CONTRACT: The Contract consists of the
following documents, all of which are as fully a part thereof as if herein set out in full, and if
not attached, as if hereto attached:
1. Notice to Bidders and Information for Bidders
2. Standard Specifications and Engineering Standards
3. Special Provisions, any Addenda, Plans and Contract Change Orders
4. Caltrans Standard Specifications and Standard Plans 2015
5. Accepted Bid and Bid Bond
6. List of Subcontractors
7. Public Contract Code Sections 10285.1 Statement
8. Public Contract Code Section 10162 Questionnaire
9. Public Contract Code Section 10232 Statement
10. Labor Code Section 1725.5 Statements
11. Bidder Acknowledgements
12. Qualifications
13. Non-collusion Declaration
14. Agreement and Bonds
15. Insurance Requirements and Forms
ARTICLE IV INDEMNIFICATION: The Contractor shall indemnify, defend with legal
counsel approved by City, and hold harmless City, its officers, officials, employees and
volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, cost (including without
limitation reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of
litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the Contractor’s negligence,
recklessness or willful misconduct in the performance of work hereunder or its failure to
comply with any of its obligations contained in this Agreement, except such loss or damage
which is caused by the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the City. Should
conflict of interest principles preclude a single legal counsel from representing both the City
and the Contractor, or should the City otherwise find the Contractor’s legal counsel
unacceptable, then the Contractor shall reimburse the City its costs of defense, including
without limitation reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of
litigation. The Contractor shall promptly pay any final judgment rendered against the City
(and its officers, officials, employees and volunteers) with respect to claims determined by
a trier of fact to have been the result of the Contractor’s negligent, reckless or wrongful
performance. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are
intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California
and will survive termination of this Agreement.
The Contractor obligations under this section apply regardless of whether such claim,
charge, damage, demand, action, proceeding, loss, stop notice, cost, expense, judgment,
civil fine or penalty, or liability was caused in part or contributed to by an Indemnitee.
However, without affecting the rights of the City under any provision of this agreement, the
Contractor shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless the City for liability
attributable to the active negligence of City, provided such active negligence is determined
by agreement between the parties or by the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. In
Page 464 of 625
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
2
instances where the City is shown to have been actively negligent and where the City’s
active negligence accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved, the obligation of
the Contractor will be for that entire portion or percentage of liability not attributable to the
active negligence of the City.
ARTICLE V. It is further expressly agreed by and between the parties hereto that should
there be any conflict between the terms of this instrument and the bid of said Contractor,
then this instrument shall control and nothing herein shall be considered as an acceptance
of the said terms of said bid conflicting herewith.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to these presents have hereunto set their hands this
year and date first above written.
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
A Municipal Corporation
__________________________________
Whitney McDonald, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM CONTRACTOR:
Name of Company
________________________________
By:________________________________
J. Christine Dietrick
City Attorney
Name of CAO/President
Its: CAO/PRESIDENT
(2nd signature required if Corporation):
By:________________________________
Name of Corporate Officer
Its: ____________________
Page 465 of 625
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
3
APPENDIX B – SEALMASTER SAFE RIDE DATA SHEET
Page 466 of 625
Page 467 of 625
Page 468 of 625
Page 469 of 625
Page 470 of 625
Page 471 of 625
Page 472 of 625
Page 473 of 625
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
4
APPENDIX C – PAVEMENT EVALUATION REPORT
Page 474 of 625
3$9(0(17(9$/8$7,21
6(59,&(6
for
&,7<2)6$1/8,62%,632
5RDGZD\3DYLQJ3URMHFW
9DULRXV6WUHHWV
Page 475 of 625
December 4, 2024 Project No. 240140
Hai Nguyen, PE
City of San Luis Obispo
919 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218
Subject: Deflection Analysis for the 2025 Roadway Paving Project in the City of
San Luis Obispo
Dear Hai:
In accordance with your request, we have completed the pavement deflection analysis
for the subject project and are herein providing our findings and recommendations.
INTRODUCTION
Our field work consisted of deflection testing using our falling weight pavement
deflection testing device in general accordance with CTM 356, coring to measure the
existing pavement thickness, and a visual condition survey. This work was performed
by Brett Long, Carlos Cardona, and Justin Custer of PEI’s staff. Visual evaluations
were performed by Steven Holm of PEI’s engineering staff. The traffic indexes used in
this analysis were provided by the City of San Luis Obispo.
We have summarized our analysis on the deflection summary sheets for the street
segments following this report. Included on the summary sheets is the coring data for
existing pavement thickness, visual condition survey, deflection test results analysis,
and rehabilitation recommendations.
ANALYSIS
The rehabilitation alternatives have been designed using structural requirements from
the deflection analysis contained in CTM 356, reflective cracking criteria, and the visual
condition survey. Reflection cracking requirements are determined as a minimum of
one-half the bonded layer section per current Caltrans recommendations for reflective
cracking. Engineering judgment and experience has been used in applying these
criteria to the individual street segments.
The rehabilitation alternatives evaluated in this analysis include HMA and RHMA
overlays, milling and replacement with HMA, and Partial Depth Recycling (PDR).
Reconstruction alternatives are also provided including Full Depth Reclamation (FDR),
Full Depth HMA, and HMA over aggregate base.
Page 476 of 625
Hai Nguyen, PE
December 4, 2024
Project No. 240140
Page 2
OVERLAYS
The recommended overlays must meet both the structural requirements from the
deflection analysis and reflective cracking requirements. The minimum recommended
overlay thickness is 1-3/4 inches to ensure that the HMA can be properly compacted.
For HMA overlays, typically a HMA leveling course is recommended if pavement fabric
is placed. The leveling course provides a uniform surface and fills cracks to ensure the
fabric is bonded properly to the overlay. Pavement fabric is not typically recommended
unless needed to reduce the overlay thickness required for reflective cracking.
PEI recommends placing a leveling course under RHMA overlays. The leveling course
helps provide a uniform surface for placing the RHMA to ensure the thickness of the
RHMA overlay. Minimum thickness for RHMA overlays is critical for compaction.
MILLING AND REPLACEMENT
Milling and replacement is generally recommended when overlay requirements for
reflective cracking exceed 3-1/2 inches and are structurally adequate by deflection.
Overlays which exceed 3-1/2 inches are not usually feasible due to geometric
constraints.
Mill and replacement alternatives allow for resurfacing the pavement to match the
existing profile. This alternative can also reduce the lift thickness to meet reflective
cracking requirements if the pavement is structurally adequate. The expected
pavement life for milling and replacing is like an overlay. Milling and replacement is a
green alternative also, because asphalt suppliers use the removed asphalt in Rap
(recycled asphalt pavement) mixes if fabric is not present.
PEI does not recommend Milling and Replacement when the pavement is less than 5
inches thick. Construction traffic can cause significant failures in pavements that are
milled and leave less than 3 inches.
PARTIAL DEPTH RECYCLING (PDR)
PDR is an option when pavements are structurally adequate or slightly structurally
deficient. It can be especially useful when pavements are thick (greater than 6 inches).
PDR helps reduce crack history in thicker pavement and provides a green approach by
using existing materials. PDR consists of either an emulsion process or a foaming
process. The cold foam process can include mixing aggregate base with asphalt
concrete.
Page 477 of 625
Hai Nguyen, PE
December 4, 2024
Project No. 240140
Page 3
RECONSTRUCTION
Reconstruction can consist of various alternatives including Full Depth HMA, HMA over
aggregate base, or Full Depth Reclamation (FDR). Full Depth HMA is the fastest for
construction but typically has higher costs than other reconstruction alternatives. FDR
HMA can be a cost-effective approach but takes much longer to construct than HMA.
HMA over aggregate base has a lower cost than Full Depth HMA but has significant
impact on the public due to the slower construction process.
FDR involves treating the existing base and soil with either cement or lime depending
on the makeup of the materials. FDR is a green alternative because it uses existing
materials and reduces the amount of imported materials.
PROJECT ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OVERVIEW
The street segments that were evaluated for this project are as follows:
Location 1:
x Calle Joaquin – Motel 6 to City Limits
x Industrial Way – Broad Street to East End
x Sacramento Drive – Via Esteban to Industrial Way
Location 2:
x Tank Farm Road – South Higuera to East City Limits
x Tank Farm Road – West City Limits to Broad Street
x Tank Farm Road – Broad Street to Righetti Ranch Road
x Tank Farm Road – Righetti Ranch Road to Wavertree Street
x Orcutt Road – Spanish Oaks Drive to City Limits
Location 3:
x Broad Street – Sweeney Lane to Tank Farm Road
Location 4:
x Foothill Boulevard – California Boulevard to City Limits
These roadways are classified as arterials with higher design traffic indexes (9.5). Most
of the R-values tested were less than 20. The recommendations for each section vary
based on existing structural section thicknesses and structural requirements by
deflection analysis.
Page 478 of 625
Hai Nguyen, PE
December 4, 2024
Project No. 240140
Page 4
PEI evaluated multiple alternatives for rehabilitating the pavements. The estimated
design life of each recommended alternative is provided in the following table:
Proposed Treatment Expected Service Life
HMA and RHMA Overlays 7-12 years
Milling and Replacement 7-12 years
Partial Depth Recycling (PDR) 7-12 years
Full Depth Reclamation (FDR) 15-20 years
Full Depth HMA 15-20 years
HMA Over Aggregate Base 15-20 years
Each alternative should be evaluated by the design engineer for cost, constructability,
and impact on the public during construction.
The Deflection Summary Sheets following this report provide the coring data, deflection
data, and visual condition evaluations used in PEI’s analysis. The recommended repair
strategies have been provided for rehabilitation alternatives. Following the summary
sheets are the deflection data print outs, R-values and photos.
MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION
HMA recommended for leveling courses less than 1 inch should be constructed using
3/8-inch maximum HMA or #4 mix. The leveling course should be rolled and
compacted with an 8 to 12 ton pneumatic-tire roller.
HMA with thicknesses of 1 to 2 inches should be constructed using 1/2-inch maximum
HMA. HMA layer thicknesses greater than 2 inches can be constructed with either 1/2
or 3/4-inch maximum HMA.
RHMA should be constructed with 3/8 inches maximum aggregate for overlays less
than 2 inches and 1/2-inch maximum size aggregate for overlays greater than or equal
to 2 inches.
All HMA and RHMA work should be placed in accordance with Caltrans 2010 Section
39 using the standard process or Caltrans 2018 Section 39 that is modified for
City/County work.
Page 479 of 625
Page 480 of 625
CALLE JOAQUIN
Motel 6 near Los Osos Valley Road to City Limits
Page 481 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Calle Joaquin
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley Road) to City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
VISUAL CONDITIONS
The pavement exhibits block shrinkage cracking and moderate to severe alligator cracking.
Numerous areas of alligator cracking have progressed to base failures in both directions. There
is also some subsidence cracking along the pavement edge. Previous maintenance includes
pavement repairs and slurry sealing.
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 5 to 6-1/2 inches of asphalt concrete over 7 to 10 inches of
aggregate base. There is 4 to 5 inches of a sandy subbase underneath the aggregate base.
PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was present in the asphalt concrete layer. The native
soils are brown sandy clays with R-values ranging from 13 to 15.
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
AB Layer
(Inches)
ASB Layer
(Inches) R-value
1 SB – 470’ from COP @ Motel 6 5 No 10 4 15
2 NB – 875’ from COP @ Motel 6 6-1/2 No 8 5 ---
3 SB -- 1250’ from COP @ Motel 6 6 No 7 4 13
4 NB -- 1700’ from COP @ Motel 6 5 No 7 5 ---
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
NB 9.5 13.0 41.2 6-1/2
SB 9.5 13.0 35.1 5-3/4
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
1-3/4 Yes
Page 482 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally deficient by 6-1/2 inches of HMA.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for full depth reclamation (FDR) and
reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA over aggregate base. Overlaying with HMA and
RHMA, milling and replacement and partial depth recycling (PDR) are not recommended
because of structural deficiency.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlay Options
Overlaying with HMA and RHMA are not recommended because of structural deficiency.
Milling and Replacement Option
Milling and replacement is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
Partial depth recycling (PDR) is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 8 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and subbase with cement to a depth of 16 inches and placing 8 inches of new HMA in
3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of 300 psi.
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 14 inches and placing 14 inches of HMA in 5 lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 483 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
20 10.95 29.57 61.28 13.78
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.50 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 41.15 47.21 68.41 1.03
HMA Overlay
0.54
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
NB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Calle Joaquin
City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
Page 484 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Calle Joaquin
City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley
NB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
113' from City Limits
206' from City Limits
302' from City Limits
409' from City Limits
504' from City Limits
606' from City Limits
705' from City Limits
828' from City Limits
934' from City Limits
1039' from City Limits
1117' from City Limits
1217' from City Limits
1306' from City Limits
1420' from City Limits
1506' from City Limits
1608' from City Limits
1700' from City Limits
1801' from City Limits
1909' from City Limits
1971' from City Limits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 485 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 10.95 10.950
2 16.30 16.300
3 35.88 35.880
4 36.54 36.540
5 26.10 26.100
6 13.85 13.850
7 15.32 15.320
8 23.15 23.150
9 29.92 29.920
10 43.56 43.560
11 11.45 11.450
12 38.45 38.450
13 39.15 39.150
14 61.28 61.280
15 28.66 28.660
16 26.70 26.700
17 38.15 38.150
18 11.39 11.390
19 36.91 36.910
20 47.67 47.670
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley Rd)
NB
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Calle Joaquin
100'
934' from City Limits
1039' from City Limits
504' from City Limits
1506' from City Limits
1608' from City Limits
409' from City Limits
705' from City Limits
1117' from City Limits
1217' from City Limits
1306' from City Limits
1420' from City Limits
828' from City Limits
113' from City Limits
206' from City Limits
302' from City Limits
1700' from City Limits
1801' from City Limits
606' from City Limits
1909' from City Limits
1971' from City Limits
Page 486 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
20 6.12 26.26 49.89 10.55
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.50 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 35.12 39.76 62.99 0.91
HMA Overlay
0.48
SB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Calle Joaquin
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 487 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Calle Joaquin
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley
City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
SB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
117' from Motel 6
223' from Motel 6
324' from Motel 6
410' from Motel 6
522' from Motel 6
624' from Motel 6
731' from Motel 6
831' from Motel 6
903' from Motel 6
1017' from Motel 6
1137' from Motel 6
1224' from Motel 6
1320' from Motel 6
1423' from Motel 6
1511' from Motel 6
1620' from Motel 6
1718' from Motel 6
1816' from Motel 6
1898' from Motel 6
1958' from Motel 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 488 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 23.60 23.600
2 11.52 11.520
3 27.67 27.670
4 25.35 25.350
5 40.43 40.430
6 49.89 49.890
7 41.56 41.560
8 6.12 6.120
9 15.77 15.770
10 21.83 21.830
11 26.61 26.610
12 25.95 25.950
13 17.07 17.070
14 20.16 20.160
15 32.60 32.600
16 35.15 35.150
17 35.06 35.060
18 25.04 25.040
19 21.52 21.520
20 22.39 22.390
522' from Motel 6
1511' from Motel 6
1620' from Motel 6
410' from Motel 6
731' from Motel 6
1137' from Motel 6
1224' from Motel 6
1320' from Motel 6
1423' from Motel 6
831' from Motel 6
117' from Motel 6
223' from Motel 6
324' from Motel 6
1718' from Motel 6
1816' from Motel 6
624' from Motel 6
1898' from Motel 6
1958' from Motel 6
903' from Motel 6
1017' from Motel 6
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Calle Joaquin
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Motel 6 (S/O Los Osos Valley Rd)
City Limits (Near KSBY 6)
SB
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Page 489 of 625
Laboratory No.:L244050
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:November 20, 2024
Report Date:November 27, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C1, Calle Joaquin
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 17.0 18.0 18.5
Dry Density (PCF) 120.4 118.7 117.7
Resistance Value (R) 24 10 0
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 389 259 157
Expansion Pressure 87 39 0
17.0
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 15
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 490 of 625
Laboratory No.:L244050
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:November 20, 2024
Report Date:November 27, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C3, Calle Joaquin
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 19.2 18.2 19.8
Dry Density (PCF) 115.7 118.1 115.2
Resistance Value (R) 10 22 0
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 266 405 164
Expansion Pressure 43 87 0
19.2
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 13
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 491 of 625
Calle Joaquin @ COP by Motel 6 looking North
Photo 1
Calle Joaquin @ COP by Motel 6 looking South
Photo 2
Page 492 of 625
Calle Joaquin @ 700’ S/O COP looking North
Photo 3
Calle Joaquin @ 700’ S/O COP looking South
Photo 4
Page 493 of 625
Calle Joaquin @ 500’ N/O KSBY looking North
Photo 5
Calle Joaquin @ 500’ N/O KSBY looking South
Photo 6
Page 494 of 625
Calle Joaquin @ KSBY looking North
Photo 7
Calle Joaquin @ KSBY looking South
Photo
Page 495 of 625
ORCUTT ROAD
Spanish Oaks Drive to City Limits
Page 496 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Road
Spanish Oaks Drive to East City Limits
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
VISUAL CONDITIONS
The pavement exhibits moderate block shrinkage cracking and alligator cracking. Some areas
of alligator cracking have progressed to base failures, predominantly in the travel lanes. The
Southbound lane appears to be in worse condition. Previous maintenance includes pavement
repairs.
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
Treated Base
Layer
(inches)
AB Layer
(Inches) R-value
1 EB – 425’ from Spanish Oaks 6 No 15 7 ---
2 WB –760’ from Spanish Oaks 5 No 9 14 ---
3 EB –1250’ from Spanish Oaks 4 No 8 14 ---
4 WB –1575’ from Spanish Oaks 6 No 0 16 18
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
EB 9.5 13.0 13.0 0
WB 9.5 13.0 10.6 0
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
5-1/4 Yes
Page 497 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 4 to 6 inches of asphalt concrete, 0 to 15 inches of treated
base, and 7 to 16 inches of aggregate base. PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was
present in the asphalt concrete layer. The native soil is brown sandy clay with an R-value of 18.
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally adequate.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for milling and replacement, partial depth
recycling (PDR), full depth reclamation (FDR) and reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA
over aggregate base. Overlaying is not recommended because of the high reflective cracking
requirement.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlay Options
Overlaying is not recommended because of the high reflective cracking requirement.
Milling and Replacement Option
HMA
We recommend milling off 3-1/2 inches of the existing pavement, 10-inch pavement repairs of
base failures, placing a 1-inch HMA leveling course, pavement fabric, and a 2-1/2-inch HMA
overlay.
RHMA
We recommend milling off 2 inches of the existing pavement, 6-inch pavement repairs of base
failures and placing a 2-inch RHMA overlay.
This alternative may leave thinner asphalt in some areas. An allowance should be included for
additional pavement repairs since construction traffic may cause failure in the thinner remaining
asphalt layer.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
We recommend partial depth recycling to a depth of 3-1/2 inches and placing a 2-1/2-inch HMA
or RHMA overlay.
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 7-1/2 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and native soil with cement/lime to a depth of 14-1/2 inches and placing 7-1/2 inches of
new HMA in 3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) of 300 psi. ***
***Careful consideration should be given when recommending FDR for this section because of
the existing treated layer.
Page 498 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 14 inches and placing 14 inches of HMA in 5 lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 499 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
18 3.85 8.93 19.99 4.85
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.50 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 13.00 15.14 0.03 0.00
HMA Overlay
0.00
EB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Orcutt Road
Spanish Oaks Drive
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
East City Limits
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 500 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Orcutt Road
Spanish Oaks Drive
East City Limits
EB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
137' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
207' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
326' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
424' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
534' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
632' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
723' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
826' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
913' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1021' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1134' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1248' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1318' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1419' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1539' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1625' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1806' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1822' from Spanish Oaks
Drive
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 501 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 3.85 3.850
2 4.03 4.030
3 5.03 5.030
4 4.02 4.020
5 9.66 9.660
6 8.05 8.050
7 4.54 4.540
8 5.06 5.060
9 4.41 4.410
10 7.81 7.810
11 13.34 13.340
12 6.94 6.940
13 11.25 11.250
14 10.29 10.290
15 19.99 19.990
16 17.59 17.590
17 13.32 13.320
18 11.52 11.520
534' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1539' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1625' from Spanish Oaks Drive
424' from Spanish Oaks Drive
723' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1134' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1248' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1318' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1419' from Spanish Oaks Drive
826' from Spanish Oaks Drive
137' from Spanish Oaks Drive
207' from Spanish Oaks Drive
326' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1806' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1822' from Spanish Oaks Drive
632' from Spanish Oaks Drive
913' from Spanish Oaks Drive
1021' from Spanish Oaks Drive
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Spanish Oaks Drive
East City Limits
EB
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Page 502 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
18 3.44 7.70 14.96 3.42
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.50 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 10.57 12.08 0.00 0.00
HMA Overlay
0.00
WB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Orcutt Road
East City Limits
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Spanish Oaks Drive
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 503 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Orcutt Road
East City Limits
Spanish Oaks Drive
WB
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
108' from East City Limits
234' from East City Limits
312' from East City Limits
402' from East City Limits
500' from East City Limits
623' from East City Limits
718' from East City Limits
815' from East City Limits
913' from East City Limits
1014' from East City Limits
1093' from East City Limits
1211' from East City Limits
1333' from East City Limits
1436' from East City Limits
1538' from East City Limits
1627' from East City Limits
1703' from East City Limits
1806' from East City Limits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 504 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 12.70 12.700
2 12.05 12.050
3 14.96 14.960
4 13.19 13.190
5 8.63 8.630
6 8.47 8.470
7 7.11 7.110
8 5.35 5.350
9 6.61 6.610
10 4.89 4.890
11 6.33 6.330
12 4.65 4.650
13 6.44 6.440
14 5.86 5.860
15 4.69 4.690
16 4.31 4.310
17 3.44 3.440
18 8.85 8.850
500' from East City Limits
1538' from East City Limits
1627' from East City Limits
402' from East City Limits
718' from East City Limits
1093' from East City Limits
1211' from East City Limits
1333' from East City Limits
1436' from East City Limits
815' from East City Limits
108' from East City Limits
234' from East City Limits
312' from East City Limits
1703' from East City Limits
1806' from East City Limits
623' from East City Limits
913' from East City Limits
1014' from East City Limits
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Orcutt Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
East City Limits
Spanish Oaks Drive
WB
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Page 505 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243996
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:November 13, 2024
Report Date:November 21, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C4, Orcutt Road
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 15.5 16.5 17.0
Dry Density (PCF) 120.6 118.6 118.0
Resistance Value (R) 28 14 1
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 405 265 164
Expansion Pressure 87 43 0
15.5
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 18
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 506 of 625
Orcutt Road @ East City Limits (COP) looking South
Photo 1
Orcutt Road @ East City Limits looking North
Photo 2
Page 507 of 625
Orcutt Road @ 1,035’ N/O East City Limits looking South
Photo 3
Orcutt Road @ 1,035’ N/O East City Limits looking North
Photo 4
Page 508 of 625
Orcutt Road @ Spanish Oaks Drive looking South
Photo 5
Orcutt Road @ Spanish Oaks Drive looking North
Photo 6
Page 509 of 625
SACRAMENTO DRIVE
Via Esteban to Industrial Way
Page 510 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Sacramento Drive
Via Esteban to Industrial Way
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
VISUAL CONDITIONS
The pavement exhibits moderate block shrinkage cracking and moderate to severe alligator
cracking. Several areas of alligator cracking have progressed to base failure, predominantly in
the travel lanes. The cracking is more severe in the Northbound lane. Previous pavement
maintenance includes pavement repairs and crack sealing.
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
AB Layer
(Inches) R-value
1 NB – 450’ from Industrial Way 8-1/2 No 0 19
2 SB – 750’ from Industrial Way 7-3/4 No 0 -
3 NB – 1,300’ from Industrial Way 8-1/2 No 0 19
4 SB – 750’ from Industrial Way 7 No 0 -
5 NB – 2,100’ from Industrial Way 3-1/4 No 13 17
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
NB 9.5 13.0 29.0 4-3/4
SB 9.5 13.0 18.3 1-1/2
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
2-3/4 Yes
Page 511 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 3-1/4 to 8-1/2 inches of asphalt concrete over 0 to 13 inches
of aggregate base. PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was present in the asphalt concrete
layer. The native soils are brown sandy clays with R-values ranging from 17 to 19.
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally deficient by 4-3/4 inches of HMA
in the Northbound lane.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for full depth reclamation (FDR) and
reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA over aggregate base. Overlaying, milling and
replacement, and partial depth recycling (PDR) are not recommended because of structural
deficiency.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlaying is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
Milling and Replacement Option
Milling and replacement is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
Partial depth recycling (PDR) is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 7-1/2 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and native soil with cement/lime to a depth of 14-1/2 inches and placing 7-1/2 inches of
new HMA in 3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) of 300 psi.
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 13-1/2 inches and placing 13-1/2 inches of HMA in 5
lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
Page 512 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 513 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
25 2.19 19.11 45.94 11.81
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.58 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 29.03 34.23 55.22 0.75
HMA Overlay
0.39
NB
10/16/24
0.58
9.50
240140
Sacramento Drive
Industrial Way
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Via Esteban
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 514 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Sacramento Drive
Industrial Way
Via Esteban
NB
10/16/24
0.58
9.50
240140
110' from Industrial Way
218' from Industrial Way
323' from Industrial Way
409' from Industrial Way
518' from Industrial Way
620' from Industrial Way
706' from Industrial Way
817' from Industrial Way
915' from Industrial Way
1025' from Industrial Way
1129' from Industrial Way
1215' from Industrial Way
1307' from Industrial Way
1407' from Industrial Way
1514' from Industrial Way
1626' from Industrial Way
1716' from Industrial Way
1811' from Industrial Way
1915' from Industrial Way
2017' from Industrial Way
2139' from Industrial Way
2212' from Industrial Way
2316' from Industrial Way
2413' from Industrial Way
2482' from Industrial Way
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 515 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 8.11 8.110
2 15.62 15.620
3 31.09 31.090
4 45.94 45.940
5 8.83 8.830
6 9.32 9.320
7 16.61 16.610
8 25.06 25.060
9 16.42 16.420
10 18.62 18.620
11 14.06 14.060
12 14.49 14.490
13 2.19 2.190
14 15.64 15.640
15 8.44 8.440
16 6.67 6.670
17 8.22 8.220
18 36.05 36.050
19 37.48 37.480
20 29.80 29.800
21 14.37 14.370
22 4.89 4.890
23 33.62 33.620
24 32.22 32.220
25 24.00 24.000
518' from Industrial Way
2212' from Industrial Way
1514' from Industrial Way
1626' from Industrial Way
409' from Industrial Way
706' from Industrial Way
1129' from Industrial Way
1215' from Industrial Way
1307' from Industrial Way
1407' from Industrial Way
817' from Industrial Way
110' from Industrial Way
218' from Industrial Way
323' from Industrial Way
1716' from Industrial Way
1811' from Industrial Way
620' from Industrial Way
1915' from Industrial Way
2017' from Industrial Way
2139' from Industrial Way
2316' from Industrial Way
2413' from Industrial Way
2482' from Industrial Way
915' from Industrial Way
1025' from Industrial Way
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Sacramento Drive
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Industrial Way
Via Esteban
NB
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.58
9.50
240140
Page 516 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
24 5.66 13.22 32.70 6.03
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.58 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 18.28 20.94 28.89 0.22
HMA Overlay
0.12
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Industrial Way
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
SB
10/16/24
0.58
9.50
240140
Sacramento Drive
Via Esteban
Page 517 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Sacramento Drive
Via Esteban
Industrial Way
SB
10/16/24
0.58
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
118' from Via Esteban
235' from Via Esteban
309' from Via Esteban
424' from Via Esteban
530' from Via Esteban
617' from Via Esteban
718' from Via Esteban
826' from Via Esteban
908' from Via Esteban
1021' from Via Esteban
1142' from Via Esteban
1233' from Via Esteban
1319' from Via Esteban
1433' from Via Esteban
1514' from Via Esteban
1612' from Via Esteban
1724' from Via Esteban
1822' from Via Esteban
1923' from Via Esteban
2011' from Via Esteban
2115' from Via Esteban
2208' from Via Esteban
2320' from Via Esteban
2416' from Via Esteban
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 518 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 17.38 17.380
2 7.15 7.150
3 21.56 21.560
4 16.67 16.670
5 17.63 17.630
6 13.26 13.260
7 10.86 10.860
8 12.80 12.800
9 15.54 15.540
10 12.54 12.540
11 8.09 8.090
12 8.48 8.480
13 10.67 10.670
14 7.17 7.170
15 11.72 11.720
16 20.38 20.380
17 14.98 14.980
18 15.25 15.250
19 32.70 32.700
20 11.18 11.180
21 10.94 10.940
22 8.04 8.040
23 6.54 6.540
24 5.66 5.660
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.58
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Via Esteban
Industrial Way
SB
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Sacramento Drive
100'
2320' from Via Esteban
2416' from Via Esteban
908' from Via Esteban
1021' from Via Esteban
530' from Via Esteban
2208' from Via Esteban
1514' from Via Esteban
1612' from Via Esteban
424' from Via Esteban
718' from Via Esteban
1142' from Via Esteban
1233' from Via Esteban
1319' from Via Esteban
1433' from Via Esteban
826' from Via Esteban
118' from Via Esteban
235' from Via Esteban
309' from Via Esteban
1724' from Via Esteban
1822' from Via Esteban
617' from Via Esteban
1923' from Via Esteban
2011' from Via Esteban
2115' from Via Esteban
Page 519 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243740
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 23, 2024
Report Date:November 4, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C1, Sacramento Drive
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 16.8 17.8 18.3
Dry Density (PCF) 118.5 117.4 116.1
Resistance Value (R) 30 15 2
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 406 265 165
Expansion Pressure 87 43 0
16.8
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 19
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 520 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243740
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 23, 2024
Report Date:November 4, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C3, Sacramento Drive
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 17.8 18.9 19.4
Dry Density (PCF) 118.6 116.8 115.6
Resistance Value (R) 31 14 1
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 389 260 160
Expansion Pressure 87 43 0
17.8
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 19
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 521 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243740
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 23, 2024
Report Date:November 4, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C5, Sacramento Drive
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 17.4 18.4 18.9
Dry Density (PCF) 119.3 117.3 116.3
Resistance Value (R) 28 14 1
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 408 270 168
Expansion Pressure 87 48 0
17.4
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 17
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 522 of 625
Sacramento Drive @ Via Esteban looking North
Photo 1
Sacramento Drive @ Via Esteban looking South
Photo
Page 523 of 625
Sacramento Drive @ Capitolio Way looking North
Photo
Sacramento Drive @ Capitolio Way looking South
Photo
Page 524 of 625
Sacramento Drive @ Ricardo Court looking North
Photo
Sacramento Drive @ Ricard Court looking South
Photo
Page 525 of 625
Sacramento Drive @ UPS Facility looking North
Photo
Sacramento Drive @ UPS Facility looking South
Photo
Page 526 of 625
Sacramento Drive @ Industrial Way looking North
Photo
Sacramento Drive @ Industrial Way looking South
Photo 1
Page 527 of 625
TANK FARM ROAD
South Higuera Street to City Limits and
City Limits to Wavertree Street
Page 528 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
South Higuera Street to East City Limits
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
AB Layer
(Inches) R-value
1 WB2 – 440’ from East City Limits 4-1/4 N 22+ -
2 WB1 – 780’ from East City Limits 5 N 18 -
3 WB2 – 1300’ from East City Limits 7 N 16 20
4 WB1 – 1690’ from East City Limits 5 N 11 9
5 EB2 – 415’ from South Higuera Street 4-1/4 N 15 -
6 EB1 – 850’ from South Higuera Street 6 N 14 -
7 EB2 – 1250’ from South Higuera Street 4-1/2 N 10 -
8 EB1 – 1700’ from South Higuera Street 10 N 3 -
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
EB1 9.5 13.0 18.2 1-1/2
EB2 9.5 15.0 15.4 0
WB1 9.5 15.0 17.2 1/4
WB2 9.5 14.0 22.1 2-1/4
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
1-3/4 Yes
Page 529 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
VISUAL CONDITIONS
Pavement exhibits slight block shrinkage cracking and moderate to severe alligator cracking.
Some areas of alligator cracking have progressed to base failure. The segment between Old
Windmill Lane and Innovation Way appears to have been paved within the last 5 years and
pavement exhibits slight longitudinal cracking. Previous maintenance includes pavement
repairs and crack sealing.
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 4-1/4 to 10 inches of asphalt concrete over 3 to 22+ inches of
aggregate base. PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was present in the asphalt concrete
layer. The native soil is a brown silty clay with R-values ranging from 9 to 20.
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally deficient by 2-1/4 inches of HMA.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for overlaying with HMA and RHMA, full
depth reclamation (FDR) and reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA over aggregate base.
Milling and replacement and partial depth recycling (PDR) are not recommended because of the
structural deficiency.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlay Options
HMA
We recommend 6-inch pavement repairs of base failures, placing a 1/2-inch HMA leveling
course, pavement fabric and placing a 1-3/4-inch HMA overlay.
RHMA
We recommend 6-inch pavement repairs of base failures, placing a 1/2-inch HMA leveling
course and a 1-3/4-inch RHMA overlay.
The pavement should be evaluated for the base failures present. If the amount of base failure
exceeds 10%, then placing overlays may not be cost effective.
Milling and Replacement Option
Milling and replacement is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
Partial Depth Recycling (PDR) is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 8-1/2 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and native soil with cement/lime to a depth of 16 inches and placing 8-1/2 inches of
Page 530 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
new HMA in 3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) of 300 psi.
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 14 inches and placing 14 inches of HMA in 5 lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 531 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
19 4.46 10.61 45.46 9.08
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.67 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 18.24 22.23 28.72 0.22
HMA Overlay
0.12
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
East City Limits
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
EB1
10/16/24
0.67
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
South Higuera Street
Page 532 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
South Higuera Street
East City Limits
EB1
10/16/24
0.67
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
149' from South Higuera
226' from South Higuera
304' from South Higuera
416' from South Higuera
513' from South Higuera
627' from South Higuera
668' from South Higuera
818' from South Higuera
910' from South Higuera
1014' from South Higuera
1114' from South Higuera
1213' from South Higuera
1330' from South Higuera
1432' from South Higuera
1517' from South Higuera
1610' from South Higuera
1691' from South Higuera
1816' from South Higuera
1917' from South Higuera
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 533 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 5.82 5.820
2 6.26 6.260
3 7.04 7.040
4 4.68 4.680
5 5.63 5.630
6 4.46 4.460
7 6.24 6.240
8 11.60 11.600
9 12.57 12.570
10 6.64 6.640
11 45.46 45.460
12 17.68 17.680
13 10.09 10.090
14 12.89 12.890
15 9.06 9.060
16 8.96 8.960
17 10.20 10.200
18 6.51 6.510
19 9.77 9.770
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.67
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
South Higuera Street
East City Limits
EB1
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
910' from South Higuera Street
1014' from South Higuera Street
513' from South Higuera Street
1517' from South Higuera Street
1610' from South Higuera Street
416' from South Higuera Street
668' from South Higuera Street
1114' from South Higuera Street
1213' from South Higuera Street
1330' from South Higuera Street
1432' from South Higuera Street
818' from South Higuera Street
149' from South Higuera Street
226' from South Higuera Street
304' from South Higuera Street
1691' from South Higuera Street
1816' from South Higuera Street
627' from South Higuera Street
1917' from South Higuera Street
Page 534 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
14 8.54 12.98 16.98 2.89
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.38 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
15.00 15.40 16.67 2.61 0.01
HMA Overlay
0.01
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
East City Limits
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
EB2
10/16/24
0.38
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
South Higuera Street
Page 535 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
South Higuera Street
East City Limits
EB2
10/16/24
0.38
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
100' from South Higuera
218' from South Higuera
316' from South Higuera
418' from South Higuera
526' from South Higuera
526' from South Higuera
604' from South Higuera
762' from South Higuera
842' from South Higuera
918' from South Higuera
1013' from South Higuera
1118' from South Higuera
1208' from South Higuera
1294' from South Higuera
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 536 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 11.39 11.390
2 13.31 13.310
3 16.98 16.980
4 16.64 16.640
5 10.16 10.160
6 10.17 10.170
7 8.54 8.540
8 12.32 12.320
9 13.44 13.440
10 10.43 10.430
11 10.74 10.740
12 16.70 16.700
13 14.24 14.240
14 16.61 16.610
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.38
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
South Higuera Street
East City Limits
EB2
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
842' from South Higuera Street
918' from South Higuera Street
526' from South Higuera Street
418' from South Higuera Street
604' from South Higuera Street
1013' from South Higuera Street
1118' from South Higuera Street
1208' from South Higuera Street
1294' from South Higuera Street
762' from South Higuera Street
100' from South Higuera Street
218' from South Higuera Street
316' from South Higuera Street
526' from South Higuera Street
Page 537 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
19 6.77 13.03 25.39 4.93
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.42 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
15.00 17.18 19.35 12.67 0.05
HMA Overlay
0.03
WB1
10/16/24
0.42
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
East City Limits
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
South Higuera Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 538 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Tank Farm Road
East City Limits
South Higuera Street
WB1
10/16/24
0.42
9.50
240140
122' from East City Limits
216' from East City Limits
329' from East City Limits
429' from East City Limits
525' from East City Limits
630' from East City Limits
728' from East City Limits
817' from East City Limits
924' from East City Limits
1020' from East City Limits
1122' from East City Limits
1213' from East City Limits
1360' from East City Limits
1432' from East City Limits
1518' from East City Limits
1628' from East City Limits
1746' from East City Limits
1817' from East City Limits
1895' from East City Limits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 539 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 8.05 8.050
2 12.41 12.410
3 12.77 12.770
4 13.35 13.350
5 14.02 14.020
6 25.39 25.390
7 13.87 13.870
8 12.11 12.110
9 6.77 6.770
10 8.69 8.690
11 10.17 10.170
12 10.97 10.970
13 9.62 9.620
14 8.83 8.830
15 9.60 9.600
16 11.88 11.880
17 17.10 17.100
18 20.25 20.250
19 21.75 21.750
525' from East City Limits
1518' from East City Limits
1628' from East City Limits
429' from East City Limits
728' from East City Limits
1122' from East City Limits
1213' from East City Limits
1360' from East City Limits
1432' from East City Limits
817' from East City Limits
122' from East City Limits
216' from East City Limits
329' from East City Limits
1746' from East City Limits
1817' from East City Limits
630' from East City Limits
1895' from East City Limits
924' from East City Limits
1020' from East City Limits
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
East City Limits
South Higuera Street
WB1
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.42
9.50
240140
Page 540 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
19 7.23 16.64 28.68 6.44
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.47 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
14.00 22.05 24.88 36.50 0.36
HMA Overlay
0.19
WB2
10/16/24
0.47
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
East City Limits
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
South Higuera Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 541 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Tank Farm Road
East City Limits
South Higuera Street
WB2
10/16/24
0.47
9.50
240140
103' from East City Limits
219' from East City Limits
373' from East City Limits
414' from East City Limits
514' from East City Limits
622' from East City Limits
731' from East City Limits
826' from East City Limits
920' from East City Limits
1012' from East City Limits
1114' from East City Limits
1197' from East City Limits
1352' from East City Limits
1430' from East City Limits
1523' from East City Limits
1623' from East City Limits
1716' from East City Limits
1808' from East City Limits
1864' from East City Limits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 542 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 8.82 8.820
2 10.32 10.320
3 21.94 21.940
4 12.33 12.330
5 10.46 10.460
6 13.39 13.390
7 18.94 18.940
8 21.12 21.120
9 22.59 22.590
10 19.34 19.340
11 28.68 28.680
12 25.39 25.390
13 22.14 22.140
14 21.74 21.740
15 11.43 11.430
16 18.92 18.920
17 13.07 13.070
18 7.23 7.230
19 8.22 8.220
514' from East City Limits
1523' from East City Limits
1623' from East City Limits
414' from East City Limits
731' from East City Limits
1114' from East City Limits
1197' from East City Limits
1352' from East City Limits
1430' from East City Limits
826' from East City Limits
103' from East City Limits
219' from East City Limits
373' from East City Limits
1716' from East City Limits
1808' from East City Limits
622' from East City Limits
1864' from East City Limits
920' from East City Limits
1012' from East City Limits
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
East City Limits
South Higuera Street
WB2
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.47
9.50
240140
Page 543 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243752
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 23, 2024
Report Date:November 5, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Sandy Clay
Sample Location:C3, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 14.4 15.4 15.9
Dry Density (PCF) 121.3 119.4 118.0
Resistance Value (R) 32 15 1
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 404 264 164
Expansion Pressure 87 39 0
14.4
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 20
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 544 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243714
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 23, 2024
Report Date:November 1, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Clay
Sample Location:C4, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 18.2 19.2 19.8
Dry Density (PCF) 113.0 110.6 109.7
Resistance Value (R) 18 6 0
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 396 261 159
Expansion Pressure 91 48 0
18.2
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 9
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 545 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
West City Limits to Broad Street
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
AB Layer
(Inches) R-value
9 EB1 – 450’ from West City Limits 7-1/2 No 19 -
10 EB2 – 850’ from West City Limits 6 No 13 12
11 EB1 – 1300’ from West City Limits 7 No 7 -
12 EB2 – 1800’ from West City Limits 6 No 8 22
13 WB1 – 475’ from Broad Street 9-1/2 No 6 -
14 WB1 – 1550’ from Broad Street 8 No 0 -
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
EB1 9.5 13.0 15.3 1/2
EB2 9.5 13.0 17.7 1-1/4
WB 9.5 13.0 16.0 3/4
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
2-1/4 Yes
Page 546 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
VISUAL CONDITIONS
Pavement exhibits slight block shrinkage cracking and moderate to severe alligator cracking.
Some areas of alligator cracking have progressed to base failure. The Eastbound direction
appears to be in worse condition than the Westbound direction. Previous maintenance includes
pavement repairs.
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 6 to 9-1/2 inches of asphalt concrete over 0 to 19 inches of
aggregate base. PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was present in the asphalt concrete
layer. The native soils are brown silty clays with R-values ranging from 12 to 22.
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally deficient by 1-1/4 inches of HMA.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for overlaying with HMA and RHMA,
milling and replacement, Partial depth recycling (PDR), full depth reclamation (FDR) and
reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA over aggregate base.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlay Options
HMA
We recommend 8-inch pavement repairs of base failures, placing a 3/4-inch HMA leveling
course, pavement fabric and placing a 1-3/4-inch HMA overlay.
RHMA
We recommend 8-inch pavement repairs of base failures, placing a 1/2-inch HMA leveling
course and a 1-3/4-inch RHMA overlay.
The pavement should be evaluated for the base failures present. If the amount of base failure
exceeds 10%, then placing overlays may not be cost effective.
Milling and Replacement Option
HMA
We recommend milling off 2-1/2 inches of the existing pavement, 7-inch pavement repairs of
base failures and placing a 2-1/2-inch HMA overlay.
RHMA
We recommend milling off 2-1/2 inches of the existing pavement, 7-inch pavement repairs of
base failures and placing a 2-1/2-inch RHMA overlay.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
We recommend partial depth recycling to a depth of 3 inches, 5-inch pavement repairs of base
failures, and placing a 2-1/2-inch HMA or RHMA overlay.
Page 547 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 8 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and native soil with cement/lime to a depth of 16 inches and placing 8 inches of new
HMA in 3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of
300 psi.
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 14 inches and placing 14 inches of HMA in 5 lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 548 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street to Righetti Ranch Road
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
AB Layer
(Inches) R-value
31 WB2 – 420’ from Righetti Ranch Road 3-1/4 No 17 19
32 WB1 – 1000’ from Righetti Ranch Road 5 No 12 -
33 WB2 – 14500’ from Righetti Ranch Road 7 No 13 14
34 WB1 – 2000’ from Righetti Ranch Road 6 No 11 -
35 WB2 – 2350’ from Righetti Ranch Road 6 No 10 19
36 WB1 – 2800’ from Righetti Ranch Road 5-1/2 No 10-1/2 -
37 EB2 – 440’ from Righetti Ranch Road 4-1/2 No 9 -
38 EB1 – 950’ from Righetti Ranch Road 4-1/4 No 12 -
39 EB2 – 1500’ from Righetti Ranch Road 5-1/4 No 15 -
40 EB1 – 1960’ from Righetti Ranch Road 4 No 13 -
41 EB1 – 2600’ from Righetti Ranch Road 3 No 15 -
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
EB1 9.5 17.0 22.8 1-1/4
EB2 9.5 15.0 17.6 1/2
WB1 9.5 14.0 20.3 1-3/4
WB2 9.5 14.0 18.7 1-1/4
Page 549 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
VISUAL CONDITIONS
Pavement exhibits block shrinkage cracking and moderate to severe alligator cracking. Some
areas of alligator cracking have progressed to base failure. Previous maintenance includes
pavement repairs.
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 3 to 7 inches of asphalt concrete over 9 to 17 inches of
aggregate base. PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was present in the asphalt concrete
layer. The native soils are brown sandy clays with R-values ranging from 14 to 19.
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally deficient by 1-3/4 inches of HMA.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for overlaying with HMA and RHMA, full
depth reclamation (FDR) and reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA over aggregate base.
Milling and replacement and partial depth recycling (PDR) are not recommended because of the
thinner existing asphalt concrete layer and structural deficiency.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlay Options
HMA
We recommend 6-inch pavement repairs of base failures and placing a 2-1/2-inch HMA overlay.
RHMA
We recommend 6-inch pavement repairs of base failures, placing a 1/2-inch HMA leveling
course and a 1-3/4-inch RHMA overlay.
The pavement should be evaluated for the base failures present. If the amount of base failure
exceeds 10%, then placing overlays may not be cost effective.
Milling and Replacement Option
Milling and replacement is not recommended because of the thinner existing pavement layer
and structural deficiency.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
Partial Depth Recycling (PDR) is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
1-3/4 Yes
Page 550 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 8 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and native soil with cement/lime to a depth of 15 inches and placing 8 inches of new
HMA in 3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of
300 psi.
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 13-1/2 inches and placing 13-1/2 inches of HMA in 5
lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 551 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road to Wavertree Street
CORING LOG
STRUCTURAL REQUIREMENTS
(by Deflection Analysis)
REFLECTIVE CRACKING REQUIREMENTS
*(Required overlay by reflective cracking is half the existing AC thickness - if pavement fabric is used then
these criteria can be reduced by 1-1/4 inch with at least a minimum overlay requirement of 1-3/4 inch)
VISUAL CONDITIONS
Pavement exhibits block shrinkage cracking and moderate to severe alligator cracking. Some
areas of alligator cracking have progressed to base failure. Previous maintenance includes
pavement repairs.
ANALYSIS
The existing pavement consists of 3 to 4 inches of asphalt concrete over 14 to 17-1/2 inches of
aggregate base. PEI could not identify if pavement fabric was present in the asphalt concrete
layer. The native soils are brown sandy clays with R-values ranging from 16 to 17.
Core
No.
Location
HMA Layer
(Inches)
Fabric
(Yes/No)
AB Layer
(Inches) R-value
20 WB – 300’ from Wavertree Street 3 N 15 16
21 EB – 600’ from Wavertree Street 3-1/4 N 17-1/2 -
22 WB – 1100’ from Wavertree Street 4 N 14 17
23 EB – 1600’ from Wavertree Street 3-1/2 N 16-1/2 -
Direction
Traffic Index
(TI)
Tolerable
80th
Percentile
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)
EB 9.5 18.0 21.4 1/2
WB 9.5 17.0 24.9 1-3/4
HMA Overlay Requirement
(Inches)*
Pavement Fabric Required
(Yes or No)
2 No
Page 552 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Based on the deflection analysis, the pavement is structurally adequate.
For this pavement, PEI is providing recommendations for overlaying with HMA and RHMA, full
depth reclamation (FDR) and reconstruction with Full Depth HMA or HMA over aggregate base.
Milling and replacement and partial depth recycling (PDR) are not recommended because of
thinner existing asphalt concrete layer and structural deficiency.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Overlay Options
HMA
We recommend 4-inch pavement repairs of base failures and placing a 2-inch HMA overlay.
RHMA
We recommend 4-inch pavement repairs of base failures, placing a 1/2-inch HMA leveling
course and a 1-3/4-inch RHMA overlay.
The pavement should be evaluated for the base failures present. If the amount of base failure
exceeds 10%, then placing overlays may not be cost effective.
Milling and Replacement Option
Milling and replacement is not recommended because of the thinner existing asphalt concrete
layer and structural deficiency.
Partial Depth Recycling Option (PDR)
Partial depth recycling (PDR) is not recommended because of structural deficiency.
FDR Option
We recommend uniformly pulverizing 16 inches of existing asphalt concrete, aggregate base,
and native soil, removing 7-1/2 inches of pulverized material, treating the remaining pulverized
material and native soil with cement/lime to a depth of 14-1/2 inches and placing 7-1/2 inches of
new HMA in 3 lifts. This recommendation is based on an unconfined compressive strength
(UCS) of 300 psi.
Reconstruction Options
Full Depth HMA
We recommend removing to a depth of 13-1/2 inches and placing 13-1/2 inches of HMA in 5
lifts.
HMA over Aggregate Base
We recommend removing to a depth of 23 inches, installing a SEG fabric, placing 16-1/2 inches
of aggregate base and 6-1/2 inches of HMA in 2 lifts.
Page 553 of 625
Deflection and Structural Summary Project No. 240140
2025 Roadway Paving Project Client: City of San Luis Obispo
Both reconstruction alternatives could develop unstable grade from construction traffic during
the construction process. Stabilization allowances should be included if one of these
alternatives is chosen.
As previously discussed in the report, rehabilitation alternatives may have different anticipated
service lives. The design engineer should evaluate each alternative based on cost,
constructability, and impact on the public.
Page 554 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
19 2.50 9.93 21.41 6.42
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.60 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 15.32 18.15 15.16 0.07
HMA Overlay
0.04
EB1
10/16/24
0.60
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
West City Limits
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Broad Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 555 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Tank Farm Road
West City Limits
Broad Street
EB1
10/16/24
0.60
9.50
240140
125' from West City Limits
226' from West City Limits
326' from West City Limits
424' from West City Limits
501' from West City Limits
642' from West City Limits
729' from West City Limits
817' from West City Limits
940' from West City Limits
1026' from West City Limits
1140' from West City Limits
1216' from West City Limits
1325' from West City Limits
1445' from West City Limits
1526' from West City Limits
1644' from West City Limits
1706' from West City Limits
1809' from West City Limits
1857' from West City Limits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 556 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 3.83 3.830
2 7.60 7.600
3 8.10 8.100
4 8.87 8.870
5 6.13 6.130
6 2.50 2.500
7 3.36 3.360
8 7.94 7.940
9 2.83 2.830
10 5.19 5.190
11 4.79 4.790
12 14.19 14.190
13 20.55 20.550
14 14.86 14.860
15 20.40 20.400
16 21.41 21.410
17 18.68 18.680
18 7.63 7.630
19 9.83 9.830
501' from West City Limits
1526' from West City Limits
1644' from West City Limits
424' from West City Limits
729' from West City Limits
1140' from West City Limits
1216' from West City Limits
1325' from West City Limits
1445' from West City Limits
817' from West City Limits
125' from West City Limits
226' from West City Limits
326' from West City Limits
1706' from West City Limits
1809' from West City Limits
642' from West City Limits
1857' from West City Limits
940' from West City Limits
1026' from West City Limits
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
West City Limits
Broad Street
EB1
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.60
9.50
240140
Page 557 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
12 7.68 14.01 21.72 4.39
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.50 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 17.70 19.63 26.54 0.20
HMA Overlay
0.11
EB2
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
West City Limits
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Broad Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 558 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Tank Farm Road
West City Limits
Broad Street
EB2
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
830' from West City Limits
908' from West City Limits
1017' from West City Limits
1105' from West City Limits
1230' from West City Limits
1310' from West City Limits
1420' from West City Limits
1534' from West City Limits
1633' from West City Limits
1728' from West City Limits
1816' from West City Limits
1903' from West City Limits
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 559 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 20.82 20.820
2 7.68 7.680
3 8.87 8.870
4 16.71 16.710
5 16.79 16.790
6 21.72 21.720
7 10.27 10.270
8 14.04 14.040
9 14.22 14.220
10 13.02 13.020
11 12.87 12.870
12 11.06 11.060
1230' from West City Limits
1105' from West City Limits
1420' from West City Limits
1816' from West City Limits
1903' from West City Limits
1534' from West City Limits
830' from West City Limits
908' from West City Limits
1017' from West City Limits
1310' from West City Limits
1633' from West City Limits
1728' from West City Limits
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
West City Limits
Broad Street
EB2
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.50
9.50
240140
Page 560 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
29 6.18 17.90 35.48 5.85
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.31 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
17.00 22.82 25.40 25.51 0.18
HMA Overlay
0.09
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Righetti Ranch Road
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
EB1
10/16/24
0.31
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street
Page 561 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street
Righetti Ranch Road
EB1
10/16/24
0.31
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
135' from Broad Street
247' from Broad Street
317' from Broad Street
404' from Broad Street
512' from Broad Street
617' from Broad Street
713' from Broad Street
764' from Broad Street
902' from Broad Street
1011' from Broad Street
1125' from Broad Street
1225' from Broad Street
1389' from Broad Street
1413' from Broad Street
1531' from Broad Street
1629' from Broad Street
1761' from Broad Street
1853' from Broad Street
1939' from Broad Street
2025' from Broad Street
2138' from Broad Street
2228' from Broad Street
2333' from Broad Street
2448' from Broad Street
2533' from Broad Street
2626' from Broad Street
2708' from Broad Street
2827' from Broad Street
2920' from Broad Street
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 562 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 18.83 18.830
2 13.60 13.600
3 6.18 6.180
4 17.41 17.410
5 17.40 17.400
6 19.81 19.810
7 11.95 11.950
8 22.65 22.650
9 15.96 15.960
10 24.36 24.360
11 23.34 23.340
12 16.24 16.240
13 15.11 15.110
14 18.33 18.330
15 13.09 13.090
16 15.39 15.390
17 12.41 12.410
18 18.87 18.870
19 18.45 18.450
20 24.28 24.280
21 15.04 15.040
22 12.86 12.860
23 13.68 13.680
24 15.48 15.480
25 21.62 21.620
26 30.01 30.010
27 35.48 35.480
28 18.57 18.570
29 12.81 12.810
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.31
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Broad Street
Righetti Ranch Road
EB1
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
2827' from Broad Street
2920' from Broad Street
2333' from Broad Street
2448' from Broad Street
2533' from Broad Street
2626' from Broad Street
902' from Broad Street
1011' from Broad Street
512' from Broad Street
2228' from Broad Street
1531' from Broad Street
1629' from Broad Street
404' from Broad Street
713' from Broad Street
1125' from Broad Street
1225' from Broad Street
1389' from Broad Street
1413' from Broad Street
764' from Broad Street
135' from Broad Street
247' from Broad Street
317' from Broad Street
1761' from Broad Street
1853' from Broad Street
2708' from Broad Street
617' from Broad Street
1939' from Broad Street
2025' from Broad Street
2138' from Broad Street
Page 563 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
24 9.15 14.16 22.50 4.11
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.41 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
15.00 17.61 19.42 14.82 0.07
HMA Overlay
0.04
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Righetti Ranch Road
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
EB2
10/16/24
0.41
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street
Page 564 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street
Righetti Ranch Road
EB2
10/16/24
0.41
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
144' from Broad Street
211' from Broad Street
329' from Broad Street
440' from Broad Street
532' from Broad Street
620' from Broad Street
708' from Broad Street
763' from Broad Street
870' from Broad Street
916' from Broad Street
1012' from Broad Street
1122' from Broad Street
1219' from Broad Street
1320' from Broad Street
1442' from Broad Street
1551' from Broad Street
1621' from Broad Street
1769' from Broad Street
1824' from Broad Street
1919' from Broad Street
2013' from Broad Street
2113' from Broad Street
2231' from Broad Street
2342' from Broad Street
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 565 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 16.80 16.800
2 10.31 10.310
3 9.78 9.780
4 16.75 16.750
5 18.35 18.350
6 20.17 20.170
7 9.15 9.150
8 12.65 12.650
9 16.21 16.210
10 18.39 18.390
11 21.74 21.740
12 12.56 12.560
13 9.99 9.990
14 11.79 11.790
15 11.50 11.500
16 22.50 22.500
17 10.52 10.520
18 9.86 9.860
19 10.01 10.010
20 12.72 12.720
21 18.37 18.370
22 14.90 14.900
23 13.42 13.420
24 11.36 11.360
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.41
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Broad Street
Righetti Ranch Road
EB2
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
2231' from Broad Street
2342' from Broad Street
870' from Broad Street
916' from Broad Street
532' from Broad Street
2113' from Broad Street
1442' from Broad Street
1551' from Broad Street
440' from Broad Street
708' from Broad Street
1012' from Broad Street
1122' from Broad Street
1219' from Broad Street
1320' from Broad Street
763' from Broad Street
144' from Broad Street
211' from Broad Street
329' from Broad Street
1621' from Broad Street
1769' from Broad Street
620' from Broad Street
1824' from Broad Street
1919' from Broad Street
2013' from Broad Street
Page 566 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
18 8.21 15.73 36.17 6.76
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.28 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
18.00 21.41 24.39 15.94 0.08
HMA Overlay
0.04
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Wavertree Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
EB
10/16/24
0.28
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road
Page 567 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road
Wavertree Street
EB
10/16/24
0.28
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
162' from Righetti Ranch Rd
229' from Righetti Ranch Rd
332' from Righetti Ranch Rd
417' from Righetti Ranch Rd
511' from Righetti Ranch Rd
612' from Righetti Ranch Rd
789' from Righetti Ranch Rd
820' from Righetti Ranch Rd
908' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1005' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1119' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1216' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1330' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1417' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1516' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1607' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1706' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1816' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 568 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 9.40 9.400
2 12.40 12.400
3 16.69 16.690
4 12.43 12.430
5 15.07 15.070
6 36.17 36.170
7 15.48 15.480
8 8.21 8.210
9 12.11 12.110
10 14.80 14.800
11 22.56 22.560
12 13.58 13.580
13 8.75 8.750
14 12.90 12.900
15 10.98 10.980
16 22.28 22.280
17 22.87 22.870
18 16.53 16.530
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.28
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Righetti Ranch Road
Wavertree Street
EB
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
908' from Righetti Ranch Road
1005' from Righetti Ranch Road
511' from Righetti Ranch Road
1516' from Righetti Ranch Road
1607' from Righetti Ranch Road
417' from Righetti Ranch Road
789' from Righetti Ranch Road
1119' from Righetti Ranch Road
1216' from Righetti Ranch Road
1330' from Righetti Ranch Road
1417' from Righetti Ranch Road
820' from Righetti Ranch Road
162' from Righetti Ranch Road
229' from Righetti Ranch Road
332' from Righetti Ranch Road
1706' from Righetti Ranch Road
1816' from Righetti Ranch Road
612' from Righetti Ranch Road
Page 569 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
19 2.33 9.15 38.15 8.18
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.73 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
13.00 16.02 19.62 18.85 0.10
HMA Overlay
0.05
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
West City Limits
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
WB
10/16/24
0.73
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street
Page 570 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
Broad Street
West City Limits
WB
10/16/24
0.73
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
138' from Broad Street
244' from Broad Street
333' from Broad Street
426' from Broad Street
519' from Broad Street
619' from Broad Street
711' from Broad Street
799' from Broad Street
928' from Broad Street
1025' from Broad Street
1142' from Broad Street
1234' from Broad Street
1321' from Broad Street
1425' from Broad Street
1527' from Broad Street
1616' from Broad Street
1720' from Broad Street
1825' from Broad Street
1933' from Broad Street
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 571 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 13.28 13.280
2 15.43 15.430
3 14.99 14.990
4 38.15 38.150
5 8.30 8.300
6 9.15 9.150
7 12.97 12.970
8 5.62 5.620
9 4.37 4.370
10 4.89 4.890
11 4.04 4.040
12 11.61 11.610
13 6.78 6.780
14 6.54 6.540
15 4.55 4.550
16 3.57 3.570
17 3.63 3.630
18 3.57 3.570
19 2.33 2.330
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.73
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Broad Street
West City Limits
WB
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
928' from Broad Street
1025' from Broad Street
519' from Broad Street
1527' from Broad Street
1616' from Broad Street
426' from Broad Street
711' from Broad Street
1142' from Broad Street
1234' from Broad Street
1321' from Broad Street
1425' from Broad Street
799' from Broad Street
138' from Broad Street
244' from Broad Street
333' from Broad Street
1720' from Broad Street
1825' from Broad Street
619' from Broad Street
1933' from Broad Street
Page 572 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
30 5.83 15.11 29.19 6.14
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.46 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
14.00 20.26 22.97 30.91 0.26
HMA Overlay
0.14
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Broad Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
WB1
10/16/24
0.46
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road
Page 573 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road
Broad Street
WB1
10/16/24
0.46
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
143' from Righetti Ranch Rd
239' from Righetti Ranch Rd
314' from Righetti Ranch Rd
402' from Righetti Ranch Rd
515' from Righetti Ranch Rd
612' from Righetti Ranch Rd
712' from Righetti Ranch Rd
804' from Righetti Ranch Rd
904' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1017' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1116' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1210' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1330' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1412' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1512' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1616' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1725' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1835' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1905' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2005' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2127' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2205' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2317' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2423' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2519' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2647' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2719' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2813' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2902' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2979' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 574 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 8.32 8.320
2 8.48 8.480
3 29.19 29.190
4 21.39 21.390
5 16.70 16.700
6 16.28 16.280
7 16.93 16.930
8 14.83 14.830
9 18.63 18.630
10 16.99 16.990
11 15.72 15.720
12 11.76 11.760
13 20.32 20.320
14 7.94 7.940
15 14.68 14.680
16 13.94 13.940
17 16.67 16.670
18 14.49 14.490
19 13.48 13.480
20 24.34 24.340
21 24.96 24.960
22 6.37 6.370
23 20.40 20.400
24 23.88 23.880
25 5.83 5.830
26 7.42 7.420
27 6.65 6.650
28 7.26 7.260
29 13.60 13.600
30 15.80 15.800
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.46
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Righetti Ranch Road
Broad Street
WB1
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
2813' from Righetti Ranch Road
2902' from Righetti Ranch Road
2979' from Righetti Ranch Road
2317' from Righetti Ranch Road
2423' from Righetti Ranch Road
2519' from Righetti Ranch Road
2647' from Righetti Ranch Road
904' from Righetti Ranch Road
1017' from Righetti Ranch Road
515' from Righetti Ranch Road
2205' from Righetti Ranch Road
1512' from Righetti Ranch Road
1616' from Righetti Ranch Road
402' from Righetti Ranch Road
712' from Righetti Ranch Road
1116' from Righetti Ranch Road
1210' from Righetti Ranch Road
1330' from Righetti Ranch Road
1412' from Righetti Ranch Road
804' from Righetti Ranch Road
143' from Righetti Ranch Road
239' from Righetti Ranch Road
314' from Righetti Ranch Road
1725' from Righetti Ranch Road
1835' from Righetti Ranch Road
2719' from Righetti Ranch Road
612' from Righetti Ranch Road
1905' from Righetti Ranch Road
2005' from Righetti Ranch Road
2127' from Righetti Ranch Road
Page 575 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
26 6.57 14.34 24.28 5.19
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.46 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
14.00 18.70 20.98 25.14 0.18
HMA Overlay
0.09
WB2
10/16/24
0.46
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Broad Street
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
Page 576 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
Tank Farm Road
Righetti Ranch Road
Broad Street
WB2
10/16/24
0.46
9.50
240140
401' from Righetti Ranch Rd
503' from Righetti Ranch Rd
622' from Righetti Ranch Rd
712' from Righetti Ranch Rd
836' from Righetti Ranch Rd
909' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1022' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1117' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1223' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1325' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1415' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1511' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1627' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1731' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1818' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1908' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2019' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2120' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2203' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2316' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2400' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2500' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2607' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2701' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2819' from Righetti Ranch Rd
2928' from Righetti Ranch Rd
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 577 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 20.78 20.780
2 23.31 23.310
3 9.76 9.760
4 14.26 14.260
5 9.12 9.120
6 14.47 14.470
7 14.48 14.480
8 12.11 12.110
9 12.97 12.970
10 8.47 8.470
11 8.83 8.830
12 8.41 8.410
13 15.55 15.550
14 19.55 19.550
15 8.81 8.810
16 17.20 17.200
17 18.28 18.280
18 18.22 18.220
19 12.22 12.220
20 19.09 19.090
21 8.67 8.670
22 6.57 6.570
23 24.28 24.280
24 19.91 19.910
25 18.69 18.690
26 8.94 8.940
836' from Righetti Ranch Road
2500' from Righetti Ranch Road
1818' from Righetti Ranch Road
1908' from Righetti Ranch Road
712' from Righetti Ranch Road
1022' from Righetti Ranch Road
1415' from Righetti Ranch Road
1511' from Righetti Ranch Road
1627' from Righetti Ranch Road
1731' from Righetti Ranch Road
1117' from Righetti Ranch Road
401' from Righetti Ranch Road
503' from Righetti Ranch Road
622' from Righetti Ranch Road
2019' from Righetti Ranch Road
2120' from Righetti Ranch Road
909' from Righetti Ranch Road
2203' from Righetti Ranch Road
2316' from Righetti Ranch Road
2400' from Righetti Ranch Road
2607' from Righetti Ranch Road
2701' from Righetti Ranch Road
2819' from Righetti Ranch Road
2928' from Righetti Ranch Road
1223' from Righetti Ranch Road
1325' from Righetti Ranch Road
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Righetti Ranch Road
Broad Street
WB2
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.46
9.50
240140
Page 578 of 625
10/24/24 Page 1
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Deflection Data Analysis
Deflection Readings (Equivalent Deflectometer Units)
No. of Tests Low Mean High Std. Dev.
18 8.69 19.97 28.49 5.86
Road Surface
Thickness Traffic Index
0.29 9.50
Structural Design
Tolerable 80th Percentile 90th Percentile % Reduction GE Deficient
17.00 24.89 27.47 31.70 0.27
HMA Overlay
0.14
(805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Righetti Ranch Road
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacramento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535
WB
10/16/24
0.29
9.50
240140
Tank Farm Road
Wavertree Street
Page 579 of 625
10/24/24 Page 2
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line: Project Number:
Tank Farm Road
Wavertree Street
Righetti Ranch Road
WB
10/16/24
0.29
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
City of San Luis Obispo
Concord Redding San Luis Obispo Sacram ento
(877) 240-0468 (530) 224-4535 (805) 781-2265 (916) 209-8300
132' from Wavertree Street
221' from Wavertree Street
315' from Wavertree Street
414' from Wavertree Street
547' from Wavertree Street
626' from Wavertree Street
727' from Wavertree Street
824' from Wavertree Street
919' from Wavertree Street
1021' from Wavertree Street
1136' from Wavertree Street
1229' from Wavertree Street
1325' from Wavertree Street
1413' from Wavertree Street
1531' from Wavertree Street
1627' from Wavertree Street
1736' from Wavertree Street
1818' from Wavertree Street
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
0 102030405060708090100
Te
s
t
P
o
i
n
t
Deflectometer Deflection
Page 580 of 625
Date:
Client: Interval:
Road: Survey Date:
From: Thickness:
To: Traffic Index:
Lane/Line Project Number:
Test
Points DynaflectConditions Deflection Exclude
1 21.98 21.980
2 23.90 23.900
3 28.49 28.490
4 23.99 23.990
5 22.50 22.500
6 20.10 20.100
7 20.88 20.880
8 22.94 22.940
9 20.63 20.630
10 10.11 10.110
11 21.18 21.180
12 24.20 24.200
13 26.82 26.820
14 21.08 21.080
15 20.20 20.200
16 11.78 11.780
17 8.69 8.690
18 9.99 9.990
Concord
(877) 240-0468
Redding
(530) 224-4535
San Luis Obispo
(805) 781-2265
Sacramento
(916) 209-8300
10/16/24
0.29
9.50
240140
PAVEMENT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED
Comments
Wavertree Street
Righetti Ranch Road
WB
10/24/2024
City of San Luis Obispo
Tank Farm Road
100'
919' from Wavertree Street
1021' from Wavertree Street
547' from Wavertree Street
1531' from Wavertree Street
1627' from Wavertree Street
414' from Wavertree Street
727' from Wavertree Street
1136' from Wavertree Street
1229' from Wavertree Street
1325' from Wavertree Street
1413' from Wavertree Street
824' from Wavertree Street
132' from Wavertree Street
221' from Wavertree Street
315' from Wavertree Street
1736' from Wavertree Street
1818' from Wavertree Street
626' from Wavertree Street
Page 581 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243714
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 24, 2024
Report Date:November 1, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Clay
Sample Location:C10, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 20.4 19.3 20.9
Dry Density (PCF) 115.0 116.5 114.5
Resistance Value (R) 9 23 0
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 270 403 165
Expansion Pressure 43 91 0
20.4
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 12
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 582 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243752
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 24, 2024
Report Date:November 5, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Silty Clay
Sample Location:C12, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 19.6 18.6 20.2
Dry Density (PCF) 114.6 116.7 113.2
Resistance Value (R) 17 35 2
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 264 406 166
Expansion Pressure 43 87 0
19.6
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 22
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 583 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243752
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 24, 2024
Report Date:November 5, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Silty Clay
Sample Location:C35, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 14.1 15.1 15.6
Dry Density (PCF) 120.2 119.6 117.7
Resistance Value (R) 33 16 1
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 416 276 173
Expansion Pressure 91 43 0
14.1
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 19
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 584 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243714
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 24, 2024
Report Date:November 1, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Silty Clay
Sample Location:C33, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 17.8 18.8 19.4
Dry Density (PCF) 117.4 116.1 115.1
Resistance Value (R) 23 10 0
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 389 260 158
Expansion Pressure 87 43 0
17.8
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 14
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 585 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243752
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 23, 2024
Report Date:November 5, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Silty Clay
Sample Location:C31, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 15.4 16.4 17.0
Dry Density (PCF) 119.5 118.3 117.5
Resistance Value (R) 32 15 1
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 407 270 168
Expansion Pressure 91 48 0
15.4
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 19
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 586 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243714
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 24, 2024
Report Date:November 1, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Clay
Sample Location:C20 Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 17.6 16.5 18.1
Dry Density (PCF) 117.7 120.8 117.8
Resistance Value (R) 13 25 4
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 260 425 187
Expansion Pressure 52 104 4
17.6
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 16
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 587 of 625
Laboratory No.:L243714
Project No.:240140
Sample Date:October 24, 2024
Report Date:November 1, 2024
Client:City of San Luis Obispo
Project Name:Pavement Evaluation Services for 2025 Roadway Paving Project
Sample Description:Brown Clay
Sample Location:C22, Tank Farm
Specimen No. 1 2 3
Moisture Content (%) 18.4 17.6 19.0
Dry Density (PCF) 117.9 120.3 118.0
Resistance Value (R) 15 26 4
Exudation Pressure (PSI) 277 413 178
Expansion Pressure 52 104 0
18.4
RESISTANCE VALUE AT 300 P.S.I. 17
Reviewed By:
Materials Engineer
Brandon Rodebaugh
RESISTANCE (R) VALUE TEST
ASTM D 2844
As Received Moisture Content (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0100200300400500600700800
Re
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
Exudation Pressure (P.S.I.)
Resistance Value Test 300 P.S.I.
Page 588 of 625
Tank Farm Road @ Wavertree Street lookingEast
Photo
Tank Farm Road @ Wavertree Street looking West
Photo
Page 589 of 625
Tank Farm Road @ Brookpine Drive lookingEast
Photo
Tank Farm Road @ Brookpine Drive looking West
Photo
Page 590 of 625
Tank Farm Road @ 430’ S/O Brookpine Drive looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road @ 430’ S/O Brookpine Drive looking :Hst
Photo
Page 591 of 625
Tank Farm Road EB @ Railroad Overpass looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road EB @ Railroad Overpass looking West
Photo
Page 592 of 625
Tank Farm Road WB @ Railroad Overpass looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road WB @ Railroad Overpass looking West
Photo 1
Page 593 of 625
Tank Farm Road EB @ Hollyhock Way looking East
Photo 1
Tank Farm Road EB @ Hollyhock Way looking West
Photo 1
Page 594 of 625
Tank Farm Road WB @ Hollyhock Way looking East
Photo 1
Tank Farm Road WB @ Hollyhock Way looking West
Photo
Page 595 of 625
Tank Farm Road EB @ Poinsettia Street looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road EB @ Poinsettia Street looking West
Photo
Page 596 of 625
Tank Farm Road WB @ Poinsettia Street looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road WB @ Poinsettia Street looking West
Photo
Page 597 of 625
Tank Farm Road EB @ Broad Street looking West
Photo
Tank Farm Road EB @ Broad Street looking East
Photo 2
Page 598 of 625
Tank Farm Road WB @ Broad Street looking East
Photo 2
Tank Farm Road WB @ Broad Street looking East
Photo 2
Page 599 of 625
Tank Farm Road EB @ Broad Street looking East
Photo 2
Tank Farm Road EB @ Broad Street looking West
Photo
Page 600 of 625
Tank Farm Road WB @ Broad Street looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road WB @ Broad Street looking West
Photo
Page 601 of 625
Tank Farm Road EB @ 350’ W/O Broad Street looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road EB @ 350’ W/O Broad Street looking West
Photo
Page 602 of 625
Tank Farm Road WB @ 350’ W/O Broad Street looking East
Photo
Tank Farm Road WB @ 350’ W/O Broad Street looking West
Photo 3
Page 603 of 625
Tank Farm Road @ West City Limits looking East
Photo 3
Tank Farm Road @ West City Limits looking West
Photo 3
Page 604 of 625
1
101
101
Reservior Canyon
Natural Reserve
Irish Hills
Natural
Reserve
Laguna Lake
Natural
Reserve
Southw
o
o
d
D
r
Flo
r
a
S
t
Slack St
Fe
r
r
i
n
i
R
d
Oliv
e
S
t
G
r
o
v
e
S
t
Murray St
Guerra
D
r
Ironbark St
D
a
l
i
d
i
o
C
a
r
m
e
l
S
t
B
e
a
c
h
S
t
Bish
o
p
S
t
McCollum St
Syd ney
S
t
Tangle wood Dr
Fuller
R
d
Fredericks St
Li
n
c
o
l
n
S
t
Diab
l
o
D
r
R
o
c
k
v
i
e
w
P
l
Suburban Rd
G
a
r
d
e
n
S
t
Tibu
ron
W
a
y
Lau
r
e
l
L
n
B
u
l
l
o
c
k
L
n
W
C
r
e
e
k
R
d
Va
che
l
l
Ln
Pi
n
n
a
c
l
e
s
R
d
Wo odbridg eSt
A
u
g
u
s
t
a
S
t
Palm
S
t
Mou
n
t
B
i
s
h
o
p
R
d
Loomis
S
t
S
a
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
D
r
High St
Islay
S
t
B
r
o
a
d
S
t
Pacifi
c
S
t
Mill St
San
L
u
i
s
D
r
G
r
a
n
d
A
v
e
P
o
i
n
s
e
t
t
i
a
S
t
WFoo
t
hill
B
l
v
d
B
l
u
e
G
r
a
n
i
t
e
L
n
Mont
e
r
e
y
S
t
M ars hSt
Pism
o
S
t
Ocea
n
a
i
r
e
D
r
SH
i
gu
e
r
aSt
Madon
n
a
R
d
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
B
l
v
d
M
o
u
n
t
L
o
w
e
R
d
Main
i
n
i
R
a
n
c
h
R
d
E Foothill Blvd
O
c
o
n
n
o
r
W
a
y
Tank
F
a
r
m
R
d
R
e
s
e
r
v
o
i
r
C
a
n
y
o
n
R
d
O
r
c
u
t
t
R
d
L
o
s
O
s
o
s
V
a
l
l
e
y
R
d
California
Polytechnic
State University
010.5 Miles
Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian
Grade-Separated Crossing
Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian
Major Crossing Improvement
Anholm Neighborhood Greenway
Broad St / Santa Barbra Corridor
Foothill Blvd
Higuera St/Marsh St
Los Osos Valley Rd
Madonna Rd/
Oceanaire NG/South St
Mill/Morro/
Railroad Safety Trail
Prado/Dilidio
Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian
Minor Crossing Improvement
Tier 1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Corridors
San Luis Obispo Sources:
City of San Luis Obispo
*See Ch. 5 for
proposed bikeway
and crossing types.
School
Park or Open Space
Rail
Trails
Tank Farm Rd Page 605 of 625
Islay Hill
Open Space
South Hills
Natural
Reserve
Rigetti
Hill Open
Space
Sout
h
w
o
o
d
D
r
Ma
l
v
a
Aero
D
r
Me
a
d
o
w
S
t
Sage St
Stoneridge Dr
Cll C
r
o
t
a
l
o
Caudill St
Clarion Ct
Mc
M
i
l
l
a
n
A
v
e
Ga
r
i
b
a
l
d
i
A
v
e
Capito
l
i
o
W
a
y
Hopkins L
n
Farmhouse Ln
Corrida Dr
Woo
d
s
i
d
e
D
r
Fer
n
w
o
o
d
D
r
Mitchell Dr
Junipero
W
a
y
F
l
o
r
a
S
t
Ironbark
S
t
Hansen Ln
Aug
u
s
t
a
S
t
Prado Rd
Wa
v
e
r
t
r
e
e
S
t
Lawrence Dr
S
e
q
u
o
i
a
D
r
Tanglewood
D
r
Fuller
R
d
Goldenrod Ln
Indust
r
i
a
l
W
a
y
R
o
c
k
v
i
e
w
P
l
Tibu
r
o
n
W
a
y
Lau
r
e
l
L
n
B
u
l
l
o
c
k
L
n
Jo
h
n
s
o
n
A
v
e
Ho
o
v
e
r
Woodbridge
S
t
Spa
n
i
s
h
O
a
k
s
D
r
S
a
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
D
r
Sa
n
t
a
F
e
R
d
P
o
i
n
s
e
t
t
i
a
S
t
Tank
F
a
rm
R
d
O
r
c
u
t
t
R
d
0 0.50.25 Miles
Sources:
City of San Luis Obispo
School
Park or Open Space
Rail
Trails
San Luis Obispo
Shared-Use Path
Bicycle Lane
Protected Bicycle Lane
Neighborhood Greenway
Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian
Grade-Separated Crossing
Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian
Major Crossing Improvement
Proposed Bicycle/Pedestrian
Minor Crossing Improvement
Tier 1 Bicycle and Pedestrian Project Corridors - Southeast
Page 606 of 625
Appendix A
ATP Tier 1 Project List
Corridor User Type ID Location Cross Street A Notable Constraints% Ridership
Potential NotesCross Street B Miles
Ped/Bike Grade‐Separated Crossing I‐4Lawrence Dr or Francis 36 Ped/bike bridge over UPRR
tracks
Requires UPRR coordination &
right‐of‐way
Ped/Bike Crossing Improvement (Major) J‐17 Pepper St Monterey St 36 Long‐term plan is a ped/bike
bridge. Interim solution may
include RRFB & median
refuge/diverter
Requires UPRR coordination &
right‐of‐way
Ped/Bike Crossing Improvement (Major) J‐64 California Blvd Taft St 36 Planned roundabout
Bike Protected Bike Lane 261 Dalidio/Prado Madonna Rd Elks Ln 0.47 17 South side of Prado
(Madonna to Froom) will be
a shared‐use path
Bike Protected Bike Lane 261 Prado Rd Elks Ln Serra Meadows Rd 0.71 17
Bike Bike Lane 104 Prado Rd Serra Meadows Rd Broad St 1.03 17
Ped/Bike Shared‐Use Path 105 Prado Rd (North
Side)
Serra Meadows Rd Broad St 1.09 17
Ped/Bike Shared‐Use Path 106 Prado Rd (South
Side)
Serra Meadows Rd Broad St 0.86 17
Ped/Bike Shared‐Use Path 127 Dalidio Dr Madonna Rd ‐0.3 17
Ped/Bike Crossing Improvement (Major) I‐2Prado Rd Damon‐Garcia Sports
Field
17 Potential ped/bike
undercrossing
Bike Protected Bike Lane 33 Tank Farm Rd S. Higuera St Horizon Ln 0.46 11
Ped/Bike Shared‐Use Path 64,157,267 Tank Farm Rd (North
Side)
Horizon Ln Santa Fe Rd 0.94 11 Requires roadway widening and
right‐of‐way
Bike Protected Bike Lane 31, 32 Tank Farm Rd Santa Fe Rd Orcutt Rd 1.33 11 May required auto lane
reduction.
Ped Crossing Improvement (Minor) J‐13 Tank Farm Rd Poinsettia St 11 Potential RRFB & median
refuge
Ped/Bike Crossing Improvement (Major) J‐65 Tank Farm Rd Orcutt Road 11 Planned roundabout
Project ID numbers correspond to mapping in the Public Viewer
http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=d0c9ddaa42a444bda8d5940e05891eb7
Tank Farm Road
Prado/Dalidio
Project ID numbers correspond to mapping in the Public Viewer
http://slocity.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=d0c9ddaa42a444bda8d5940e05891eb7
Page 4
Page 607 of 625
Page 608 of 625
Page 609 of 625
Page 610 of 625
Page 611 of 625
Page 612 of 625
Page 613 of 625
Page 614 of 625
Page 615 of 625
Page 616 of 625
Page 617 of 625
Page 618 of 625
Page 619 of 625
Page 620 of 625
Page 621 of 625
Page 622 of 625
Page 623 of 625
Page 624 of 625
Page 625 of 625
2025 Paving Project
& Tank Farm Rd
Design Alternatives
City Council Presentation
MAY 6, 2025
Project Overview
2
BASE BID
•Tank Farm Rd
•Sacramento Dr
•Safety Striping Refresh
•Broad Street
•Santa Rosa / Mill Crosswalks
•Madonna
•Prado Road
•Tank Farm Road
BID ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE A
•Orcutt Road
BID ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE B
•Calle Joaquin
Planning Context
3
Tank Farm Road
4
Existing Conditions & Planning Context
5Existing Tank Farm Road (Broad to UPRR Bridge)
Existing Conditions & Planning Context
6Existing Tank Farm Road (Righetti Ranch to Orcutt)
Existing Issues & Concerns
7
1.Unsafe/illegal vehicle speeds
2.Difficulty making left turns on to Tank Farm
3.Ped Crossing Concerns – Failure to yield to pedestrians
within x-walks crossing Tank Farm at Poinsettia, Righetti
Ranch Roundabout
4.Requests for pedestrian crossing enhancements between
Poinsettia and Righetti Rd
Planning Context
8
ATP
•Tier 1 Project - Protected bike lanes & potential road diet proposed
•Proposed ped crossing improvements between Poinsettia and
Righetti Ranch Rd
TRAFFIC SAFETY/VISION ZERO ACTION PLAN
•Not on High -Injury Network, but 11th highest crash rate arterial street
•15 collisions in past 5 years
–1 severe injury ped collision at Morning Glory
–1 severe injury ped collision at Poinsettia in 2014
–No bike collisions in past 5 years
–Pattern, of minor solo veh collisions at Righetti Ranch Roundabout
due to high/ unsafe entry speeds and DUI
Tank Farm Design Alternatives
9
•Alternative 1 – Road Diet
•Alternative 2 – No Road Diet
•Hybrid Alternative – Road Diet Eastbound Only
Emergency Response & Evacuation Considerations
10
Cal Fire – Fire Hazard Safety Zones
2009-2 0 11
2025
Emergency Response & Evacuation Considerations
11
Emergency Response & Evacuation Review Findings & Recommendations:
1.As currently proposed, none of the current design alternatives would pose significant concerns to ability to evacuate via Tank Farm Road
2.No vertical protected bikeway features recommended to preserve road clearance for potential evacuation
3.Provide traffic lane widths wider than minimum City Standard (10’) where possible
4.Develop special traffic signal timing plans for Broad (SR 227)/ Tank Farm intersection to clear traffic during evacuation
Common Features to All Alternatives
12
1.Pavement reconstruction & ADA curb ramps
2.New streetlights at Poinsettia & Morning Glory
intersections
3.Radar speed feedback signs
4.Green bike lanes at conflict areas
5.Restripe WB right turn lane at Tank Farm/ Broad
from right -turn only to shared thru/ right lane
6.Tank Farm East of UPRR Bridge – Same design for
all Alts
Tank Farm Improvements – Ea st of UPRR
13
Proposed: Tank Farm Road (Righetti Ranch to Orcutt)
Tank Farm Improvements – Ea st of UPRR
14
Tank Farm & Righetti Ranch Roundabout
Alternative 1: Road Diet
15
Alternative 1: Road Diet
16Proposed: Tank Farm Road (Broad to Poinsettia)
Alternative 1: Road Diet
17Proposed: Tank Farm Road (Broad to Poinsettia)
18
19
20
Alternative 1: Road Diet
21
Pros & Cons of Alternative 1
22
Pros
1.Road Diets reduce crashes by 19%-47%
2.RRFBs increase driver yield rate by up to 98%, reduce
ped crashes by 47%
3.Eliminate “multiple threat” ped collision risk
4.Reduce illegal speeding – cuts collision frequency
and severity for all users
5.Retains acceptable traffic operations & emergency
evacuation flexibility
6.Can be “undone” relatively easily in future, if needed
Cons
1.New configuration may require learning curve for
drivers
2.Less excess road capacity for future growth and
potential large -scale evacuation, but not considered
significant concern as proposed
Alternative 2: No Road Diet
23Proposed Tank Farm Road (Broad to UPRR Bridge)
24
25
Pros & Cons of Alternative 2
26
Pros
1.Retains existing road configuration & familiarity for road users
2.Reduced construction cost compared to Alt 1 ($50K less by omitting ped
crossing at Morning Glory/ Sunset)
3.Retains excess traffic capacity for future growth and/ or large -scale emergency
evacuation
4.Some benefits over existing conditions with addition of radar speed feedback
signs, green bike lane markings in conflict areas, etc.
Cons
1.Less potential to reduce high-end vehicle speeds
2.Less potential to improve road safety, particularly for pedestrian crossings
3.No designated ped crossing between Poinsettia and Righetti Ranch Rd
4.Less separation between vehicles and pedestrians/bicycles
ATC Inp ut
27
1.Detailed review of 2025 Paving Project in November 2024, project update in
March 2025
2.Key Comments/ Recommendations:
Sacramento:
a)Reduce vehicle speeds
b)Add pedestrian crossing along Sacramento
Tank Farm:
a)Support road diet
b)Prefer protected bike lanes – preference for concrete/rigid materials for bikeway
separation & openings for passing/ left turns
c)Prefer median refuges at pedestrian crossings
d)Slow speeds entering Righetti Ranch Rd Roundabout & improve ped crossing visibility
Public Input
28
Outreach & Noticing:
a)Project website
b)Direct mailers sent to all properties along Sacramento and Tank Farm Rd ahead of each
public meeting
c)In -person meeting at November 2024 ATC meeting
d)News releases, email list, social media updates
e)Input from previous outreach as part of ATP and Vision Zero Action Plan
Key Comments/ Recommendations:
a)Roughly 50/ 50 split for/ against road diet on Tank Farm
b)Support for more robust pedestrian crossing measures, such as raised median refuges at
Poinsettia and Morning Glory
c)Suggestions for rumble strips along Tank Farm
Project Costs & Funding
29
GENERAL FUND (Streets R&R)$6,160,000
GENERAL FUND (CIP Re se rve )$1,404,530
S B1 FUND $ 1,2 7 7 ,3 12
WATER FUND $199,200
SEWER FUND $76,800
AVAILABLE FUNDING $9,117,842
BASE BID TO TAL ESTIMATE $ 9 ,117 ,8 4 2
ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE A $1,351,585
ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVE B $673,915
TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $11,143,34
Project Cost
Funding
•May 2025 – Update designs based on Council input;
City Engineer to approve final plans and specifications
•June -July 2025 – Solicit construction bids & award
construction contract
•August/September 2025 – Start construction
•January/February 2026 – Complete construction
30
Next Steps & Schedule
Recommendation
31
1.Receive staff presentation, provide input and policy direction regarding roadway
striping modifications for Tank Farm Road for implementation with the 2025 Paving
Project designs; and
2.Authorize the City Engineer to approve final plans and specifications for the 2025
Paving Project, Specification No. 2000616, including incorporation of designs for Tank
Farm Road pursuant to City Council direction, prior to advertising the project for
construction; and
3.Authorize staff to advertise for bids for the 2025 Paving Project; and
4.Authorize the City Manager to award the construction contract for the 2025 Paving
Project pursuant to Section 3.24.190 of the Municipal Code for the bid total, if the
lowest responsible bid is within the publicly disclosed funding amount of $7,720,000;
and
5.Adopt a draft resolution entitled “A Resolution of the City Council of the City of San
Luis Obispo, California, Authorizing Appropriation of Capital Projects Reserve Funds
to Support the 2025 Paving Project, Specification Number 2000616”; and,
Recommendation
3
6.Authorize the Finance Director to make the following appropriations and funding
transfers to the 2025 Paving Project Account (2000616):
a. Appropriate $1,404,530 of Capital Outlay LRM funds from the FY24/ 25 Capital Reserve of the
Capital Outlay Fund; and
b. Transfer $2,100,000 of Capital Outlay LRM funds from the Roadway Sealing 2024 Project
Account (No. 2000615); and,
c. Transfer $100,000 of Capital Outlay LRM funds from the Arterials 2023 Project Account (No.
2001065); and,
d. Transfer $199,200 of Water funds from the Water Valve Cover Adjustments Account (No.
2001005); and,
e.Transfer $76,800 of Sewer funds from the Sewer Valve Cover Adjustments Account (No.
2000084); and
7.Authorize the City Engineer to issue Contract Change Orders for the 2025 Paving
Project up to and in excess of $200,000 if within available project budget, and up to any
amended budget subsequently approved by the City Manager per City Purchasing Policy
approval thresholds.
Questions?
Tank Farm Design Alternatives
35
•Alternative 1 – Road Diet
•Alternative 2 – No Road Diet
•Hybrid Alternative – Road Diet Eastbound Only
Protected Bike Lane Considerations
36
1.Emergency services recommend no vertical bikeway
elements to preserve clearance for emergency vehicle
access and capacity for potential large-scale
evacuation on Tank Farm
2.If directed by Council, staff recommendation is for
flexible materials (i.e. flex posts) – lower costs,
opportunity for driver adjustments, maximizes clearance
for emergency access & evacuation
•Converting striped bike lanes to protected lanes, even with
rubber flex posts only, reduces veh vs. bicycle crash rates by
up to 53%, reduces crash rates for all users (FHWA)
3.Cost Implications
•+$50,000-$-75,000 in construction costs for flex posts;
+$150,000-$175,000 for more rigid materials
•+$30,000 per year in maintenance costs
Road Maintenance Elements
3
Sacramento Drive, Orcutt Road,
and Calle Joaquin
•Mill and Fill Asphalt
•9 ADA curb ramp upgrades
Tank Farm Road
•Full Depth Reclamation (FDR)
•19 ADA curb ramp upgrades
Key Steps with FDR
3
1. Pulverization: Existing pavement and base are ground up.
2. Mixing: Additives like cement and lime are mixed in.
3. Compaction: Compacted to form a strong base.
4. Surface Course: A new asphalt section is applied.
FDR Benefits / Challenges
3
Benefits
1.Lower Costs
2. Less Hauling
3. Environmentally Friendly
Challenges
1.Project Duration
2.Phased Construction Planning
3.Dust Control Needs
4.Site Suitability Madonna Road Full Depth Reclamation (2017)
Sacramento Drive
4
Existing Issues and Planning Context
41
1.ATP:
–Striped (Class II) bike lanes
–Potential ped crossing (all-way stop at Sacramento/Capitolio )
2.Safety/Vision Zero : Fatal ped collision along curve in
2022 due to driver negligence. No other high collision
rate locations
3.Poor pavement condition
4.High traffic speeds
5.Parked vehicles encroaching into bike lane
6.Safety concerns at roadway curve north (unsafe speeds,
vehicles cutting corner & encroaching into bike lane)
Proposed Improvements
4
1.Reconstruct pavement
2.ADA curb ramp upgrades
3.Safety improvements along roadway curve
4.Radar speed feedback signs & additional speed limit signs
5.Red curb (“Daylighting”) to improve sight lines at
intersections & driveways
6.Increase bike lane widths & add buffers (where width
allows)
7.Green bike lane markings through conflict areas
Proposed Improvements
4
Further Tra ffic Ca lming Opportunities
4
Future Speed Cushion Pilot Program
Pedestrian Crossing Considerations
4
•Sacramento & Capitolio intersection
does not meet warrants for All-Way
Stop Control
•No ped collision history or locations
with concentrated crossing demand
•Development proposal currently
under review for new private school
on Sacramento near Via Esteban.
•Pedestrian crossing likely to be
recommended as condition of
approval for new school
Orcutt Road
4
1.Roadway Repaving and restriping
2.Minor drainage improvements
3.No changes to roadway configuration
Ca lle Joa quin
4
Proposed Improvements:
1.Reconstruct pavement
2.Replace existing striping & add edge stripes for
added visibility
3.Replace faded road signs & object markers
48Proposed: Tank Farm Road (Poinsettia to UPRR Bridge)
Hybrid Alterna tive: Roa d Diet EB Only
49
50
Pros & Cons of Hybrid Alternative
51
Pros
1.Retains existing 2 -lane vehicle capacity in WB direction, most likely evacuation route
2.Greater potential to reduce speeds and improve safety than Alt 2 (No Road Diet)
3.Provides opportunity for raised ped median refuges, which improves ped crossing
safety, particularly crossing dual WB traffic lanes.
Cons
1.Less potential to reduce high-end vehicle speeds than with Alt 1
2.Less potential to improve road safety, particularly for pedestrian crossings than with
Alt 1
3.Less separation between vehicles and pedestrians/bicycles than with Alt 1
Alternatives to Staff Recommendations
52
Tank Farm Design Alternatives
1.Hybrid Alterna tive – Road Diet Eastbound Only
2.Other Design Outside of Current Staff Alts
3.No Change/ Maintenance Only – Pave and restore existing
striping configuration, no added features
Alternatives to Staff Recommendations
53
2025 Paving Project Alternatives
1.Modify design features for other (non-Tank Farm) streets in
2025 Paving Project
2.Deny Authorization to Advertise – Defer project and/ or
return at future date