CC 2018-04-10_12b 2018 Street Repairs Alternatives
MEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: BILL ROBESON, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
BY: ROBIN DICKERSON, CITY ENGINEER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF PAVEMENT TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR
THE 2018 STREET REPAIRS PROJECT, PW 2018-04
DATE: APRIL 10, 2018
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The City Council will review and select a preferred alternative for the 2018 Street
Repairs Project.
IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES:
An allocation of $700,000 of Local Sales Tax funds and $70,000 of Urban State
Highway Account (USHA) funds is earmarked for the Pavement Management Program
in the FY 2018/19 Capital Improvement Program budget. It is anticipated that
approximately $39,400 will be carried over from FY 2017/18 and staff will be requesting
$100,000 of Transportation Fund and $294,500 of Senate Bill 1 (SB-1) monies in the
upcoming budget for a total available budget of $1,203,900. Of this overall budget, it is
estimated there will be approximately $1,091,200 available for construction and
construction contingencies.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review alternative treatment options for the 2018 Street Repairs project and select
Alternative 1 – Digouts and overlay, as the preferred alternative.
BACKGROUND:
On February 14, 2017, the City Council adopted the 2016 update to the City’s
Pavement Management Plan and endorsed the Critical Point Management methodology
for the City’s Pavement Management System. This methodology selects the road
segments for repair or resurfacing that are at a “critical point” of deterioration. The
critical point is a point located on the pavement deterioration graph which indicates the
Pavement Condition Index (PCI) value is about to drop to a level that would trigger a
more expensive maintenance or rehabilitation approach. (PCI is a standard
measurement on a 100 point scale used by most public agencies to determine the state
of their roadways.)
Item 12.b. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF PAVEMENT TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR THE 2018
STREET REPAIRS PROJECT, PW 2018-04
APRIL 10, 2018
PAGE 2
For the 2018 Street Repairs project, James Way was identified as a road that is at a
critical point of deterioration and would most likely move into a reconstruction category
with another significant rainy season. In these situations, the City has historically
repaired the areas of isolated pavement failures (digouts) followed by a slurry seal or
overlay. Due to the substantial investment anticipated to rehabilitate James Way from
Equestrian way to Tally Ho Road, deflection testing and coring was performed to
determine the existing asphalt layer thickness and correct depth repair that will be
required. It was determined that James Way is structurally deficient in some areas by as
much as 3-1/4”of asphalt concrete based on the type of traffic the road is carrying today.
This is significant when minimum standard road sections are 4.5” of asphalt for a
collector. As recommended and described below, the digout and overlay method will
correct these structural deficiencies.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
Utilizing the deflection testing and coring findings, the design engineer identified five
treatment alternatives for James Way from Equestrian Way to Tally Ho Road, which
ranged from seven to twenty year expected service life. Two alternatives were found to
be the most cost effective. One is digouts with an overlay, and the other is
reconstruction using a full-depth reclamation technique with an overlay.
Alternative 1 – Digouts and Overlay
This consists of localized pavement repairs to correct structural deficiencies. Where
failure is occulting, the pavement is saw-cut in rectangular patterns and all material
within the rectangle is removed and replaced. This is followed by an asphalt overlay of
the entire road.
‐ Expected Service Life: 10 Years
‐ Estimated Cost: $1.98M
‐ Follow-Up Treatment: Grind and Overlay in 10 years at $1.7M (in today’s $)
‐ Fiscal Impact: Estimate 2-1/2 Years of the City’s Pavement
Management Program Budget
Alternative 2 – Full-Depth Reclamation (FDR)
Full-depth reclamation is a more comprehensive method where large worn out asphalt
pavements street sections are rebuilt from curb to curb by recycling the existing
roadway. The old asphalt and base materials are pulverized, mixed with cement,
hydrated lime and water, and compacted to produce a strong, durable base for either an
asphalt or concrete surface.
‐ Expected Service Life: 20 Years
‐ Estimated Cost: $3.44M
‐ Follow-Up Treatment: Grind and Overlay in 20 years at $960K (in today’s $)
‐ Fiscal Impact: Estimate 4 Years of the City’s Pavement
Management Program Budget
Item 12.b. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF PAVEMENT TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR THE 2018
STREET REPAIRS PROJECT, PW 2018-04
APRIL 10, 2018
PAGE 3
Both alternatives are considered an alteration of a street under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) and will trigger the City’s obligation to provide ADA compliant curb
ramps where pedestrian walkways intersect the resurfaced street. The estimated cost of
these improvements is $159,000.
Because of the significant investment needed to rehabilitate James Way and the impact
to the City’s Pavement Management Program budget which would result in the delay of
addressing other roads in the City for approximately 2 to 4 years depending on the
alternative chosen. Many streets throughout the City are in need of some repair.
James Way is number one on the list of street repairs. Further delay in repairing James
Way, will result in continued to deterioration and the cost to repair will continue to
escalate.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternative is provided for the Council’s consideration:
1. Approve staff’s recommended treatment of Alternative 1- Digouts and overlay
2. Approve Alternative 2 – Full-depth reclamation
3. Direct Staff to investigate other pavement rehabilitation methods.
4. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Providing a cost effective approach for the repair of a major collector street in Arroyo
Grande, which has been identified as one of the worst streets in the City and is number
one on the list for street repair.
DISADVANTAGES:
Selection of either alternative reduces available funding for other street maintenance
projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
No environmental review is required for this item.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENTS:
The Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
Item 12.b. - Page 3
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Item 12.b. - Page 4