Systemic Safety Analysis Report & Local Roadway Safety Plan - 2020
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page i
Prepared For:
City of Pismo Beach
Prepared By:
GHD
669 Pacific Street, Suite A
San Luis Obispo, CA
93401
805-858-3141
Adopted December 1st, 2020
Systemic Safety
Analysis Report
(SSAR)
Local Roadway
Safety Plan
(LRSP)
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CITY COUNCIL
Mayor: Ed Waage
Mayor Pro Tempore: Erik Howell
Council Member: Sheila Blake
Council Member: Marcia Guthrie
Council Member: Mary Ann Reiss
PARTNERS
Caltrans District 5
City of Arroyo Grande
City of Grover Beach
San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
CITY STAFF
City Manager: James R. Lewis
Director of Public Works: Benjamin A. Fine, P.E.
Police Chief: Jake Miller
Fire Battalion Chief: Paul Lee
Engineer: Chad Stoehr
Public Works Management Analyst: Erin Olsen
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page iii
Table of Contents
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................................... ii
1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Vision and Goals .......................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Vision Zero Statement ....................................................................................................... 3
2.2 Goals .................................................................................................................................. 4
3. Safety Partners ............................................................................................................................. 5
3.1 Safety Leadership .............................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Stakeholders ...................................................................................................................... 6
4. Plan Development and Process ................................................................................................... 7
4.1 Highway Safety Improvement Program Funding ............................................................... 7
4.2 Systemic Citywide Safety Pattern Analysis ....................................................................... 7
4.3 Site Specific Analysis ......................................................................................................... 7
4.4 Traffic Safety Committee Review ...................................................................................... 7
4.5 Virtual Public Outreach ...................................................................................................... 7
4.6 Adoption ............................................................................................................................. 8
5. Existing Efforts ............................................................................................................................. 9
6. Data Summary ........................................................................................................................... 11
6.1 Citywide Collision Trends................................................................................................. 11
6.1.1 Overall Collision Trend ................................................................................... 14
6.1.2 Injury and Fatal Only Collision Trends............................................................ 14
6.1.3 Pedestrian collision trend ............................................................................... 15
6.1.4 Bicycle Collision Trend ................................................................................... 16
6.1.5 Human and Economic Impact ........................................................................ 17
6.2 Traffic Enforcement .......................................................................................................... 18
7. Citywide Systematic Collision Pattern Analysis ......................................................................... 21
7.1 Citywide Predominant Contributing Factors .................................................................... 21
7.2 Pedestrian Collision Types and Predominant Contributing Factors ................................ 22
7.3 Bicycle Collision Types and Predominant Contributing Factors ...................................... 23
8. Emphasis Areas ......................................................................................................................... 24
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page iv
8.1 Emphasis Area #1: Highest Incident Locations ............................................................... 24
8.1.1 Engineering Recommendations ..................................................................... 25
8.1.2 Education Recommendations ......................................................................... 25
8.1.3 Enforcement Recommendations .................................................................... 25
8.1.4 Emergency Services Recommendations ....................................................... 25
8.2 Emphasis Area #2: Intersection Visibility ......................................................................... 26
8.2.1 Engineering Recommendations ..................................................................... 27
8.2.2 Education Recommendations ......................................................................... 27
8.2.3 Enforcement Recommendations .................................................................... 27
8.2.4 Emergency Services Recommendations ....................................................... 27
8.3 Emphasis Area #3: Impaired Driving ............................................................................... 28
8.3.1 Engineering Recommendations ..................................................................... 29
8.3.2 Education Recommendations ......................................................................... 29
8.3.3 Enforcement Recommendations .................................................................... 29
8.3.4 Emergency Services Recommendations ....................................................... 29
8.4 Emphasis Area #4: Speeding .......................................................................................... 30
8.4.1 Engineering Recommendations ..................................................................... 31
8.4.2 Education Recommendations ......................................................................... 31
8.4.3 Enforcement Recommendations .................................................................... 31
8.4.4 Emergency Services Recommendations ....................................................... 31
8.5 Emphasis Area #5: Access Management ........................................................................ 32
8.5.1 Engineering Recommendations ..................................................................... 33
8.5.2 Education Recommendations ......................................................................... 33
8.5.3 Enforcement Recommendations .................................................................... 33
8.5.4 Emergency Services Recommendations ....................................................... 33
9. High Incident Data Analysis (Systemic Safety Analysis Report - SSAR) .................................. 35
9.1 Top Locations and Recommended Projects .................................................................... 35
9.1.1 Recommendations and Benefit-Cost Analysis ............................................... 35
9.1.2 Dolliver/Hwy 1 (Main St. to Ocean View Ave.) Ranks #1, #3, #6, #7, & #8 ... 36
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page v
9.1.2.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Bulbouts ..................................... 39
9.1.2.2 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Parking Restrictions/Restriping . 41
9.1.2.3 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Right Turn Pocket ...................... 43
9.1.3 N. 4th Street and 5 Cities Drive Rank #2 ......................................................... 44
9.1.3.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis - Signal Upgrade ........................... 47
9.1.4 North Oak Park Blvd. and West Branch St. Rank #4 ..................................... 48
9.1.4.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Signal upgrades ......................... 51
9.1.5 Price St. and Hinds Ave. Rank #5 .................................................................. 52
9.1.5.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Restriping ................................... 55
10. Site Specific Locations ............................................................................................................... 57
10.1 Summary of Site Specific Location and Recommended Approaches ............................. 57
10.1.1 Price St / Mattie Rd Intersection and segment Locations #1 & #2 ................. 58
10.1.1.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis-Restriping and sidewalk ................ 60
10.1.2 Beachfront Promenade (Main St. to Edgewater Hotel) .................................. 61
10.1.2.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Beachfront Promenade from
Main St. to Cypress St. ................................................................................... 63
10.1.3 Sidewalk and Bike lane under US 101 (Mattie Rd. to Shell Beach Rd.) ........ 64
10.1.3.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Sidewalk and Restripe ............... 66
10.1.4 Shell Beach Rd. (Spyglass Dr. to Terrace Ave) ............................................. 67
10.1.4.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Sidewalk on Shell Beach Rd. .... 69
10.1.5 Sidewalk on Coburn Lane (sidewalk along Coburn Lane to existing sidewalk
on Shell Beach Rd.) ........................................................................................ 70
10.1.5.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Sidewalk on Coburn Ln. ............. 72
10.1.6 Price Canyon Rd. and Bello St ....................................................................... 73
Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis- Signalize and modification of the Intersection76
11. Evaluation and Implementation .................................................................................................. 77
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page vi
Figure Index
Figure 1 Local Road Safety Plans courtesy of Federal Highway Administration ................................... 2
Figure 2. A New Vision for Safety .......................................................................................................... 3
Figure 3. 2014-2018 Citywide Collision Locations ............................................................................... 11
Figure 4. Collision hotspots in the city center ....................................................................................... 12
Figure 5. Collision hotspots outside the city center .............................................................................. 13
Figure 6: All Collisions .......................................................................................................................... 14
Figure 7: Injury and Fatal Collisions ..................................................................................................... 14
Figure 8. Citywide Pedestrian Collision Injury Severity ........................................................................ 15
Figure 9. Citywide Pedestrian Collision Location ................................................................................. 15
Figure 10. Citywide Bicycle Collision Injury Severity ............................................................................ 16
Figure 11. Citywide Bicycle Collision Location ..................................................................................... 16
Figure 12. Overall Citations .................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 13. Speeding Citation ................................................................................................................ 18
Figure 14. DUI Arrest............................................................................................................................ 19
Figure 15. Citation by Vehicle Code Section ........................................................................................ 19
Figure 16. Predominant Collision Factors ............................................................................................ 21
Figure 17. Pedestrian Collision Types.................................................................................................. 22
Figure 18. Predominant Bicycle Collisions ........................................................................................... 23
Dolliver Street & Ocean View Avenue shown to represent typical segment collision patterns ............ 37
Exhibit A: Dolliver Street and Cabrillo Highway- Bulbouts ................................................................... 38
Exhibit B.1: Dolliver Street and Cabrillo Highway Parking Restrictions ............................................... 40
Exhibit B.2: Dolliver Street and Cabrillo Highway Right Turn Pocket .................................................. 42
4Th Street and 5 Cities Drive collision patterns ..................................................................................... 45
Exhibit C: Five Cities Dr. and 4th Street ................................................................................................ 46
Branch Street and Oak Park Boulevard collision patterns ................................................................... 49
Exhibit D: North Oak Park Blvd and Branch St. ................................................................................... 50
Price Street and Hinds Avenue collision patterns ................................................................................ 53
Exhibit E: Price and Hinds Left turn Pocket ......................................................................................... 54
Exhibit F: Price St. and Mattie Rd. ....................................................................................................... 59
Exhibit G: Beachfront Promenade ........................................................................................................ 62
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page vii
Exhibit H: Sidewalk and bike lane under US 101 ................................................................................. 65
Exhibit I: Shell Beach Rd. ..................................................................................................................... 68
Exhibit J: Sidewalk on Coburn Ln. ........................................................................................................ 71
Price Canyon Road and Bello Street collision patterns ........................................................................ 74
Exhibit K: Price Canyon Rd and Bello St.............................................................................................. 75
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 1
Executive Summary
The City of Pismo Beach and GHD are pleased to present the City’s Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP)
and Systemic Safety Analysis Report (SSAR). The purpose of this document is to establish the
framework and process for identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing roadway safety improvements on the
City of Pismo Beach’s streets. The LRSP section of this report identifies the top Pismo Beach systemic
collision trends and recommends countermeasures across the four safety disciplines; Engineering,
Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Services. The SSAR section of this report identifies the
specific top collision locations in Pismo Beach based on collision frequency and recommends
countermeasures that can be implemented to mitigate collision patterns. In addition to top collision
frequency locations, this report also assesses key locations identified by City staff and officials based
anticipated multimodal volume influxes due to new developments and destinations.
This plan and report are prepared in compliance with the State and Federal guidelines for eligibility to
apply for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding (HSIP) and provides the necessary data to
support current and future applications for the recommended projects.
LRSPs are critically important as, according to the Federal Highway Administration, over 80% of all
public roads are operated by local or rural governments and approximately 56% of all fatalities occur on
these roads. Even beyond the tragedy of severe incapacitating injuries and deaths, traffic collisions have
a significant cost to the community. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) estimated
that in 2017 traffic collisions resulted in $836 billion dollars in damages, and effected quality of life, and
household productivity. The data presented in this report is from 2018 and prior, as this is the most
recent data available and is typical due to collision report processing time frames and late reporting by
involved parties. In future HISP grant cycles, an adopted LRSP will be a prerequisite for grant eligibility.
In 2018 the City of Pismo Beach experienced 104 traffic collisions, the same as the prior year. Generally,
Pismo Beach’s overall collision trend has remained relatively static. The injury collision trend has also
remained relatively static with 26 occurring in 2018 and the same occurring in 2017. However, in
comparison, the State of California has experienced a 6% reduction and the US a 2% reduction in overall
collisions, therefore the City is tracking slightly below State and National trends for traffic safety.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 2
1. Introduction
The City of Pismo Beach is committed to improving transportation safety and reducing the risk of
death and serious injury that result from incidents on its transportation systems. The purpose of this
report is to establish the framework and process for identifying, analyzing, and prioritizing systemic
roadway safety improvements on the city’s streets. As part of an ongoing effort to make safety
improvements, the Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) was developed in collaboration between the City
and its safety partners.
The City of Pismo Beach LRSP includes the following elements depicted below in Figure 1:
Figure 1 Local Road Safety Plans courtesy of Federal Highway Administration
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 3
2. Vision and Goals
2.1 Vision Zero Statement
The Vision of this plan, or an idealized description of the plan’s success, is a future for the City where
there are no severe injuries or fatalities as a result of traffic collisions. The City would strive towards
achieving this vision while increasing safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all. Traditionally, traffic
deaths and severe injuries have been considered inevitable side effects of modern life. The reality is
that these tragedies can be addressed over time by taking a proactive and preventative approach
that prioritizes traffic safety as a public health issue.
Vision Zero is a significant departure from the status quo in two major ways:
Vision Zero recognizes that people will sometimes make mistakes, so the road system and
related policies should be designed to minimize those inevitable mistakes and reduce their
likeliness to result in severe injuries or fatalities. This means that system designers and
policymakers are expected to improve the roadway environment, policies (such as speed
management), and other related systems to lessen the severity of crashes. Roadway users
are however still responsible for their mistakes and should follow all applicable laws and use
reasonable judgement when conducting themselves within the public right of way.
Vision Zero is a multidisciplinary approach, bringing together diverse and necessary
stakeholders to address this complex problem. In the past, meaningful, cross-disciplinary
collaboration among local traffic planners and engineers, policymakers, and public health
professionals has not been standard practice. Vision Zero acknowledges that many factors
contribute to safe mobility -- including roadway design, enforcement, education, and
emergency response -- and sets clear goals to achieve the shared goal of zero fatalities and
severe injuries.
Figure 2. A New Vision for Safety
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 4
2.2 Goals
From 2014 to 2018, 584 traffic crashes occurred within the City of Pismo Beach with 13 of these
crashes ending in serious injuries or death. In addition to these tragedies, the economic impact of
these crashes was greater than $6.5 million per year. Based on an assessment of collisions citywide,
the major contributing factors to these crashes are unsafe speed, intersection sight distance, driving
under the influence (DUI), and private driveway access management. Based on these predominant
factors the goals to achieving a vision of no traffic related sever injuries or fatalities, while increasing
safe, healthy, and equitable mobility for all are as follows:
1. Addressing Collision Patterns at High Incident Locations.
The City should systematically identify and prioritize the City’s highest collision incident
locations approximately every two years. The City should also analyze, develop
countermeasures, and implement those counter measures using Grants, General Fund,
and Fees from Development Conditions of Approval/Mitigation Measures.
2. Managing speed to appropriate levels.
The City should strive to reduce excessive speeding behavior and subsequently reduce
the number of speeding related collisions.
3. Reducing Impaired Driving.
The City should endeavor to minimize impaired driving through engagement with alcohol
serving establishments, public education campaigns, and enforcement actions and
enforcement presence.
4. Improving intersection visibility.
The City should strive to maintain intersection visibility where it is currently adequate and
improve intersection visibility where it its limited. The City should pursue jurisdictional
authority from Caltrans over Dolliver Street and consider implementing various sight
distance improvements as documented herein.
5. Managing private driveway access to City streets.
The City should establish access management standards and policies that minimize
conflict points and subsequently reduce the number of collisions along high frequency
driveway corridors or at driveways in immediate proximity to controlled intersections.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 5
3. Safety Partners
Safety partners are those agencies and organizations whose input and support are foundational to a
successful plan. The safety leadership team is primarily comprised of City Departments that have key
roles in the development, implementation, and operation of safety projects, programs, and policies.
The leadership team is ultimately responsible for developing, adopting, and implementing the plan
and program. The stakeholder team is distinguished from the leadership team as it is comprised of
partner agencies and organizations who collaborate with the City and contribute to and assist with
the development and implementation of the plan. These agencies and their roles in the plan’s
development and implementation are provided below:
3.1 Safety Leadership
A. City Council
The legislative body which is ultimately responsible for adopting the final plan,
setting safety policies, and approving budget and funding levels.
B. Traffic Safety Committee
The non-legislative advisory body including both City Administrative staff as well as
well as a volunteer citizen representation which evaluates and provides feedback
on the plan.
C. Public Works
Public Works is the lead City Department in development and production of the
plan and its periodic updates. The Public Works Department is responsible for
assembling other City Departments and collaborating with Stakeholders. Public
Works is also responsible for capital project implementation. The City’s Public
Works staff may also lead or collaborate in education campaigns.
D. Police Department
The City’s Police Department collaborates with and assists the City’s Public Works
Department in the development and production of the plan and its periodic updates.
The Police Department maintains collision records and is responsible for carrying
out enforcement practices and activities. The City’s Police Department may also
lead or collaborate in education campaigns.
E. Fire Department
The City’s Fire Department serves in a support role in the development and
production of the plan.
F. Community Development
The Community Development Department supports implementation of the plan
through its development review responsibilities. Community Development assigns
conditions of approval and mitigation measures to new development applications
in collaboration with Public Works where nexus is found and ensure new
development requirements are implemented.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 6
3.2 Stakeholders
I. City of Arroyo Grande and City of Grover Beach
The Cities of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach border Pismo Beach. Roadways
and intersections along these borders require communication and collaboration.
Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach also compete and coordinate on regional funding
allocations through the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments. These agencies
provide feedback to the City of Pismo Beach over the course of plan development
and updates in regards to bordering facilities, regional safety goals and policies, as
well as cooperative funding arrangements.
II. San Luis Obispo County and County Sheriff
Similar to the City of Arroyo Grande and Grover Beach, San Luis Obispo County
also borders Pismo Beach, although to a much lesser degree in terms of roadway
infrastructure. The County also provides feedback to the City of Pismo Beach over
the course of plan development and updates along County borders as well as
regional safety programs, policies, and funding.
III. Caltrans
Caltrans has jurisdiction over US 101 and Dolliver/Hwy 1 through the City’s limits.
Caltrans also provides oversight of various grant funding sources. Many of the
City’s streets and intersections borders State controlled roadways and ramps.
Caltrans provides feedback on the development of this plan and confirms its
compliance with HSIP requirements for future funding eligibility. Under SB 504, the
City is authorized to pursue the relinquishment of Dolliver Street from Caltrans.
IV. San Luis Obispo Council of Government (SLOCOG)
The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments coordinates regional transportation
programs and projects as well as regional funding allocations. SLOCOG provides
feedback on the development of the plan and updates in context to regional
planning activities and potential funding allocations.
V. Pismo Chamber of Commerce
The Pismo Beach Chamber of Commerce represents business interests across the
City, including those businesses in the downtown core where City collision
concentrations are the highest. The Chamber provides feedback on plan
development and in particular how the recommended countermeasures fit with
economic vitality goals of the City and its business community.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 7
4. Plan Development and Process
4.1 Highway Safety Improvement Program Funding
Beginning with HSIP Cycle 11, an approved LRSP will be a requirement for funding
eligibility going forward. The City of Pismo Beach was successful in grant funding to prepare
this combination SSAR and LRSP, which has been developed to meet application
requirements of the HSIP program.
4.2 Systemic Citywide Safety Pattern Analysis
An assessment of all city traffic collisions over the course of 5 years was performed. The
predominant city-wide systemic patterns were identified along with the most common
contributing factors leading to those patterns. These factors established the top five
emphasis areas the City should focus on to reduce traffic collisions. For each factor,
multidisciplinary counter measures were developed, including engineering, education, and
enforcement.
4.3 Site Specific Analysis
In addition to Systemic Citywide Patterns the collision incident locations in the City were
identified, prioritized, and ranked. The collisions at each location were evaluated and
potentially correctable patterns were identified. Countermeasure recommendations were
developed to reduce collisions at the top ranked locations. Preliminary designs, cost
estimates, and a benefit-cost ratio (a measure of and justification for the economic
investment in the improvement versus the value of the benefit) were prepared.
4.4 Traffic Safety Committee Review
The City of Pismo Beach has an established Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) consisting of
City Administration staff, emergency services staff, Public Works staff, as well as a citizen
representative. The safety pattern analysis and site-specific analysis along with preliminary
recommendations was presented to this Committee on February 27, 2020. The program
and its recommendations were updated over the course of plan development consistent
with feedback provided from the group.
4.5 Virtual Public Outreach
Development of the City’s SSAR and LRSP occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.
While in person workshops were initially anticipated with both leadership and stakeholder
groups, State and Local shelter in place order, and other various related public meeting
restrictions prevented this type of outreach. Due to restriction on gathering size, a virtual
outreach platform was developed to present plan information, drafts, and provided a forum
for feedback on plan development from October 2020 through the plans adoption.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 8
4.6 Adoption
The City’s SSAR and LRSP was presented to the City Council at a public hearing on
December 1st 2020. The item received public input supporting recommendations of the
plan. The plan was unanimously adopted by Council resolution.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 9
5. Existing Efforts
In conjunction with safety policies and guidelines stated in the Pismo Beach Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan, the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG) Transportation Plan, and the
City of Pismo Beach Circulation Element, there are several safety projects that are currently in
progress, nearly complete, recently completed or will begin in the near future. These projects are:
Mattie Road Sidewalk Extension (pedestrian safety, extends sidewalk from Pismo Preserve
under US 101 to Price St.) – Completed in June 2020.
Shell Beach Streetscape (bike/pedestrian safety, installation of a multi-use path along 12
blocks of Shell Beach Road) – Completed early Fall 2020.
Bello Bridge replacement (transportation safety, replacement of closed bridge to add an
additional transportation and evacuation route) – in progress, anticipated project completion
in summer of 2021.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 10
DATA ANALYSIS
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 11
6. Data Summary
6.1 Citywide Collision Trends
The past five complete years of collision data (2014-2018) were downloaded from the Statewide
Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) database for the analysis. This data was then cross-
checked with the injury collisions in the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS). The City of
Pismo Beach provided collision history at the study locations, this data was added to the final data
set to complete a comprehensive crash record for the City.
Figure 3 below depicts the citywide collision frequency; areas in red have the highest frequency of
traffic collisions and areas in blue or grey have the lowest. As shown in Figure 3, the highest
concentration of collisions in the City are along Highway 1 (Dolliver Street) and Price St. between
Main St. and Ocean View Ave. The figure also depicts isolated high concentrations of collisions at
4th Street and 5 Cities Drive as well as N. Oak Park Blvd. and W. Branch Street.
Figure 3. 2014-2018 Citywide Collision Locations
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 12
Figure 4 below depicts a more focused view of the highest concentration area of the collisions in the
City. As shown, Dolliver/Hwy 1 from Main Street to Ocean View Avenue has the highest
concentration. The vast majority of collisions within this section involved vehicles turning onto or from
side streets colliding with vehicles traveling along Highway 1.
On October 3, 2019 Governor Newsom signed Senate Bill 504 which allows Caltrans to relinquish its
jurisdiction of this section of Highway 1 to the City of Pismo Beach. The Bill went into effect in January
of 2020; however at the time of this plan the relinquishment has not yet been accepted by the City.
Figure 4. Collision hotspots in the city center
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 13
In addition to the concentration of collisions in the vicinity shown in Figure 4, Figure 5 below depicts
two (2) isolated collision concentrations: one at 4th Street and 5 Cities Drive and the other at N. Oak
Park Blvd. and W. Branch Street. Collisions at both of these locations primarily involved various
turning movements and approaches at the signalized intersections as well as vehicles turning into
and from driveways in close proximity to the signalized intersections.
Figure 5. Collision hotspots outside the city center
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 14
6.1.1 Overall Collision Trend
Figure 6 below shows collision from 2014 to 2018, the total number of collisions reported in the City
remained relatively stable with a slight spike in 2016. It should be noted that the overall collision chart
below does not represent all collisions that occur in the City—rather all reported collisions where a
collision report is generated. Many collisions may be unreported by the involved parties, or reported
by the parties without an officer investigation.
Figure 6: All Collisions
6.1.2 Injury and Fatal Only Collision Trends
Injury collisions are the most accurate representation of overall collision trends because these types
of collisions are most consistently reported and investigated. There was one less injury collision from
2017 to 2018. Aside from 2014, injury collisions have been on a slight upward trend over the last five
years.
Figure 7: Injury and Fatal Collisions
It’s difficult to identify a trend in fatal collisions for the City because these types of collisions are
infrequent, sporadic, and typically occur under unusual circumstances. There were two fatal collisions
between 2014 and 2018. The first collision located at Five Cities Dr. and 4th St. involved a cyclist
hitting an object with no known contributing factors, the second at Shell Beach Rd. and Leeward Ave.
was a broadside collision which involved a vehicle and a motorcycle attributed to impaired driving.
0
50
100
150
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
82 97 113 77 78
35 18 22
25 24
1 4 3 1 2
1 0 0 1 0
Property Damange Only Injury Severe Injury Fatal
0
20
40
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
35
18 22 25 24
1
4 3 1 2
1
0 0 1 0
Injury Severe Injury Fatal
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 15
6.1.3 Pedestrian collision trend
Pedestrian collisions have shown an overall upward trend since 2014, with the exception of 2017,
where only one pedestrian collision was reported. Because of the vulnerable nature of pedestrians
as compared to a motor vehicle, pedestrian collisions typically have a higher number of injuries,
serious injuries, and fatalities.
Figure 8. Citywide Pedestrian Collision Injury Severity
Figure 9. Citywide Pedestrian Collision Location
0
2
4
6
8
10
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
3
12
4
4
1
4
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
Property Damange Only Injury Severe Injury Fatal
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 16
6.1.4 Bicycle Collision Trend
Bicycle collisions have been on a steady decline from 2014 through 2017, 2017 having the lowest
reported bicycle collisions on record. However there was a spike in 2018.
Figure 10. Citywide Bicycle Collision Injury Severity
Figure 11. Citywide Bicycle Collision Location
0
5
10
15
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1 2 2 1 1
10 6 6
4 7
1
3 1
1
Property Damange Only Injury Severe Injury Fatal
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 17
6.1.5 Human and Economic Impact
Traffic collisions result in direct economic costs to those involved—wages and productivity losses,
medical expenses and legal costs, and motor vehicle damages—but this represents only a portion of
total costs associated with collisions. Traffic collisions also have indirect impacts on the families of
those involved, employers, and society as a whole. A study by the National Highway Transportation
Safety Administration (NHTSA) found that more than 75 percent of collision costs are born by society
in the form of insurance premiums, taxes and congestion-related costs such as travel delay, excess
fuel consumption and lost quality of life associated with deaths and injuries.
Comprehensive costs include the economic cost components, but also indirect societal costs. Using
cost estimates by crash severity published in the American Association of State Highway
Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Highway Safety Manual, adjusted to reflect 2018 dollars, the
comprehensive costs associated with the 104 citywide traffic collisions occurring in 2018 were
calculated to be slightly more than $3.8 million. Comprehensive collision costs for 2018 by collision
type are summarized in Table 1 below.
Table 1: 2018 City of Pismo Comprehensive Collision Cost
Collision Severity Number of collisions Cost per Collision Total Cost
Fatal 0 $6,418,400 -
Disabling injury 2 $345,800 $691,600
Non-Incapacitating Injury 9 $126,500 $1,138,500
Possible injury 15 $71,900 $1,078,500
Property damage only 78 $11,800 $920,400
Total $3,829,000
Source: Crash Cost Estimates based on AASHTO’s Highway Safety Manual, 2010. Costs adjusted to 2018 dollars based
on Consumer Price Index and Employment Cost Index per Highway Safety Manual guidance.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 18
6.2 Traffic Enforcement
Enforcement is one of the key disciplines for achieving a reduction in collision trends and improving
overall safety. Figure 12 below depicts the total citations (hazardous and nonhazardous) by the Police
Department from 2014 to 2019, which shows an overall rise over the last five years. This positive
enforcement trend has likely contributed to the fact that City traffic collision numbers have remained
relative static despite rising traffic volumes.
Figure 12. Overall Citations
According to National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (NHTSA), speeding has been
the primary contributing factor in approximately one-third of all motor vehicle fatalities. Since 2014,
the Police Department has averaged 33.5 speeding citations each year. In 2018 the Police
Department cited 32 people for speeding.
Figure 13. Speeding Citation
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Traffic Citations Trends
Traffic Citations
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Speeding Citations
Speeding Citations
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 19
Driving under the influence (DUI) violations have been a focal point of enforcement in an effort to
reduce injury traffic collisions. Typically, DUI is associated with drunk driving, however, DUI also
includes operating a motor vehicle while impaired by drugs (including prescription drugs). Since 2014,
the Police Department has averaged 128 DUI arrests each year. In 2018 the Police Department cited
(cite and release) only 3 people for DUI, however in the same year arrested 159 people for DUI.
Figure 14. DUI Arrest
Figure 15 below depicts the distribution of vehicle code citations by type for 2018. Over half of the
collisions in Pismo beach were reported as not complying with traffic control devices or failing to yield
the right of way, this is consistent with the predominant collision patterns along Dolliver/Hwy 1 as well
as Price St.
Figure 15. Citation by Vehicle Code Section
0
50
100
150
200
250
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
DUI Arrest
DUI Arrest
Distraction and
Driving Offenses
(§23100-23135)
24%
Speed (§22348-
22413)
8%
Stop Sign (§22450-
22456)
47%
Traffic Control
Devices (§21350-
21468)
4%
Bicycle Violation
(§21200-21212)
4%
Right side of
Roadway (§21650-
21664)
4%
Turning & Signals
(§22100-22113)
7%
Failure to Yield
(§21800-21809)
1%Pedestrian
Violation (§21949-
21971)
1%
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 20
CITYWIDE SYSTEMIC
PATTERN ANALYSIS
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 21
7. Citywide Systematic Collision Pattern Analysis
7.1 Citywide Predominant Contributing Factors
As shown in Figure 16 below, broadside, sideswipe, and rear end were the most common type of
collisions reported in 2018, representing 73% of the total recorded incidents. Broadside and sideswipe
collisions were the most prominent, with automobile right of way (ROW) and improper turning as the
leading contributing factors.
Figure 16. Predominant Collision Factors
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 22
7.2 Pedestrian Collision Types and Predominant Contributing
Factors
As shown in the Figure 17 below, vehicle/pedestrian collisions were most commonly caused by
unsafe speed, improper turning, and pedestrian violations.
City of Pismo Beach Police Department typically classifies all pedestrian collisions as
Vehicle/Pedestrians. However, in cases where a collision occurs in multiple stages, such as a rear-
end collision between vehicles that then results in one of the vehicles colliding with a pedestrian,
these pedestrian collisions are coded based on the initial stage of the collision. This is why some
pedestrian collisions are coded as rear-end or sideswipe.
Figure 17. Pedestrian Collision Types
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 23
7.3 Bicycle Collision Types and Predominant Contributing Factors
As shown in the Figure 18 below, Sideswipe and Broadside were the most common type of bicycle
collisions reported in 2018, representing 78% of the total bicycle recorded incidents with improper
turning as the leading contributing factor.
Figure 18. Predominant Bicycle Collisions
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 24
8. Emphasis Areas
8.1 Emphasis Area #1: Highest Incident Locations
Between 2014 and 2018 the City experienced 584 traffic
collisions, although the number of traffic collisions has remained
relatively static over the year’s traffic collisions statewide have
been on the decline. The City’s highest incident collision locations
are concentrated in the City’s downtown core along Dolliver/Hwy
1 as well as Price Street.
One of the most effective ways to reduce Citywide collisions is to
regularly and systematically identify the highest incident
locations, analyze the collision patterns at those locations,
develop targeted countermeasures to those patterns, then
prioritize and implement the measures.
Clipart obtain from <a href="https://www.clipart.email/">clipart.email</a>
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 25
8.1.1 Engineering Recommendations
Idenify and rank the highest incident locations within the City every two to
three years.
Assess collision patterns at each of the highest incident locations and develop
countermeasures to address those patterns.
Maintain an official list of prioritized safety locations and the associated
countermeasures for:
o Grant Funding Requests such as HSIP, ATP, SHA, etc.
o Capital Improvement Funding Requests
o Leveraging other Capital Projects to Implement safety measures
(i.e.…changing striping as part of a roadway resurfacing project)
o Informing safety analysis of development proposals and potentially
establishing those as mitigation measures or conditions of approval
where nexus is established.
o Informing updates to existing fee programs or establishing new fee
programs.
o Leveraging the analysis and prioritization for defense against tort
liability claims.
Assess and report collision patterns before and after implementation of
countermeasures and adjust as necessary.
8.1.2 Education Recommendations
Publish results of high incident location analysis and countermeasure
recommendations.
Regularly initiate and engage with local media outlets such as the Tribune,
KSBY, Pismo Beach Civic News & Announcements, and City’s other own
social media platforms to publish articles and interviews regarding high
incident locations and contributing factors.
Consider “pop-up” safety events on-site at high incident locations. (i.e. on-site
staff handing out flyers and discussing the primary factors for bicycle
accidents at a high bicycle incident location)
8.1.3 Enforcement Recommendations
Prioritize patrol patterns and overall presence at high incident locations.
Target driver behavior that correlates with the predominant contributing
factors for collisions at high incident locations.
8.1.4 Emergency Services Recommendations
Support Engineering, Education, and Enforcement, Activities.
Consider targeted training for responding to specific high incident locations
and treatment of predominant injuries types at those locations.
Consider prepositioning of assets in close proximity to high incident locations.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 26
8.2 Emphasis Area #2: Intersection Visibility
Broadside and Rear end collisions, primarily resulting from vehicles
turning from a side street at two-way stop controlled intersections, are
the City’s number one most common collision type.
Intersection visibility is the most common issue reported by parties
involved in these collision types. Visibility limitations are most
commonly on-street parking, street furniture, and vegetation. These
collision types are predominantly concentrated along Dolliver/Hwy 1
between the Pismo Creek Bridge and Price St.
“Road Junction “icon by Alexander Skowalsky from the noun Project
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 27
8.2.1 Engineering Recommendations
Consider proceeding with Dolliver/Hwy 1 Right-of-Way acquisition from
Caltrans as permitted through SB 503 legislation.
Consider installation of bulbouts and moving side street stop bars forward to
improve visibility around obstructions from side street approaches.
Consider parking restrictions and clearing other sidewalk furniture and
vegetation obstructions in the immediate vicinity of intersections. Right or left
turn pockets can be installed with width gained from parking restrictions that
would further lessen conflicts.
Require sight distance studies as part of development applications and
require minimum visibility clearances at driveways and adjacent
intersections.
Consider conducting all-way stop control and signalization warrant studies
and following up with potential installations where warrants are satisfied.
8.2.2 Education Recommendations
Consider installation of “cross-traffic” does not stop supplemental warning
placards on side street approaches.
Regularly Initiate and Engage with local media outlets such as the Tribune,
KSBY, Pismo Beach Civic News & Announcements, and City’s other own
social media platforms to publish articles and interviews regarding turning
onto Dolliver/Hwy1 and the importance of ensuring an adequate gap is
available before proceeding from the side street.
8.2.3 Enforcement Recommendations
Prioritize patrol patterns and overall presence at high incident locations.
Engage in targeted stop sign and traffic signal compliance.
8.2.4 Emergency Services Recommendations
Support Engineering, Education, and Enforcement Activities.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 28
8.3 Emphasis Area #3: Impaired Driving
DUI (driving under the influence), OUI (operating under the influence), and
DWI (driving while intoxicated) are the most common contributing factors
across the City top collision types. From 2014-2018, 51 reported collisions
in the City of Pismo Beach (one resulting in a fatality) involved alcohol or
drug-impairment.
The highest concentration of impaired driving collisions is in the vicinity of
Dolliver/Hwy 1 near the downtown core, the next highest concentration of
impaired driving collisions is in the vicinity of Shell Beach Road and
Windward Ave. Both locations do have a higher relative proximity to alcohol
serving establishments as compared to other locations in the City.
Engineering solutions are much less effective at addressing impaired
driving patterns. Education and Enforcement are the most effective
disciplines for combating this systemic collision trend.
“Drunk Driving “icon by Myly from the noun Project
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 29
8.3.1 Engineering Recommendations
Support Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Services Activities
8.3.2 Education Recommendations
Regularly engage with alcohol serving establishments in proximity of
impaired driving collision concentrations such as Shell Beach Road and the
downtown core. Utilize PD citizen volunteers for engagement where possible.
Engage with media regarding DUI collisions in the downtown core.
Consider wraps or public art on public trashcans and utility boxes on
sidewalks for impaired driving education campaigns.
8.3.3 Enforcement Recommendations
Conduct DUI checkpoints within impaired driving collision concentrations.
Advertise as required, engage with media outlets.
Increase perception of DUI enforcement presence and higher probably of
being arrested if driving under the influence.
Continue to Prioritize patrols in high incidence areas during peak collision
times of 7pm to 2am
8.3.4 Emergency Services Recommendations
Continue to conduct training targeted at responding to DUI collision and
providing services to intoxicated individuals.
Consider prepositioning assets in downtown area and in the Shell beach area
during peak DUI collision times of 7pm to 2am.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 30
8.4 Emphasis Area #4: Speeding
Speeding is one of the top contributing factors for traffic collisions in
the City of Pismo Beach. Speeding collisions most commonly occur
along Dolliver Street, Price St., 4th St., and Five Cities Dr.
Dolliver/Hwy 1, having the highest concentration of speeding related
collisions, is under Caltrans Jurisdiction, although legislation has
been adopted allowing the transfer of jurisdiction to the City. The
corridor has state standard lane widths, relatively long straight
sections, and limited intersection controls than what might otherwise
be expected for urban built out areas. These conditions could allow
drivers to feel more comfortable traveling at higher speeds despite
frequent driveways and cross streets present along Dolliver Street
Speeding behavior is most commonly resulting in rear-end collisions
in the downtown core.
Clipart obtain from <a href="https://www.clipart.email/">clipart.email</a>
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 31
8.4.1 Engineering Recommendations
Consider proceeding with Hwy 1 Right-of-Way acquisition from Caltrans as
permitted through legislation.
Where lanes are 12’ or more consider narrowing travel lanes and utilizing excess
space for such features as buffered bike lanes, wider parking stalls, or medians as
space permits. At intersections consider bulbouts, traffic circles, and dedicated turn
lanes.
Where possible create a perceived sense of narrowed roadway through pavement
treatments, street trees, and other roadside features.
Consider the addition of turn lanes and other roadway features and striping that
create horizontal deflection.
Consider raised intersections with decorative pavement treatments.
8.4.2 Education Recommendations
Consider entry monuments or other visual cues at Dolliver/Hwy 1 at Price and
Dolliver/Hwy 1 near the Monarch Butterfly Preserve to mark and emphasize the
transition from higher speed corridors into the lower speed downtown core areas of
the City.
Consider the installation of speed feedback signs with photoflash simulation on
approaches into areas with a high incidence of speed related collisions.
Regularly Initiate and Engage with local media outlets such as the Tribune, KSBY,
Pismo Beach Civic News & Announcements, and City’s other own social media
platforms to publish articles and interviews regarding where high speed collisions
are occurring, the damages and injuries involved, and enhanced enforcement
activities.
8.4.3 Enforcement Recommendations
Where possible Increase frequency and visual presence of patrol activity in high
speed incident areas. Utilize PD citizen volunteers to increase presence.
Consider conducting and advertising periodic speeding checkpoints in high speed
incidence areas.
Track speeding citation dismissals and trends, coordinate with San Luis Superior
Court Commissioner and Overseeing Judges to resolve common dismissal
patterns.
Establish/Maintain cooperative enforcement agreements with CHP, County Sherriff,
and Arroyo Grande PD.
8.4.4 Emergency Services Recommendations
Continue to conduct training targeted at responding to speed related collisions
Consider prepositioning assets in close proximity to high incident areas.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 32
8.5 Emphasis Area #5: Access Management
Another top collision trend in the City of Pismo Beach involves
vehicles turning to/from private driveways that are in close
proximity to other driveways or controlled intersections.
This collision pattern is similar to Emphasis Area 2, Intersection
visibility. However, the primary contributing factor here is the
higher level of complexity and decision making required to
navigate turning movements with a higher number of conflict
points than drivers are typically accustomed to.
“Access Management “icon obtain from USDOT
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 33
8.5.1 Engineering Recommendations
Develop and adopt access management standards or guidelines for new
development and redevelopment which establishes:
o Distance between controlled intersections and/or movement
restrictions when distances can’t be achieved.
o Maximizing feasible driveway spacing from other driveways
and/or adjacent intersections.
o Establishing provisions for restricting certain movements at
driveways within close proximity to intersections or other
driveways.
Consider requirements for shared driveways as part of redevelopment or
new development applications to reduce access points along high incident
corridors.
Consider the installation of turn restrictions such as medians along high
incident corridors.
Consider provisions for U-Turns, Two-Stage left turn lanes, and other design
features that allow drivers to complete turning movements and navigate a
lower number of conflicts in multiple stages of their movement.
8.5.2 Education Recommendations
Include information regarding collisions at access points as part of
development permit instructions and pamphlets.
Include access management guidelines into City’s development standards /
policies
Encourage and incentivize cooperative access agreements across private
property lines
8.5.3 Enforcement Recommendations
Support Engineering and Education Activities
8.5.4 Emergency Services Recommendations
Support Engineering and Education Activities
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 34
SYSTEMIC SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
(SSAR)
HIGH INCIDENT LOCATIONS
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 35
9. High Incident Data Analysis (Systemic Safety
Analysis Report - SSAR)
9.1 Top Locations and Recommended Projects
All collisions within the City of Pismo were assessed for the number of collisions over the course of
the last five years. The top five locations were ranked, prioritized, and individual collisions at those
locations were analyzed for correctable patterns. Two intersections along Dolliver Street were
identified in the top incident locations, after further analysis it was found that identical collision
patterns also existed at other locations along the corridor, so the top five list was expanded to eight
to include those as well.
9.1.1 Recommendations and Benefit-Cost Analysis
The collision patterns have been evaluated at each of the top incident locations identified above.
Countermeasures to those patterns have been developed as well as the preliminary estimated cost
of those measures. The following sections of this report summarizes those results.
One of the primary purposes of this report is to establish the City’s eligibility for Highway Safety
Improvement Program (HSIP) grant funding. HSIP grant funding is prioritized and awarded based on
the economic effectiveness of the grant funding, which is established by a benefit to cost ratio. A
summary of the benefit to cost ratios is also provided in the following sections of this report. Project
cost estimates are calculated on a line item basis using the Caltrans Contract Cost Database. In some
cases recent construction bids and benefit values are calculated based on Caltrans established
countermeasure values. Under the current HSIP call for projects the minimum Benefit to Cost Ratio
is 3.5.
Rank Location # Collisions - 5 Yrs.
#1 Dolliver/Hwy 1 & Ocean View Ave.29
#2 N. 4th St. & 5 Cities Dr.22
#3 Dolliver/Hwy 1 & Stimson Ave.18
#4 North Oak Park Blvd. & West Branch St.16
#5 Price St. & Hinds Ave.12
#6 Dolliver/Hwy 1 & Main St.8
#7 Dolliver/Hwy 1 & Pomeroy Ave.7
#8 Dolliver/Hwy 1 & Hinds Ave.7
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 36
9.1.2 Dolliver/Hwy 1 (Main St. to Ocean View Ave.) Ranks #1, #3, #6, #7, & #8
Collision Pattern Assessment
North/South Side Street Traffic vs. East/West Main Street Traffic. Majority of Drivers from Side Street indicated
that they did not see on-coming traffic from Main Street.
Recommendations
Install bulbouts and move side street stop bars forward to clear sight distance around parked cars and other
visibility limitations. Bulbouts would also provide a secondary benefit of shortening of pedestrian crossings.
The drawback is this would result in a potential loss of two parking spaces at each intersection. Alternative B
is the removal of on-street parking in-lieu of bulbouts to improve sight distance, the drawback is this would
results in a potential loss of more on-street parking, however the additional space resulting from parking
removal could be used for intersection turn lanes.
Segment Description
Dolliver/Hwy 1 is a two-way one-lane highway that runs northwest/southeast through the center of the city from
Price St. through the North Beach Campground area. The segment has class 2 bike lanes and on-street
parking on both sides of the street.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 37
Dolliver Street & Ocean View Avenue shown to represent typical segment
collision patterns
STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP61'41'57'38'50'38'50'38'51'38'51'38'STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP51'38'51'38'STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP51'38'52'38'0 80'40'20'NFilename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 3 November 2020 - 4:13 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
11/03/2020
Source: GHD
Exhibit A
Dolliver St / Cabrillo Highway
Bulb Out Alternative
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 39
9.1.2.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Bulbouts
The cost estimate
provided to the right
represents the preliminary
line item cost for installing
bulbouts along
Dolliver/Hwy 1 between
Main and Ocean view.
Line item costs are derived
from Caltrans contract
cost data base for District
5. Cost Estimates should
be updated at 50% design.
The total cost of this project is
estimated at $776,100 which
does not includes the
design/engineering costs.
The estimated benefit of
these improvements is
$1,874,240 based on the
State adopted HSIP Cost
Benefit Calculator. The
Resulting B/C ratio is 2.4.
The current HSIP cycle
program has a minimum B/C
ratio of 3.5, therefore this
project would not be competitive for HSIP funding at this time. However if Bulbouts along the corridor
would be limited to Stimson and Ocean View Intersections the B/C Ratio would result in a significantly
higher ratio and therefore would be a competitive HSIP application.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
STOPSTOP
STOPSTOP STOPSTOP
Exhibit B.1
Dolliver St / Cabrillo Highway
Left Turn Pocket
0 100'50'NFilename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 26 October 2020 - 6:27 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
10/26/2020
Source: GHD
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 41
Dolliver/Hwy 1 (Main St. to Ocean View Ave.)
9.1.2.2 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Parking Restrictions/Restriping
The cost estimate provided
to the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
restriping along Dolliver/Hwy
1 between Main and Ocean
view. Line item costs are
derived from Caltrans
contract cost data base for
District 5. Cost Estimates
should be updated at 50%
design.
The total cost of this project is
estimated at $31,800 which
does not includes the
design/engineering costs. The
estimated benefit of these
improvements is $6,599,840
based on the State adopted
HSIP Cost Benefit Calculator.
The Resulting B/C ratio is
206.3.
With a minimum B/C ratio of
3.5 to apply under the current
HSIP cycle, alternative B
would be a very competitive
project for HSIP funding. Given the high B/C ratio of 244.6 the project could also include
design/engineering costs as well as further associated improvements including roadway resurfacing
to facilitate a more complete restriping and roadside sight distance clearing/reconfiguration of
vegetation and street furniture. This project could also potentially be combined with alternative A,
providing bulbouts at Stimson and Ocean View and parking removal at Main, Pomeroy, and Hinds.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
STOPSTOP
STOPSTOP STOPSTOP
Exhibit B.2
Dolliver St / Cabrillo Highway
Right Turn Pocket
0 100'50'NFilename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 26 October 2020 - 6:29 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
10/26/2020
Source: GHD
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 43
Dolliver/Hwy 1 (Main St. to Ocean View Ave.)
9.1.2.3 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Right Turn Pocket
The cost estimate provided
to the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
restriping along Dolliver/Hwy
1 between Main and Ocean
view. Line item costs are
derived from Caltrans
contract cost data base for
District 5. Cost Estimates
should be updated at 50%
design.
The total cost of this project
is estimated at $25,900
which does not includes the
design/engineering costs.
The estimated benefit of
these improvements is
$1,874,240 based on the
State adopted HSIP Cost
Benefit Calculator. The
Resulting B/C ratio is 72.4.
With a minimum B/C ratio of
3.5 to apply under the
current HSIP cycle,
alternative B.2 would be a very competitive project for HSIP funding. Given the high B/C ratio of 72.4
the project could also include design/engineering costs as well as further associated improvements
including roadway resurfacing to facilitate a more complete restriping and roadside sight distance
clearing/reconfiguration of vegetation and street furniture.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 44
9.1.3 N. 4th Street and 5 Cities Drive Rank #2
The intersection at N. 4th St. and 5 Cities Dr.
is located on the South East portion of the
city near the Pismo Coast shopping plaza.
Dedicated left and right turn lanes are
provided at this intersection and the
intersection is controlled by a traffic signal. A
striped pedestrian crossing is provided on
the south and east sides of the intersection
connecting both sides of the intersection.
The predominant collision pattern involves sideswipe, rear end, and broadside collisions. The most
common scenario is sideswipe collisions occurring as a result of improper turning/lane changing.
Rear-end collisions are also a high frequency pattern at this location, the majority of the crashes
were attributed to speeding.
Dynamic speed feedback signs, signal ahead warning sign with beacons for the south bound and
west bound approaches. Also upgrading signal heads from 8” to 12” indications and retroreflective
back plates.
Segment Description
Collisions Pattern
Recommendations
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 45
4Th Street and 5 Cities Drive collision patterns
1
1
1 2
1 2
1
1
4
5
5
5
43
3 4
Exhibit C
Five Cities Dr and 4th St
Proposed Countermeasures
NOTES:
INCREASE EXISTING 8" SIGNAL HEAD TO 12".
INSTALL NEAR SIDE SIGNAL HEAD.
INSTALL SIGNAL AHEAD (W3-3) SIGN.
INSTALL FLASHING BEACON TO SUPPLEMENT SIGNAL AHEAD (W3-3) SIGN.
INSTALL VEHICLE SPEED FEEDBACK SIGN.
1
2
3
4
5
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 21 September 2020 - 3:50 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/21/2020
Source: GHD
0 200'100'N
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 47
N. 4th Street and 5 Cities Drive
9.1.3.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis - Signal Upgrade
The cost estimate provided to
the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
signal upgrade at N. 4th St. and
5 Cities Dr. Line item costs are
derived from Caltrans contract
cost data base for District 5.
Cost Estimates should be
updated at 50% design.
The total cost of this project is
estimated at $135,900 which
does not includes the
design/engineering costs. The
estimated benefit of these
improvements is $3,701,835
based on the State adopted
HSIP Cost Benefit Calculator.
The Resulting B/C ratio is
27.2.
The current HSIP cycle
program has a minimum B/C
ratio of 3.5. With a B/C ratio of
27.2 the proposed signal upgrades and speed feedback device would be a competitive HSIP project.
With a high B/C ratio of 27.2, design/engineering costs could also be included and the project would
remain competitive for HSIP funding.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 48
9.1.4 North Oak Park Blvd. and West Branch St. Rank #4
The intersection at W. Branch St. and N. Oak
Park Blvd. is located at the border of the City of
Pismo Beach and City of Arroyo Grande near the
north-bound entrance of US 101. The
intersection has a dedicated left and right turn
lane, and shared through lane along W. Branch
St. and N. Oak Park Blvd. This intersection is
controlled by a traffic signal. A striped pedestrian
crossing is available on the east side of the
intersection connecting both sides of the
intersection.
The predominant collision pattern involves broadside, rear-end, and sideswipe collisions. The
primary contributing factor was speeding, however, most collisions also involved another
hazardous violation such as talking on the phone while rear-end collisions happened because of
an unsafe speed.
Dynamic speed feedback signs, signal ahead warning sign with beacons for the south bound and
west bound approaches. Also installation of retroreflective back plates on the signal heads.
Segment Description
Recommendations
Collision Pattern
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 49
Branch Street and Oak Park Boulevard collision patterns
3
1
1
2
3
2
150'125'150'100'0 100'50'
Exhibit D
N. Oak Park Blvd and Branch St
Signal Modification
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 16 September 2020 - 5:12 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/16/2020
Source: GHD
N
NOTES:
INSTALL NEAR SIDE SIGNAL HEAD.
INSTALL FLASHING BEACON TO SUPPLEMENT SIGNAL AHEAD (W3-3) SIGN.
INSTALL SIGNAL AHEAD (W3-3) SIGN.
1
2
3
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 51
North Oak Park Blvd. and West Branch St.
9.1.4.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Signal upgrades
The cost estimate provided
to the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
signal update at N. Oak Park
Blvd. and W. Branch St. Line
item costs are derived from
Caltrans contract cost data
base for District 5. Cost
Estimates should be
updated at 50% design.
The total cost of this project is
estimated at $85,200 which
does not includes the
design/engineering costs. The
estimated benefit of these
improvements is $298,973
based on the State adopted
HSIP Cost Benefit Calculator.
The Resulting B/C ratio is 3.5.
The current HSIP cycle
program has a minimum B/C
ratio of 3.5, therefore the
project would be eligible for
submittal under the current
cycle however it would not likely compete well with other applications.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 52
9.1.5 Price St. and Hinds Ave. Rank #5
The intersection at Price St and Hinds Ave is
located on the northeast side of the
downtown. Price St. is a two-way, two-lane
road with on-street street parking on both
sides of the road. Hinds Ave. is a one-way,
two-lane road with on street parking on each
side of the road going north and two-way
one-lane going south. This intersection is
controlled by a traffic signal.
North/South Price Street traffic Vs. west side Hinds Street Traffic. The most common scenario for
sideswipe crashes is that the majority of Drivers from Hinds St indicated that they did not see on-
coming traffic from Price St. While rear-end collisions happened because of unsafe speed.
To convert one of the East and West bound through lanes to make room for intersection turn
lanes, two-way left turn lanes on the approaches, and potentially bike lanes striping. Up and Down
stream segments do have one lane in each direction, therefore it’s likely this would not impact on
operations however that should be verified.
Segment Description
Recommendation
Collision Pattern Assessment
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 53
Price Street and Hinds Avenue collision patterns
STOP11'12'11'5'2'8'64'0 100'50'NExhibit E
Price St and Hinds Ave
Left Turn Pocket Alternative
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 21 September 2020 - 11:42 AM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/21/2020
Source: GHD
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 55
Price St. and Hinds Ave.
9.1.5.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Restriping
The cost estimate provided to
the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
restriping at Price St. and Hinds
Ave. Line item costs are
derived from Caltrans contract
cost data base for District 5.
Cost Estimates should be
updated at 50% design.
The total cost of this project is
estimated at $24,400 which does
not includes the
design/engineering costs. The
estimated benefit of these
improvements is $300,001 based
on the State adopted HSIP Cost
Benefit Calculator. The Resulting
B/C ratio is 2.3.
The current HSIP cycle program
has a minimum B/C ratio of 3.5.
With a B/C ratio of 12.3 the
proposed restriping would be an
eligible HSIP project.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 56
SYSTEMIC SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
(SSAR)
SITE SPECIFIC LOCATIONS
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 57
10. Site Specific Locations
10.1 Summary of Site Specific Location and Recommended
Approaches
In addition to high incident locations within the City, six locations were evaluated for potential eligibility
for HSIP funding. These six intersections were identified by City staff based on potential growth in
traffic as a result of development and new connections within the vicinity as well as feedback City
staff has received from the public regarding locations that should be considered for further safety
improvements and connectivity. This list is provided below.
These projects have been evaluated following the same methodologies as the high incident locations.
The estimated costs are also based on Caltrans Construction Cost Database and crash reduction
measure benefits are calculated based on values adopted within the Caltrans HSIP analyzer.
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 58
10.1.1 Price St / Mattie Rd Intersection and segment
Locations #1 & #2
The intersection at Price St. and
Mattie Rd. is located north of
downtown Pismo Beach. The
pedestrian crossing at the
intersection crosses Price St. and is
controlled on all sides by a traffic
signal. Mattie Rd. is a two-way, two-
lane road that runs northwest and
southwest crossing under Hwy 101.
A pedestrian sidewalk and a class 2
bike lanes were recently constructed
been constructed along this
undercrossing segment
There were five collisions recorded at Price St. and Mattie Rd. Intersection from 2014 to 2018.
However, no pattern among these five collisions could be identified, each were unique. There were
no collisions along Mattie Rd. from Price to NB 101 ramp under US 101 from 2014 to 2018.
While there was no discernable collision pattern at this intersection and corridor, it is anticipated
that the volume of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle traffic will increase as a result of improved
connectivity along price street and the new Pismo Preserve recreation area. The improvements
recently constructed provide improved multimodal connectivity, as volumes increase overtime its
recommended that the NE corner of Price St and Mattie Rd be adjusted to provide better clearance
for bicycles and that the signing and striping at the undercrossing be upgraded consistent with
National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) recommendations.
Segment Description
Recommendation
Collision Pattern Assessment
0 80'40'20'
Exhibit F
Price St and Mattie Rd
Specific Area #1 & #2
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 21 September 2020 - 12:03 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/21/2020
Source: GHDNNOTES:
REMOVE PAVEMENT STRIPE
ROADWAY WIDENING FOR 5-FOOT CLASS II BIKE LANE
RECONSTRUCT SIDEWALK AND CURB RAMP TO PROVIDE
5- FOOT CLASS II BIKE LANE AT INTERSECTION APPROACH
RELOCATE SIGNAL POLE
INSTALL BICYCLE TREATMENT
INSTALL CROSSWALK
1
2
3
4
5
5
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 60
10.1.1.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis-Restriping and sidewalk
The cost estimate
provided to the right
represents the
preliminary line item cost
for restriping and
sidewalk along Mattie Rd.
and Price St. And Mattie
Rd. intersection. Line
item costs are derived
from Caltrans contract
cost data base for District
5. Cost Estimates should
be updated at 50%
design.
The total cost of this
project is estimated at
$80,500 which does not
includes the
design/engineering costs.
Under HSIP benefit
values are only provided
when the proposed
project addresses existing
collisions correctable by
that project. Because no
correctable collisions
associated with this
project were identified, the
calculated traffic safety
benefit under HSIP methodologies results in $0 and would not be eligible for HSIP funding. However,
this does not mean that the project has no value outside the HSIP funding program.
The project does functionally improve safety by enhancing bicycle clearances as well as delineation
and warning markings. While there is no value benefit under HSIP program this project would likely
have benefit value under other funding programs such as the active transportation programs.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 61
10.1.2 Beachfront Promenade (Main St. to Edgewater Hotel)
An extension of the beach front
promenade north from Main St. to
the stairs near Wadsworth St. and
the Edgewater Hotel.
There is currently no walkway in this area, and no collisions related to vehicles with bicycles or
pedestrians occurred from 2014 to 2018.
Extend the current boardwalk along the beach front from Main St. to Wadsworth Ave. maintaining
current beach access for the adjacent housing and hotel properties.
Segment Description
Collision Pattern Assessment
Recommendation
0 100'50'
Exhibit G
Beachfront PromenadeN
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 16 September 2020 - 5:01 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/16/2020
Source: GHD
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 63
10.1.2.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Beachfront Promenade from
Main St. to Cypress St.
The cost estimate provided to above represents the preliminary line item cost for Beachfront
Promenade from Main St. to Cypress St. Line item costs are based on prior extensions of the
boardwalk and adjusted by CPI in addition to the Caltrans contract costs data base. Cost Estimates
should be updated at 50% design. Because there is no discernable collision pattern that would be
addressed by this improvement this project would not be eligible for HSIP grant funding.
Construction Cost Estimate
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 64
10.1.3 Sidewalk and Bike lane under US 101 (Mattie Rd. to Shell
Beach Rd.)
Extension of the sidewalk on the
northwest end of Mattie Road to
Spyglass Drive under US 101 to Shell
Beach Road including crosswalks and
bike lanes. Currently there are no
sidewalk or bike lanes on either side of
the segment.
There are no reported collisions at the connection between Mattie Rd. and Shell Beach Rd. under
the US 101 from 2014 to 2018.
Install bike lanes and a pedestrian sidewalk on one side of the segment identical to the
improvements recently constructed at Price St and Mattie Rd.
Segment Description
Collision Pattern Assessment
Recommendation
STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP
STOP STOPSTOP
STOPSTOPSTOP
0 80'40'20'
Exhibit H
Spyglass Dr
Pedestrian Improvement
N
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 16 September 2020 - 5:34 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/16/2020
Source: GHD
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 66
10.1.3.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Sidewalk and Restripe
The cost estimate provided
to the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
sidewalk and restriping
along Spyglass Dr. between
Mattie Rd. and Shell Beach
Rd. Line item costs are
based on construction bids
for the recently constructed
Price and Mattie project as
well as derived from
Caltrans contract cost data
base for District 5. Cost
Estimates should be
updated at 50% design.
The total cost of this project
is estimated at $172,300
which does not includes the
design/engineering costs.
The estimated benefit of
these improvements is $0
because there have been no
collision occur at the site.
The Resulting B/C ratio is 0.
Because there is no
discernable collision pattern
that would be addressed by
this improvement this project
would not be eligible for HSIP grant funding.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 67
10.1.4 Shell Beach Rd. (Spyglass Dr. to Terrace Ave)
Extension of Shell Beach Road
streetscape to include pedestrian
path/sidewalk on north side of
Shell Beach Road beginning at
Terrace Avenue to Spyglass Drive.
Currently, part of the sidewalk is
incomplete.
There were 3 vehicle collisions recorded from 2014 to 2018. However there was no discernable
pedestrian collision pattern along Shell Beach Rd.
Complete gaps in sidewalk connectivity and add a bike lane on the east side along this segment
while removing and replacing the existing deteriorated sidewalk.
Segment Description
Collision Pattern Assessment
Recommendation
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 16 September 2020 - 5:17 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/16/2020
Source: GHD
Exhibit I
Shell Beach Rd
Specific Area #5
N
0 120'60'
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 69
10.1.4.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Sidewalk on Shell Beach Rd.
The cost estimate
provided on the right
represents the preliminary
line item cost for sidewalk
along Shell Beach Rd.
from Spyglass Dr. to
Terrace Ave. Line item
costs are derived from
Caltrans contract cost data
base for District 5. Cost
Estimates should be
updated at 50% design.
The total cost of this project
is estimated at $273,000
which does not includes the
design/engineering costs.
The estimated benefit of
these improvements is $0
because there have been no
collision occur at the site.
The Resulting B/C ratio is 0.
Because there is no
discernable collision pattern
that would be addressed by
this improvement this project
would not be eligible for
HSIP grant funding.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 70
10.1.5 Sidewalk on Coburn Lane (sidewalk along Coburn Lane to
existing sidewalk on Shell Beach Rd.)
The segment is located along the
south side of Coburn Lane that
connects to the existing sidewalk on
the south side of Shell Beach Road.
Which includes an incomplete
section.
There were no collisions recorded collision at this location from 2014 to 2018. However, incomplete
sidewalk connections may lead to pedestrians walking in the roadway or shoulder. It’s recommended
that this gap in the sidewalk be completed.
Construct sidewalk along the missing gaps of this segment. Due to the lack of collision history the
project would not qualify for HSIP funding, the project may however compete well with under other
grant programs such as Active Transportation or State Highway Account. Other options include
investigating a nexus for requiring construction as a condition of developing adjacent parcels. The City
should also consider adopting construction of sidewalk gaps into its development impact fee program
as a potential funding source.
Segment Description
Collision Pattern Assessment
Recommendation
STOP
0 80'40'20'
Exhibit J
Coburn Ln
Sidewalk Extension
N
Filename: N:\US\San Luis Obispo\Projects\561\11203763\Digital_Design\2669L001.dwg Plot Date: 16 September 2020 - 5:24 PM
Date
Report No.
Project No.City of Pismo Beach
Pismo Beach SSAR
11203763
R11203763RPT001
09/16/2020
Source: GHD
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 72
10.1.5.1 Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis – Sidewalk on Coburn Ln.
The cost estimate provided above represents the preliminary line item cost for new sidewalk along
Coburn Ln. Line item costs are derived from Caltrans contract cost data base for District 5. Cost
Estimates should be updated at 20% design.
The total cost of this
project is estimated at
$24,000 which does
not includes the
design/engineering
costs. The estimated
benefit of these
improvements is $0
because there have
been no collision occur
at the site. The
Resulting B/C ratio is 0.
Because there is no discernable collision pattern that would be addressed by this improvement this
project would not be eligible for HSIP grant funding.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 73
10.1.6 Price Canyon Rd. and Bello St
The intersection at Price Canyon Rd. and Bello St. is
located northeast of downtown Pismo Beach. The
intersection is an uncontrolled intersection with a
dedicated right turn lane on Bello St. and a dedicated
turn pocket on Price Canyon Rd. A class 2 bike lane
can be found heading northeast bound along Price
Canyon Rd. Price Canyon Rd. is a two-way, one-lane
road that runs northeast and southwest while Bello
St. is a two-way, one-lane road that runs east and
west.
.
There were four collisions recorded at Price canyon Rd. and Bello St. intersection from 2014 to 2018. The
predominant collision pattern involved vehicles turning from Bello to Price Canyon resulting in a broad side
collision. The most common scenario for broadside crashes is that the majority of drivers from Bello St.
indicated that they either did not see or miss judged on-coming traffic from S. West Bound Price Canyon
Rd.
Although this location does not currently rank as a high collision incident location, an increase in traffic
volumes and potentially collisions following the same pattern could occur after the Bello bridge is opened.
Its recommended that the intersection’s operations and safety be studied after the Bello bridge is opened.
Collision Pattern Assessment
Recommendation
Intersection Description
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 74
Price Canyon Road and Bello Street collision patterns
DRAFTData Disclaimer
** Insert text as required by data custodian **** Remove only if not required by data custodian **
EXHIBIT K
Project No.Revision No.-11203763
Date 11/20/2020
CITY OF PISMOPismo Beach SSAR/LRSPPaper Size ANSI A o
Data source: . Created by: jramirez2C:\Users\jramirez2\Desktop\11203763_Bello&Price_Signal Exhibit.mxdPrint date: 20 Nov 2020 - 13:24
Bello St and Price Canyon Rd Signal Exhibit
N.T.S
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 76
Cost Estimate and Cost/Benefit Analysis- Signalize and modification of the Intersection
The cost estimate provided
to the right represents the
preliminary line item cost for
intersection modification and
signalization of the
intersection. Line item costs
are derived from Caltrans
contract cost data base for
District 5. The intersection
has significant underground
and overhead utility conflicts
which are roughly
represented in this cost
estimate. Utility coordination
should occur prior further
design and costs estimated
at 50% progress.
The total cost of this project is
estimated at $423,300 which
does not includes the
design/engineering cost. The
estimated benefit of these
improvements is $107,300
based on the State adopted
HSIP Cost Benefit Calculator.
The resulting B/C ratio is 0.3.
The current HSIP cycle
program has a minimum B/C
ratio of 3.5. With a B/C ratio of
0.3 the proposed intersection
modification would not be
eligible for HSIP funding program.
Construction Cost Estimate
Total Cost & Benefit
GHD | City of Pismo Beach SSAR & LRSP | Page 77
11. Evaluation and Implementation
This LRSP / SSAR is a living document, the list of high incident locations and recommended
countermeasures should be updated every two years to coincide with the City’s Capital
Improvement Budget and HSIP grant cycles for potential inclusion or overlap. Updated high incident
list and recommended safety measures should be presented to key stakeholders and the City’s
Traffic Safety Committee and for review and feedback then submitted to the City Council as an
information item for review and to provide an opportunity for public feedback.
The list of top citywide systemic collision patterns and countermeasures should be updated
approximately every five years in order to utilize the latest data and detect trends or to modify action
items if it is not working. Similarly, top systemic patterns and updated emphasis areas should be
presented to the City’s Traffic Safety Committee and City Council.
Grant Funding
Although this LRSP/SSAR is primarily a requirement for HSIP funding, this document should also
be referenced for potential applications to Active Transportation Program (ATP), Regional State
Highway Account (RSHA), Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) and other funding
sources that are available.
Fee Programs
When updating fee programs or developing/updating development reimbursement agreements this
plan and its recommendations should be considered for inclusion.
City Capital Improvement Program
The project and priorities identified in this plan should serve as a source for Capital Project Request
consideration as well as a cross reference for other capital projects that could be leveraged to
implement the recommendations provided by this plan. For example a roadway resealing project
may provide an opportunity to revise a corridor lane re-configuration by installing proposed striping
from this plan as opposed to replacing prior striping.
Development Review
With implementation of SB 743 traffic safety will have much more focus in development review and
environmental impact reports. Development projects should be crosschecked against the high
incident locations and patterns identified in this report and future updates to help identify potentially
significant traffic safety impacts, and corresponding mitigation measures and/or conditions of
approval.