Final Design Report

Preparedfor
05/18/2015
HousingProject
BrizzolaraStudent
DESIGNREPORT

ANGLE ENGINEERING – DESIGN REPORT 2
May 18, 2015
Paul F. Valadao, PE
Civil and Environmental Engineering Department
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, California
RE: Design Report for the Brizzolara Student Housing Project (80% Design)
Mr. Valadao,
On behalf of Angle Engineering, I am pleased to present the requested 80% design report and drawings
for the Brizzolara Student Housing Project on the Cal Poly campus.
In the following report we have provided Angle Engineering's (AE) project understanding, design
considerations, and design recommendations. AE is a team consisting of qualified individuals in all
aspects of Civil Engineering design. Our team will ensure that Cal Poly will receive a high quality design
that will benefit current and future residents.
Please contact us with any questions or concerns regarding the enclosed report and separately bound
drawings.
Sincerely,
Kelsey Littell
Project Manager
Angle Engineering
925.813.5205
klittell@calpoly.edu

TABLE OF CONTENTs
1. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING................................................................................................ 4
2. SCOPE OF WORK................................................................................................................ 5
2.1 Environmental Considerations ...........................................................................................................5
2.1.1 Water Quality ..............................................................................................................................5
2.1.2 LEED Certification ........................................................................................................................5
2.1.3 Tree Removal and Impact on Local Wildlife................................................................................5
2.2 Geotechnical and Structural Considerations .....................................................................................5
2.3 Traffic and Transportation Demand Management Program Considerations.....................................6
3. DESIGN APPROACH AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................. 7
3.1 Structural Recommendations.............................................................................................................7
3.1.1 Brizzolara Creek Bridge................................................................................................................7
3.1.2 Parking Structure.........................................................................................................................7
3.2 Geotechnical Design Recommendations............................................................................................8
3.2.1 Bridge Foundation Design ...........................................................................................................8
3.2.2 Parking Structure Foundation Design..........................................................................................8
3.2.3 Retaining Wall Design..................................................................................................................8
3.3 Traffic Analysis....................................................................................................................................8
3.4 Road Layout and Pavement Design Recommendations.....................................................................9
3.4.1 Road Layout.................................................................................................................................9
3.4.1 Pavement Design.......................................................................................................................10
3.5 Improvements to Cal Poly Transportation Demand Management Plan ..........................................10
3.6 Utility Improvements........................................................................................................................12
3.7 Drainage Recommendations.............................................................................................................12
3.7.1 Bioswales ...................................................................................................................................12
3.7.2 Retention Basin..........................................................................................................................12
3.7.3 Curbs and Gutters......................................................................................................................12
3.7.4 Inlets, Catch Basins, and Storm Drains......................................................................................13
3.8 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................13
4. COST ESTIMATE FOR OVERALL PROJECT........................................................................... 16
5. RESOURCES ..................................................................................................................... 17

1. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
The BSHP is intended to increase on-campus student housing for sophomore and higher standing
students attending California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly). Located on the
existing H-12 and H-16 parking lots, north of Highland Drive and Brizzolara Creek, the BSHP will consist
of four-bedroom units housing 1460 additional students. Parking improvements will also be made to
accommodate the increase in students and mitigate the loss of surface parking. A parking structure will
provide parking for all spaces removed and an addition of at least 40% of the BSHP resident population.
Under the Cal Poly 2001 Master Plan, H-12 and H-16 parking lots are classified as MU-2, which allows for
multi-use development. A portion of the H-12 parking is already a potential location of a parking
structure under the Master Plan, and design efforts will be made to fulfill this plan.
The H-12 and H-16 parking are two of the most heavily used general parking lots on campus. In order to
satisfy the demand for student parking while simultaneously conducting construction, it is necessary to
allow traffic flow through Via Carta Road as it is one of two roads that lead to the H-12 and H-16 parking
lots. Improvements to the Brizzolara Creek Bridge are imperative to allow increased access to the new
parking structure for students and the adjacent residences. Pedestrian and bicycle access to the student
housing will also be enhanced.

2. SCOPE OF WORK
We will be designing two parking structures on the H-12 lot to accommodate the existing and increase in
parking demand from the new student housings located on the H-16 lot. The report will contain all
necessary structural details and considerations of the parking structure including but not limited to,
columns, girders, and slabs. Along with the parking structures foundation, the report will include
grading, horizontal control, and retaining wall plans for the site. Finally, utility, drainage, transportation,
runoff plans, and cost estimation are also included in the report.
2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The proximity of Brizzolara Creek to our project presents a very unique challenge for our team, as we
aim to minimize impact on the creek and surrounding riparian areas. After careful examination of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), we have determined that the Brizzolara Student Housing
Project includes potential significant impacts, so an Environmental Impact Report is recommended.
2.1.1 Water Quality
A key aspect of our project vision was to greatly enhance the stormwater conditions on site. We were
able to convert over 20% of the site to dedicated green space, allowing for infiltration, groundwater
recharge, and potential habitat for native species. Through the design of four different bioswales and a
bioretention basin, the stormwater that does runoff impervious area is decontaminated and slowed,
allowing time for infiltration. The easternmost portion of Highland Drive and the southern portion of Via
Carta are being converted to pavers, which also reduce the speed with which stormwater is discharged
in to the creek.
2.1.2 LEED Certification
Pursuant to the California State University (CSU) Chancellor's Executive Order 987, the new construction
for the BSHP will be compliant with the CSU Sustainability Measurement System, and thus will qualify
for Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) Silver Certification at minimum. Through
satisfying various credit categories such as Alternative Transportation, Stormwater Design, Energy
Efficiency, Water Efficiency, and Indoor Environmental Quality, our project goal is a LEED Gold
Certification.
2.1.3 Tree Removal and Impact on Local Wildlife
It will be necessary to remove 150 trees in the construction of the BSHP, which will be mitigated
through dedicated green areas. This project will have a net positive impact on the creek flora and
fauna alike, due to a decrease in peak storm flows. All necessary permitting will be acquired
through the corresponding agencies.
2.2 GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS
Site conditions for the BSHP vary across the site, making each foundation and retaining wall unique.
Design will be based on the specific soil conditions found in the Soils Engineering Report produced by
C.P. Engineering. The site has three primary soil layers overlaying a bed of sandstone which ranges from
2-40 feet underneath the ground surface, with a water table ranging from 10-18 feet below the ground

surface. Our geotechnical and structural specialist worked together to design both shallow and deep
foundations for the parking structure and Brizzolara Creek Bridge. Retaining walls will be utilized
throughout the site and the bridge will contain abutments.
The parking structures were modeled to fit the existing H-12 parking lot to maximize the space in the
site, and consist of five floors. The housing complex is located in the existing H-16 parking lot to avoid
and will avoid the FEMA flood zone. To provide more safety for the residents, the design of these
housing complexes shall follow the recommendations put forth by FEMA. Barrier walls in the first
through fourth floor of the structures will have a two inch clearance between the wall and the adjacent
columns to divert runoff and accommodate drainage. The fifth floor of the structure will have
continuous walls for safety and have inlets to direct the runoff to drainage pipes.
2.3 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
CONSIDERATIONS
Improvements in the level of service (LOS) for the intersections surrounding the project site are a key
part of the final proposed transportation layout. Peak hour vehicular circulation was deficient at
Highland Dr./California Blvd. and Highland Dr./University Dr. Improving overall circulation and LOS for all
modes of transportation became a central focus for the project.
The reconfiguration of the parking and road network near the BSHP site prompted the need for changes
to Cal Poly's Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM Plan). The existing measures were
analyzed for effectiveness and paired with new measures to provide the campus with an expanded and
more developed plan. TDM measures were carefully chosen so they would not add additional trips to
intersections already determined to be operating at an unacceptable LOS.

3. DESIGN APPROACH AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Angle Engineering worked closely together to come up with the safest and most economically feasible
design that would best suit Cal Poly and its residents. AE aimed to minimize the environmental impact
on the Brizzolara creek and surrounding areas, as well as the impact of construction and staging while
school is in session.
3.1 STRUCTURAL RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1.1 Brizzolara Creek Bridge
Structural type selection for the Brizzolara Creek Bridge was based on cost, aesthetics and structural
efficiency. Initially, cast-in-place girders were chosen, however the necessary false work during
construction caused by the cast-in-place girders would disrupt the creek bed. Angle Engineering is
dedicated to reducing our environmental impact to the Brizzolara Creek, so precast members were
chosen as they can be craned into place with minimal creek invasion.
Precast, pre-stressed CA I-42 girders were chosen to span the creek. A reinforced concrete deck will be
poured in place. The use of precast girders reduces the need for false work and working in an
environmentally sensitive area. Pre-stressed members also reduce cracking in the concrete under
service loads which allows for protection of the encased steel from corrosion. The pre-stressing strands
allow for a smaller girder size to be used, reducing overall self-weight of the bridge and foundation.
The bridge spans 60 feet, with five CA I-42 girders crossing the span. Demand values used to size girders
are shown in the sample calculations attached in Appendix C. Girders were designed in accordance with
ACI 318-11. The girders are topped with a 10" reinforced concrete slab with #8 flexural steel bars at 9
inches on center (O.C.) running on top and bottom with a clear cover of 1.5 inches, and #4 reinforcing
steel bars at 18 inches O.C. at the top and bottom for temperature and shrinkage. The slab was designed
using ACI 318-11, and attached are spreadsheets finalizing our design.
3.1.2 Parking Structure
Though the parking structures are irregular shapes, Angle Engineering analyzed the structures for
vertical design as a rectangular shape by extending its sides and corners, then cutting the beams and
girders to fit the irregular shape of the parking structures. Framing was laid out based upon the optimal
parking space layout. Columns were placed to control the size of the girders and to maximize the
number of parking spaces. Purlins were spaced to control the lengths of the T-beam. Only the critical
members were designed, and will be the design for the rest of the members in both structures. Each
floor of the parking structure will have the same layout and the same size members as the other floors.
Columns were designed to resist the load from the whole structure. For lateral design, only seismic
loads were considered, and the parking structures were analyzed with their irregular shape.
Both structures were designed for the worst case member and columns were designed to hold the loads
of all floors. For a more cost effective design, columns can get redesigned to hold the loads for its
respective floor. Moreover, some purlins and girders can get redesigned according to its actual length.
For a more aesthetic design, special moment frames or open shear walls can be taken into
consideration.

3.2 GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
The BSHP site is located on a minimal grade with three primary soil layers - clayey sand, silty clay, and
sandy clay - overlaying a bed of sandstone at varying depths. Drilled shafts and strip footings were used
for the parking structure foundation in order to have all foundations embedded or lying on top of the
sandstone. All drilled shafts for this project were designed in accordance with FHWA NHI-10-016. For the
Brizzolara Creek Bridge, abutments are placed on top of drilled shafts at each end of the bridge. All
footings and retaining walls are designed with drainage systems in order to prevent a buildup in pore
pressure beneath or behind structural elements.
3.2.1 Bridge Foundation Design
Combining information from the structural loads with the soil type, drilled shafts were determined to be
the best foundation for the Brizzolara Creek Bridge. We found it necessary to design and construct an
abutment to support the embankment in terms of overturning and sliding. These abutments will sit
directly on top of the drilled shafts which support the relevant loads from the bridge as well as the
abutments. Abutments and drilled shafts will be placed far enough away from the creek insuring no
significant impact on the creek.
3.2.2 Parking Structure Foundation Design
The parking structure will be supported with both strip footings drilled shafts. Strip footings will lie atop
the underlying layer of sandstone and drilled shafts will be embedded a minimum of 2 feet into the
sandstone. The highest recorded groundwater table was used in design in order to be conservative as
possible. This design was chosen to obtain a sufficient bearing strength and to ensure compressibility
will be equal across the entire site. Shafts were treated as columns when designing for reinforcement
with an appropriate cap design. Shaft and cap reinforcement were designed in accordance with ACI 318.
Loads were determined from a 5-story reinforced concrete structure.
3.2.3 Retaining Wall Design
Retaining walls of varying height will be used for the BSHP. Both the parking structures and dormitories
sites will be excavated down to be built on level ground, yet will have sloped boundaries that could
potential impede on the structures. Soil strength parameters were either given or determined from the
Soils Engineering Report. All retaining walls will lie atop the sandstone layer. The average most unit
weight was used for the sandstone in calculation of overburden stress.
Bearing capacity, sliding and overturning failure modes were considered for design. Bearing capacity
was designed using Vesic's method and sliding was the governing failure mode. All retaining walls are
equipped with a Geocomposite drain to ensure all backfill of walls will avoid saturation. All walls are
reinforced in accordance with ACI 318.
3.3 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
Trip generation for the site utilized rates provided in the 2001 Cal Poly Master Plan for upperclassmen.
The expected trip increase in average daily traffic (ADT) from the addition of 1460 beds will be 1947
trips, based off a rate of 2.504 for upperclassmen. Because the students moving to campus will no
longer make the daily trips to campus, a commuter reduction was also applied to the additional ADT
value. The process for determining the split of trips between ingress and egress of the site was modeled

after the Student Housing South Project trip generation. See Table 1 for the breakdown of the effects
the additional trips will have on morning and evening peak hours.
Table 1 - BSHP Trip Generation for Upperclassmen Housing
ADT AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Beds Rate Total Rate In Out Total Rate In Out Total
Upperclassmen 1460 2.504 3656 0.074 82 28 110 0.192 99 183 282
Commute Reduction 1460 -1.17 -1709 -0.117 -129 -43 -172 -0.166 -85 -158 -243
1947 -47 -15 -62 14 25 39
According to Caltrans, a project has significant impact on an intersection if net new trips are added to an
intersection currently operating at an unacceptable LOS. From the most recent traffic study completed
by Fehr and Peers in 2013, many intersections surrounding the campus operate at a LOS of C or lower.
On campus, many intersections experience increased delay due to pedestrians. Angle Engineering
looked at all options to improve the Highland and University intersection, including a roundabout and
traffic signal. From research into the Cal Poly Master Plan, it was determined that University Drive will
be closed to vehicular traffic in the future. Replacing the entire intersection geometry only to shut down
a majority of the traffic flow is not financially feasible. Therefore, a traffic signal was investigated.
Each of the warrants provided by Caltrans for considering a signal was investigated thoroughly. Warrant
1 and 3 were met by the existing vehicle and pedestrian traffic on Highland Drive and University Drive.
Warrant 1, minimum vehicle volumes, is met with the existing Highland traffic counts. Due to high
pedestrian volumes from the parking lots, Warrant 3, minimum pedestrian volumes, is also met for
Highland and University Road. Signalizing the Highland and University intersection is recommended to
handle the peak hour delay in the morning and evening. The signal does not require a geometry change
for the intersection beyond the current recommendations for Via Carta closing. This intersection
improvement can also be removed or converted into a pedestrian only signal upon the closure of
University Drive. For these reasons, Angle Engineering recommends the traffic signal as the best option
for improving the intersection.
3.4 ROAD LAYOUT AND PAVEMENT DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
3.4.1 Road Layout
To facilitate the improvement in LOS of all modes, University Dr. was extended north and Via Carta, the
road between Highland Dr. and Pinnacles Rd., was closed to vehicle traffic. Highland Dr. will end at
University Dr. due to the closure of Via Carta, and a traffic signal is recommended to be installed at this
new 3-way intersection. The intersection will have the same configuration as the current 4-way stop
controlled intersection, with Highland Dr. having a dedicated left turn and right turn lanes. Thru traffic is
restricted to authorized vehicles. The University Dr. extension will end at Pinnacles Rd. A new 3-way stop
controlled intersection is recommended for the existing Pinnacles Rd. and Via Carta intersection.
Pinnacles Rd. will extend to a cul-de-sac between the new residential structures. All roads were
designed for 20 mph with a suggested speed of 20 mph.
Pedestrian traffic will be diverted away from the Highland Dr. and University Dr. intersection to the
pedestrian space on the existing H-2 parking lot. Pedestrians will only be able to cross the intersection
on the southern leg of University Dr. The replacement of the existing vehicle bridge with a pedestrian
and bicycle bridge will allow access to the campus core from the BSHP that does not interfere with the

vehicle traffic. The new vehicle bridge on the University Dr. extension will have a separated pedestrian
path that is only accessible on the east side. To ensure pedestrians from the west parking structure
access the correct exit, a bridge spanning the two parking structures will be erected. Pedestrians will use
this bridge to then cross the creek and access the campus core.
Bicycle traffic will be allowed on all new road alignments in the BSHP site with a dedicated lane on
University Drive and sharrows on Pinnacles Road connecting to the existing Via Carta. The bicycle path
connecting Poly Canyon Village and Building 24 will be extended to include the BSHP site. Residents will
be able to cycle to the campus core with relative ease and be separated from both pedestrians and
vehicles. Bicycle traffic will be allowed to go thru the Highland signal to access the bicycle path.
Overall, 1703 parking spaces will be furnished in the parking structures. This will provide ample space for
the new residents and existing commuting students and staff. Parking Structure 1 will be reserved for
staff parking on the first floor and general parking floor two to five. The staff spaces removed from the
H-2 parking lot for the creation of the green space will be placed in Parking Structure 1. Parking
Structure 2 will have general parking on the first floor and residential parking on floors two to five.
3.4.1 Pavement Design
Chapter 630 of the Highway Design Manual for flexible pavement design was used to design all HMA
pavements on site. Utilizing the ADT determined in the traffic analysis and a Traffic Index of 8.5, a
structural section comprised of 0.35' HMA and 1.65' of Class 2 Aggregate Base was determined. A sub-
base was determined to be unnecessary due the relatively low ADT rates. All pertinent calculations can
be found in Appendix C.
Access to the Farm Shop and the Bioresource and Agricultural Engineering (BRAE) shop along the
existing Via Carta will be maintained through the installation of interlocking concrete pavers (ICP). This
area will be closed to general traffic, but state vehicles and other authorized vehicles will be allowed in
the pedestrian zone via the ICP road. Design methods provided in technical specification 4 from the
Interlocking Concrete Pavement Institute were used for design. Paver sizes provided from Air Vol Block,
Inc. were used in the design. To maintain continuity with the rest of the campus, Apache pavers from Air
Vol Block are the suggested paver style.
3.5 IMPROVEMENTS TO CAL POLY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
Angle Engineering utilized the Transportation Demand Management Manual created by the California
State University System as a starting point for designing the proposed TDM improvements to the BSHP
site. The CSU Manual incorporates six goals that are met with the new Cal Poly plan. These goals aim to
improve the flow of all modes on the CSU campuses and promote environmentally sustainable practices.
The first goal is about encouraging the use of non-auto modes to campus. All measures suggested in this
plan highlight this idea, as well as improve the user experience getting to campus and travelling on
campus. The complete lists of goals are as follows:
1. Encourage the use of non-auto modes
2. Maintain financial sustainability
3. Ensure equitable access
4. Preserve valuable campus land
5. Promote environmental sustainability

6. Build partnerships with the local community and private and institutional actors
A significant part of the transportation design of the project is to separate the different modes to
improve the LOS. This separation also follows two objectives, to enhance both the overall experience to
all modes of transportation and the safety of pedestrians and cyclists. A protected pedestrian walkway
will parallel Via Carta Rd. as it crosses Brizzolara Creek, then diverge to the newly created open space on
the existing H-2 staff parking lot. Pedestrians are protected from both cars and cyclists on this path.
With the construction of two parking structures on the existing H-12 parking lot, the staff portion of the
H-2 parking will be replaced in the new structure. A green space for pedestrians will be provided in the
H-2 lot. A portion of existing Via Carta will be maintained as a special access road with ICP for
Agricultural vehicles going to the Farm and BRAE Shop, but will primarily be green space. Making the
parking lot a new, usable space for residents and students expands recreational space without taking up
new space on campus.
Residents of BSHP will be connected to campus by extending the existing bicycle path near Campus
Market. The two-way Class 1 path will still serve the connection between Poly Canyon Village and
Campus Market. Cyclists coming onto campus from Highland will have access to this new facility from
the Highland and University Dr. intersection. Bike lockers and covered bicycle parking is incorporated
along the path. A bike fix station will also be included at the south end of the BSHP site.
One of the most effective and popular TDM programs on campus is the subsidized SLO transit student
program. Cal Poly subsidizes bus fares for all students and faculty with a valid school ID. This program is
sustained through parking citation revenue and no changes to this program are necessary. A lesser
known counterpart to this effort is the SLO Transit application for smart phones. Accessible to all transit
users this app allows users to track the location of buses on all routes in real time. Promotion of this
feature may help existing user’s better track their travel times and encourage new users to use the bus.
Cal Poly currently has a Rideshare program for faculty and staff only and expanding this program to off-
campus students will help reduce single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips to campus. Similar to the SLO
Transit bus tracker app, an application can be developed with the assistance of a partnership with an
outside firm and Cal Poly students to create a system for student ride sharing. Student created Facebook
pages for finding rides home during academic breaks exist, but consolidating these pages into an app,
and adding in a feature for finding everyday commuter rides, can reduce SOV trips to campus. Another
goal of the CSU Manual encourages partnership with local businesses to foster community. Working
with students and local tech companies to create the student ride share application will fulfill this goal.
While most of the proposed TDM plan elements are self-sustaining or only have a construction cost,
others will require a funding source to remain viable options. As a way to both discourage SOV trips to
campus and increase potential parking revenue, a small increase in parking pass fees could be instituted.
The CSU Manual suggests parking pricing as a successful tool to discourage drivers. Working with
University Police and Parking Services to find an appropriate balance of permit prices is needed. Another
potential source of revenue is charging students to use bike lockers installed in the BSHP. The additional
funding can be used to fund the new rideshare application.

3.6 UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
There are copious amounts of existing utilities beneath the BSHP project site. As the site is to be
constructed on two existing parking lots, the most notable existing utilities are the electrical lines that
power the parking lot lights. It will be necessary to excavate these lines in order to facilitate the
foundations supporting both parking lots and the residential housing unit buildings. There are also many
mains that run beneath the existing Via Carta Road. These utilities must be relocated by their owners
and operators to accommodate construction. These utilities include gas, sewer, and telecom lines. Angle
Engineering has presented recommendations for the relocation of potable water and storm drain lines
that will serve the new BSHP site, as well as what was being previously serviced before construction.
3.7 DRAINAGE RECOMMENDATIONS
A key design requirement for the Brizzolara Student Housing Project is to avoid any increase of peak
runoff during a design storm event. Due to the pre-development condition of nearly 100% impervious
area, we will be decreasing the peak runoff by a considerable amount. In order to further protect the
Brizzolara Creek from erosion and pollutants, we have taken significant measures to improve storm
water quantity and quality beyond what is required.
3. .1 Bioswales7
The significant portion of our roof surface runoff will be diverted to run through bioswales before being
directed to the storm water pipes that will lead to Brizzolara Creek. Using the Rational Method, peak
runoff was determined for each of these surfaces. The four different bioswales were designed according
to Table 2-1 of the Caltrans Biofiltration Swale Guidance handbook. These swales will serve not only a
technical functionality, but are also an architectural feature, adding to our goal of a foliage-filled, natural
landscape.
3. .2 Retention Basin7
Pre-development, all of the runoff from H-16 flows in to a concrete lined channel, ending in a concrete
basin with an 18” pipe that flows directly in to the Brizzolara Creek. This design currently causes visible
erosion in the main channel of the creek, and provides no filtration system for the pollutants that gather
on the parking lot surface. Runoff from buildings 3 and 4 will be diverted to a bioswale in place of this
concrete lined channel, ending in a bioretention basin, intended to slow and filter the water, with a
French drain to take into account overflow for storm events. A consultation will be necessary with the
District NPDES and Office of Storm Water Management Design, as it does not comply with the standards
set forth by the Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbook. This basin will be an improvement over the
current one, reducing the flow while simultaneously percolating the water.
3. .3 Curbs and Gutters7
Curbs and gutters were designed to convey flow along the repaved and redesigned University Dr., Via
Carta, and Pinnacles Rd. San Luis Obispo city standard 18” gutters are used throughout the site. We
categorized these roads as high traffic local streets, which limit our maximum spread to half of the
driving lane. After taking in to consideration the requirements provided by the FHWA for inlet locations,
we considered the proposed grades, and determined the areas that would be draining to each inlet.
Using the Rational Method and dividing the relevant areas in to separate sub-basins, we calculated the

peak flow the gutters would experience during a 10 year storm event. We then calculated the spread at
every station location along the new proposed roads. The spread does not exceed our 18” gutters and 4’
bike lanes, eliminating the need for composite gutters. The curbs were designed to ensure that the
water depth would not exceed the height of the curbs, while leaving room for freeboard.
3. .4 Inlets, Catch Basins, and Storm Drains7
The newly constructed streets will be integrated with numerous inlets placed at strategic locations.
Inlets will route storm water captured in the street gutters to the new underground storm drain system
network. All grates are Caltrans Standard 24-13 grates, and were designed with a 2' maximum width in
order to minimize the amount of reach in to bike lanes. All inlets are integrated in Caltrans Standard G0
precast concrete catch basins. Integrated inlets were designed to capture 100% of flow within their
respective zones. Inlets are placed every 200 feet, as well as at geometric control locations, such as just
uphill of crosswalks.
All catch basins route captured flow to storm drain lines underground. All underground storm drains are
constructed of precast reinforced concrete piping (RCP) with a 12" minimum diameter. Precast RCP was
chosen as the pipe material to accommodate relatively quick installation, as well as a provide durability
for high flows and velocities. All underground storm drains are provided with a minimum 3’ cover from
the new ground surface. There are two major and three minor separate systems that will accommodate
captured storm runoff. The first runs along the existing portion of Pinnacles Road and diverts under the
new University Drive extension. This system captures flow from the surrounding areas adjacent to the
new parking structures. This system will drain just before the new vehicular bridge into Brizzolara Creek.
The second system will capture flow from residential complex area, under the longitudinal portion of
the new open space, and drain into Brizzolara Creek at the north end of the existing bridge along Via
Carta. The third system will capture storm water just south of the new vehicular bridge and empty into
an existing 15" storm drain that empties in to Brizzolara Creek.
The open space will be accessed by a road composed of both a standard bike path, as well as a
pedestrian interlocking concrete paver (ICP) walkway. The ICP walkway is designed to allow infiltration
and divert captured runoff to 2" drains at both sides of the walkway. These drains will tie in to storm
drain systems 2 and 3 and drain appropriately.
3.8 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE RECOMMENDATIONS
The BSHP will be constructed on the site of two heavily-used parking lots on the Cal Poly campus. It is
imperative that construction be planned such that everyday proceedings are minimally interrupted.
We recommend that the construction staging area, which will include all on-site trailers, material
storage spaces, and construction staff parking spaces, will be located by building 4, better known as the
Hanger, in the H-13 parking lot. The space is close to the site and will minimally impact the campus core.
Phase I should encompass the construction work package of the new vehicular bridge. It is
recommended that from the first day of construction, the northern partition of the H-2 parking lot be
shut down to make way for construction of the new bridge that connects with the intersection of
Highland Drive and University Drive. As a staff lot, those spots will be relocated and replace as many of
the metered spots in the main part of the H-2 lot as necessary. It is recommended that a portion
residential parking, such as the Poly Canyon Village Aliso parking structure, be opened to general

parking to compensate for lost parking through the entire duration of the project. Additionally, a small
amount of parking spots in the H-12 parking lot must be removed as part of the demolition for north
end of the bridge. Coordination with University Police will be necessary to ensure that lost parking is
appropriately compensated for, and that safety is ensured.
Phase II will consist of the construction elements required for the west parking structure, the garage
located entirely on the H-12 parking lot. This work package will also see the construction of the road
that connects the vehicular bridge to the existing Via Carta Rd. Existing gas and electrical lines will be
pulled from the ground and relocated. New water lines, storm drains, and other necessary utilities will
be installed below the roads. It is highly recommended that this phase begin at the very beginning of
summer quarter so that it is possible to close the entire H-12 parking lot when parking demand is
minimal.
The east parking structure and renovated open space is recommended to be built during Phase III. This
work package will see the closure of the section of Via Carta that runs from the present intersection with
Highland Dr. and University Dr. to the point where it meets the new road built during Phase II. This
phase will also include the construction of the pedestrian bridge at the location of the existing Via Carta
vehicular bridge. Upon demolishing the existing vehicular bridge, pedestrian traffic will be detoured to
the new roads over the vehicular bridge. Drainage and water supply utilities will be installed in the open
space. Phase III will also call for the H-16 parking lot to be completely closed and demolished, coinciding
with the opening of the new vehicular bridge on the realignment of Via Carta and the west parking
structure. Potable water lines to the feed the green space will tie in to the existing 12" water main under
the irrigation field. Drainage basins will be tied to existing drains that flow to the creek. We strongly
suggest that this phase begin during summer quarter so that construction can be done when parking
demand is lowest. Additionally, it is recommended that during this phase flaggers be implemented along
the existing Pinnacles Rd to control through traffic as the road will be heavily used by commuters and
construction staff simultaneously.
Phase IV will see the site preparation of the residential complex, including the construction of the access
road through the complex, and the utilities & tie-ins that feed the site. Potable water lines that feed the
northern buildings and fire hydrants will tie in to a location along Via Carta. In these occurrences,
vehicular traffic along Via Carta will be detoured to an alternate route through Village Drive adjacent to
Poly Canyon Village. The southern buildings will tie in to the 12" potable water main that runs through
the southern part of the site, which will not require road closures. All other utilities will tie in to the
existing lines that run under Via Carta, including gas, telecom, and Utilidor utilities, which will be
relocated by others. Storm water runoff will flow to new storm drains under the street that will flow to
the creek.
Phase V will be the complete fabrication of the residential complex housing buildings, including the core,
shell, and tenant improvement components of each building.
See Figure 1 below for a geographic representation of the recommended construction sequence.

Figure 1 - Map of Site with Location of Construction Phases
It is necessary that all parties are notified when certain construction activities will occur that significantly
impact traffic flow in order to prevent unexpected inconveniences. The BSHP is located where most
traffic occurs on campus, and construction communication and planning will be of the utmost
importance to avoid disrupting the campus community. University Police must be notified when any
traffic or parking-affecting activities occur during construction. Cal Poly Facilities must be notified of any
utility work that requires shut downs or closures.

4. COST ESTIMATE FOR OVERALL PROJECT
The high-order-of-magnitude cost estimation for the BSHP was completed using unit costs from the
RSMeans Building and Heavy Civil Construction Cost data, as well as the online Caltrans Cost Data
database. Unit costs were assumed to include all pertinent materials, labor, and equipment costs that
contribute to the construction of each component. The proposed new road alignments and new
Brizzolara Creek vehicular bridge are designed in accordance with Caltrans standards, and as such, are
priced according to published Caltrans estimates. All building and site work unit costs are prepared
based on RSMeans cost estimates.
The 80% design cost cost estimation of the BSHP is determined to be $143,943,909. The total project
cost is approximately on the given budget of $146 million. The complete engineer’s cost estimate can be
found in Appendix E.
This grand total is composed of the direct costs associated with the project such as material and labor
costs, as well as General Conditions (GC's) that constitute indirect costs. The direct cost subtotal includes
the demolition of the existing site, bridge crossing Brizzolara Creek, and existing utility upheaval. It also
includes the site preparation and engineering costs directly related to the BSHP. Indirect cost rates are
applied to the subtotal of the project portion's direct cost. A 5% location cost is applied to account for
the isolated nature of the project in relation to major metropolitan areas that are more easily accessible,
and more economical to build in. A 20% emergency contingency fund is also assessed to account for
unforeseen situations that may occur throughout the duration of the project, and are applied to the
subtotal of the project portion's direct cost.

5. RESOURCES
"Biofiltration Swale Design Guidance." California Department of Transportation. Caltrans, 2009. Web. 10
May 2015.
Brown, Dan A., Ph. D, P.E., John P. Turner, Ph. D, P.E., and Raymond J. Castelli, P.E. Drilled Shafts:
Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods. Rep. no. FHWA NHI-10-016. Washington D.C.:
National Highway Institute, 2010. Print.
Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete (ACI 318-11) and Commentary. Farmington Hills, MI:
American Concrete Institute, 2011. Print.
Caltrans. Office of the Engineer. 2014 Contract Cost Data. N.p.: Caltrans, 2014. Web. 14 May 2015
"Construction Site Best Management Practice (BMP) Field Manual and Troubleshooting Guide."
California Department of Transportation. Caltrans, 2003. Web. 16 May 2015.
"Highway Design Manual." California Department of Transportation. Caltrans, 22 Sept. 2014. Web. 10
May 2015.
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Reston, VA: American Society of Civil
Engineers, 2010. Print.
RSMeans Building Construction Cost Data 2015. Norwell, MA: RSMeans, 2014. Print.
RSMeans Building Construction Cost Data 2013. Norwell, MA: RSMeans, 2012. Print.
"Storm Water Quality Handbook: Project Planning and Design Guide." California Department of
Transportation. Caltrans, 22 Sept. 2014. Web. 10 May 2015.
Structural Design of Interlocking Concrete Pavement for Roads and Parking Lots. Tech. no. 4. Interlocking
Concrete Pavement Institute, Sept. 2014. Web. 10 May 2015.

AngleEngineering
Approaching Problems
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
San Luis Obispo, CA 93405
G1
BrizzolaraStudentHousingProject
CaliforniaPolytechnicStateUniversity,SanLuisObispo
1GrandAvenue
SanLuisObispo,CA93405
G1 Title Sheet
G2 General Notes
C1 Site Plan & Demolition Plan
C2 Utility Plan
C3 Grading & Drainage Plan
C4 Horizontal Control
C5 Street Plan & Profiles
C8 Signage Details
C9 Signage Details
C10 Signage Details
C11 Pavement Details
C12 Drainage Details
C13 Drainage Details
S1 Vehicle Bridge Plan & Profile
S2 Vehicle Bridge Cross Section
S3 Parking Structure Foundation Plan
S4 Parking Structure East Face
S5 Parking Structure North Face
S6 Parking Structure Framing Plan
S7 Structural Details
Sheet Index
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo
Project Plans for the
Brizzolara Student Housing Project
APP As Per Plan
BB Begin Bridge
BOT. Bottom
BS Back of Sidewalk
COL. Column
CL Center Line
CLR. Clear Spacing
CTB Cement Treated Base
DFS Deep Foundation Schedule
E.W. Each Web
EB End Bridge
EP Edge of Pavement
Abbreviations
1006
2011 Centerline intersection of
Project Road and Via Carta
N2308998.56
E5766976.85
Southern centerline intersection of
Project Road and Loop Road
N2308597.93
E5768219.76
Basis of Bearings
The basis for this project is based off of a processed, adjusted and recalibrated static GPS
control survey, holding two existing control points, that were provided by Cal-Poly University,
from the survey performed by Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates, dated 8-13-93, having
more particularly described as follows:
slab west of the water tank at the southeast corner of campus having the following coordinates:
N: 2306275.98
E: 5770296.16
approximately 700(ft) north of Highway 1 intersection, located on the northwesterly end of
campus having the following known coordinates:
N: 2309407.51
E: 5762036.39
Survey Control Map Vicinity Map
ELEV. Elevation
EXT. Exterior
FC Face of Curb
INT. Interior
LONG. Longitudinal
NTS Not to Scale
O.C. On Center
PED. Pedestrian
P.S. Parking Structure
RCP Reinforced Concrete Pipe
LONG. Reinforcement
RWS Retaining Wall Schedule
Regional Map
SDS Storm Drain Schedule
SFS Shallow Foundation Schedule
STA Station
STS Stirrup Schedule
SYM Symmetric
TRANS. Transverse
TYP. Typical
UNO Unless Otherwise Noted
VAR Variable

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
1GrandAvenue
G2
General Notes
1. The contractor agrees that he shall assume complete responsibility for
the job site during the course of the project, including the safety of all persons
and property; and that the contractor shall defend and hold the engineer and
owner harmless from any liability in connection with performance of work on
this project
2. The contractor shall practice safety at all times and shall furnish, erect,
and maintain fences, barricades, lights, and signs necessary to give adequate
protection to the public.
3. Information pertaining to existing underground facilities is based on
record information and is as shown for information purpose only, underground
features shown in plan view on the plans may not appear in profile views. The
contractor shall be responsible for contracting all agencies involved and shall
allocate all facilities prior to excavation. The contractor shall call underground
service alert at (800) 642-2444.
4. The contractor shall continually review the job site conditions.
Conditions requiring construction different from that shown on the plans shall
be reported to the engineer prior to proceeding with affected area.
5. These drawings show the finished conditions and unless indicated, do
not show the method of construction.
6. Contractor shall keep a set of project drawings on which record
information shall be replaced noting deviations from the plans in the location,
grade, size, and scope of work which is constructed.
7. The engineer shall review as-built and record survey information
provided by a licensed surveyor of completed work to determine conformance
with the approved plans, contractor shall correct any differences found by such
survey and will provide all contractor's records kept during the course of
construction to the engineer for preparation of record drawings. Engineer will
prepare such record drawings upon completion of work.
8. If construction operations uncover archaeological resources, the
contractor shall stop work in the area of discovery and notify the engineer of
work. A qualified archaeologist will assess the value and importance of the
discovery and direct the removal in accordance with state and federal law.
9. Details shown on these drawings are typical. Similar details apply to
similar conditions. Dimensions take precedence over scale. Notes on the
drawings take precedence over the general notes. Whenever there is a conflict
between requirements shown on these drawing, the more stringent requirement
shall govern.
10. A compaction report shall be provided from a licensed soils engineer
stating that the base and subgrade were prepared in accordance with the project
soils report or city parking driveway standards. 95% minimum compaction
11. All pavement markings to follow 2010 Caltrans Standard Plans
12. In the event that the project construction continues during wet winter
months, the contractor shall make every effort to maintain or winterize the
roads for emergency vehicles.
Grading Notes
1. All grading and site work shall be done in accordance with the grading
specifications of the city of San Luis Obispo and the soils engineering report
no. CP-0114-SA prepared by C.P. engineering, dated august 25, 2014. In the
case of conflict, the more stringent shall govern.
2. The contractor shall verify the locations of all existing underground
installation prior to construction.
3. All cut or fill slopes shall be no steeper than 2 horizontal to 1 vertical.
4. All fills shall be benched into competent material and fill areas shall be
prepared as required by the soils engineer. No fill shall be placed until
preparation of the site has been approved by the soils engineer
5. Clean fill material shall be placed in layers not to exceed 8 inches
compacted thickness and compacted at optimum moisture content an
approved method. Dimensions of backfill material shall be approved by the
soils engineer.
6. Subgrade material shall be compacted to a relative compaction of 95%
in the zone between finished subgrade elevation and one floor below; all
material in fill sections below the zone mentioned above shall be compacted to
90% relative compaction. Relative compaction is to be determined by ASTM
d-1557-78 and certified by test results and reports from the soils engineer. Soil
test shall be made prior to placing of the next material.
7. A compaction report shall be provided from a licensed soil engineer
stating that the base and subgrade were prepared in accordance with the project
soils report of the city parking and driveway standards. 95% minimum
compaction.
8. Provide a minimum 25 slope in natural grade for a minimum of 5 feet
away from building foundations.
9. Provide a copy of the CALOSHA permit for excavations greater than 5
feet in depth.
10. Prior to final inspection, the soil engineer shall certify that all grading
and compaction was done in accordance with the recommendations noted in
the plan.
11. The contractor shall investigate the site during clearing and earthwork
operations for any existing hazard to construction not show on the plans such
as filled excavation or buried structures. If any such hazards are found the
owner shall be notified. All existing structures in the plans shall be disposed of
at a licensed disposal facility.
12. All graded surfaces disturbed areas, loosened transported or stock pile
material shall be wetted protected, or protected in such a way to prevent dust
or spill upon neighboring site area. Contractor shall be responsible for cleanup.
13. All disturbed surfaces resulting from grading operations shall be
prepared and maintained to control erosion. The control shall consist of
effective planting. Protection shall be completed immediately after construction
is complete.
Construction Notes
1. Soils tests shall be done in accordance with requirements of the soils
report CP-0114-SA. All tests must be completed within fifteen days prior to
placing material. The test results shall clearly indicate the location and source of
the material.
2. Provide a minimum cover of 36 inches over the top of waterlines unless
shown otherwise.
3. All underground utilities shown on these plans were determined based
on the best as-built information available. The contractor is responsible to
verify the actual locations of the utilities in the field prior to construction and
shall notify the engineer immediately in the event that potential conflicts are
discovered.
4. Provide verification of the property corners to the satisfaction of the
building inspector at the time of foundation inspection.
5. Building pad certification shall be submitted prior to the foundation
inspection. Certification shall include evidence from the project engineer that
the pads substantially conform to elevation shown on the civil grading plan.
6. All construction practices will be performed in strict accordance with the
Caltrans Construction Site Best Management Practice (BMP) Field Manual and
Troubleshooting Guide, with exceptional attention allocated to the bioswales
and other areas sensitive to erosion.
7. Bioswales will be planted according to recommendations found in the
Biofiltration Guidance - Vegetation section of the Caltrans Biofiltration Swale
Design Guide.
Erosion Control Notes
1. Contractor shall be responsible for the prevention of wind erosion and
dust within the project site area. Control shall satisfy the requirements of the air
pollution control district.
2. Contractor shall avoid tracking mud or debris off the project site. In the
event that this does occur, the contractor shall be responsible for cleanup.
3. Erosion control devises shall be placed as erosion control measure as
directed by engineer.
4. All areas disturbed by grading and are 3:1 or steeper shall be hydro
seeded per the city standard specification sec. 20-3.
5. All disturbed surfaces with a slope 4:1 and greater shall be prepared and
maintained to control erosion by effective planting. All planting to be
completed no later than 30 days prior to request for final approval.
6. Contractor shall place erosion control device at the edge of construction
set parallel with contours to project adjacent properties. Placement of erosion
control measures shall be inspected and approved by the engineer of work.
Water Notes
General Pipeline Conditions
1. The contractor shall pothole all utility crossings prior to staking and
prior to any pipeline excavations to allow grade revisions if necessitated by
actual locations.
2. Pipelines shall be installed after the roadways and the site have been
brought to subgrade, unless otherwise authorized by the specialists.
3. All utility lids shall be marked with the service they represent.
Sewer Conditions:
1. All sewer manhole rims and clean-outs shall be adjusted to finish
grade in paved areas and to 6" above finish grade in untraveled landscaped
areas.
2. Sanitary sewer pipe shall be PVC: Gravity sewer shall be SDR 35 with
integral socket end for gasketed joint assembly. Pipe, fittings, and joints shall
be in conformance with the applicable requirements ASTM 3034.
3. Sewer mains shall be tested after roadways and the site have been
brought to subgrade and after compaction certification.
4. All new sewer main installations shall be video tested.
Storm Drain Conditions:
1. All drainage structures shall be class "A" reinforced Portland cement
concrete.
2. PVC shall be SDR 35 with integral socket end for gasketed joint
assembly. Pipe, fittings, and joints shall be in conformance with the
applicable requirements ASTM 3034.
3. ADS "N-12" (or equal) HDPE material and installation shall comply
with the manufacturer's specifications and the referenced standard
specifications. Joints shall be integral socket end and gasketed joint assembly.
4. Contractor to provide permanent concrete splash blocks at all down
spout locations. Direct runoff towards the nearest swale and/or drop inlet.
Water Main Construction Notes:
1. Water mains shall be tested after the roadways and the site have been
brought to subgrade and compaction certification.
2. All water mains and services shall pass over all sewer mains and
laterals with a minimum of one foot of vertical clearance, unless otherwise
authorized on the plans.
3. All water main fittings, tees, valves, bends, etc., shall have flange
connections with any adjacent fittings.
4. PCV pipe shall be class 200 and shall conform to meet the
requirements of A.W.W.A. specification C900 for 12 inches and smaller.
5. All valve box covers shall be adjusted to finish grade.
6. A continuous tracer wire and tracer tape shall be placed over the water
main and brought to the valve chambers for testing.
7. Locations and elevations of existing water lines and appurtenances are
approximate. Where connections to existing lines are to be made, as shown
on the plans, contractor shall expose the existing line and notify the specialist
of location, elevation, and type of pipe and/or fitting prior to any
construction.
8. Pressure testing of the system shall be performed in conformance
with specification section 02510 when services and related fittings are
installed properly and all meter boxes are set to proper grade. No permanent
connections to existing waterlines shall be made until all pressure testing and
bacteria testing is complete.
9. California Polytechnic State University of San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly
SLO) shall be notified of all work involving shutting off water at any time for
any reason. Lines shall be pressurized and protected from backflow
conditions which could cause bacteria and dirt to enter lines. Cal Poly SLO
shall operate all valves in the accepted system.
10. Before any pressure testing is ready for inspection, the system must be
completed per Cal Poly SLO facility standards; all services installed and to
grade. All main line control valves must have chambers set to grade. All
blow-off, air valves and fire hydrants must be installed. Final pressure testing
shall be done at this point.

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C1
1GrandAvenue
Demolition Notes
1. Hatching represents all existing pavement
to be removed.
2. Hatching represents all trees to be
removed.
3. Bridge to be removed.
4. Trees to be saved.
5. Existing utilities to be relocated by others
prior to construction.
6. Existing utilities to be relocated by
AngleEngineering identified in the Utility
Plan, Sheet C2
7. Light posts to be removed.
Key Notes
Cut 1702 CU. YD.
Fill 5141 CU. YD.
Net 3439 CU. YD. FILL
Demolition Map
1" : 200'
#
#
Earthwork
1. Pedestrian walkway and access road for
authorized and emergency vehicles
2. Bike lane extension
3. Architectural arch
4. Hatching represents proposed bioswale
locations. See
5. Existing farm shops
6. FEMA 100-Year floodzone
7. Proposed staircase and ADA ramp
8. Proposed retaining wall locations. See S8.
9. Proposed light post locations
10. Proposed bridge locations. See S1-S2 for
vehicle bridge. See S5-S7 for ped. bridge.
11. Proposed bicycle rack locations
12. See bridge details S1-S2.
13. Unmarked areas surrounding the access
road are open space for vegetation or
other recreational centers.
14. Proposed bicycle fixing station
15. Proposed retention basin location.
See
3
C13
3
C13
Feet
0 60 120

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C2
1GrandAvenue
Utility Notes
1. Caltrans G0 Curb inlet: Type 24-13 grate
inlets on precast concrete catch basin
modified with 2 ft. sweeper curb inlets.
See
2. Type 24-13 grate inlet on precast concrete
catch basin
3. Proposed manhole locations
4. Connection from paver drainage to storm
water
5. Proposed fire hydrant locations.
6. Fire hydrant range
#
Utility Legend
Existing electrical
Existing gas
Existing telecom
Existing sewer
Existing storm drain
Existing water
New electrical
New telecom
New storm drain
New sewer
New water
Storm Drain Schedule
Pipe Length (ft.)
Pipe Size
(in.)
PI2 450 18
VCA 156 18
VC1 60 15
G1 360 21
PIA 63 18
PI1 200 21
UN1 120 21
UN2 200 21
UN3 96 12
EP 60 12
WP 90 12
WP
EP
PIA
PI1
UN2
VCA
VC1
PI2
G1
UN1
UN3
Utility Notes
1. All pipes shall be made of precast RCP.
#
1
C12

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C3
1GrandAvenue

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C4
1GrandAvenue
CURVE TABLE
Curve Length (ft) Radius (ft)
C1 122.36 157 44.65
C2 59.28 200 16.98

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C5
1GrandAvenue
Plan & Profile Notes
Feet
0 40 80
1. All striping and signage, see sheet C8-C10
2. Type G0 Catch basins and standard
manhole; see and reference City of
San Luis Obispo 2014 Engineering
Standard 3530
3. Connects to Storm Drains PI1. See C2
4. Ties in to lateral outlet. See C2
5. Ties in to existing 15" storm drain. See C2
2
C12
23
224
25

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C6
1GrandAvenue
Feet
0 40 80
1. All striping and signage, see sheet C8-C10
manhole; see and reference City of
Standard 3530
3. Connects to Storm Drains VC1 & G1; see
C2
4. Standard manhole; reference City of San
Luis Obispo 2014 Engineering Standard
3530
5. Connects to Storm Drain PIA. See C2.
6. Connects to Storm Drain UN1. See C2.
2
C12

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C7
1GrandAvenue
1. All striping and signage, see sheet C9-C11.
manhole. See and reference City of
Standard 3530
3. Connects to Storm Drain VCA. See C2.
4. Standard manhole; reference City of San
Luis Obispo 2014 Engineering Standard
3530
5. Connects to Storm Drain PI2. See C2.
6. Ties in to existing 24" storm drain. See C2.
Feet
0 100 200
2
C12

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C8
1GrandAvenue
SIGNAGE
# TITLE
1 R2-1, 20 MPH SPEED LIMIT SIGN(24" x 30")
2 R3-4, NO U-TURN SIGN (SYMBOL) (24" x 24")
3 R61-19(CA), LEFT AND RIGHT TURN ONLY SIGN (48" x 36")
4 R73-4(CA), INTERSECTION LANE CONTROL SIGN (36" x 45")
5 R73-4(CA)(R), INTERSECTION LANE CONTROL SIGN (36" x 45")
6 R5-11, AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY SIGN (30" x 24")
7 R49(CA), NO PED CROSSING USE CROSSWALK SIGN (42" x 18")
8 R9-3, NO PED CROSSING (SYMBOL) SIGN(18" x 18")
9 R10-7, DO NOT BLOCK INTERSECTION SIGN (24" x 30")
10 D3-1, STREET NAME SIGN (VARIES x 12")
Striping notes
1. All pavement markings shall follow Caltrans 2010 Standard Plans.
2. All words will follow "Pavement Markings Words" Sheet A24D.
3. Striping will follow "Pavement Markers and Traffic Lines Typical Details" Sheets A20A
and A20B.
4. Traffic lights.
#
#

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C9
1GrandAvenue
SIGNAGE
# TITLE
1 R1-1, STOP SIGN (30" x 30")
2 R2-1, 20 MPH SPEED LIMIT SIGN (24" x 30")
3 R26(CA), NO PARKING ANYTIME SIGN (12" x 18")
5 R1-5, YIELD HERE TO PEDS SIGN (36" x 36")
6 R99(CA), ACCESSIBLE PARKING ONLY SIGN (12" x 8")
7 R7-8B, VAN ACCESSIBLE SIGN (12" x 18")
8 R5-1, DO NOT ENTER SIGN (30" x 30")
9 R5-1A, WRONG WAY SIGN (36" x 24")
10 R6-1, ONE WAY SIGN (36" x 12")
Striping notes
1. TYP. van accessible aisle with 8'-0" width.
2. Hatching represents dead space.
3.
4.
5. Hatching represents TYP. ADA aisle with 5' width.
8. Striping will follow "Pavement Markers and Traffic Lines Typical Details" Sheets A20A and
A20B.
#
#

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C10
1GrandAvenue
SIGNAGE
# TITLE
1 R1-1, STOP SIGN (30" x 30")
2 R2-1, 20 MPH SPEED LIMIT SIGN(24" x 30")
3 R26(CA), NO PARKING ANYTIME SIGN (12" x 18")
6 R9-3, NO PED. CROSSING (SYMBOL) SIGN (18" x 18")
Striping notes
3. Striping will follow "Pavement Markers and Traffic Lines Typical Details" Sheets A20A
and A20B.

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C11
1GrandAvenue

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C12
1GrandAvenue

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
C13
1GrandAvenue
Inlet notes
1. City of San Luis Obispo Engineering
Standards, 2014
1.1. 6040 - Manhole covers
1.2. 3530 - Precast storm drain manhole

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S1
1GrandAvenue

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S2
1GrandAvenue

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S3
1GrandAvenue
DEEP FOUNDATION SCHEDULE
Pad No. Piles
Pile Size
Pad Dimensions (ft)
Pad Reinf.
Diameter (ft)
Long. Reinf. Long. Reinf. Trans. Reinf.
No. Bars Bar Size Bar Size Spacing Bar Size Spacing
DF A 20 5 40 #11 30 x 40 #10 8" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF B 20 5 40 #11 30 x 40 #10 8" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF C 20 5 40 #11 30 x 55 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF D 20 5 40 #11 30 x 55 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF E 18 5 40 #11 30 x 70 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF F 18 5 40 #11 30 x 55 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF G 18 5 40 #11 30 x 70 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF H 16 5 40 #11 30 x 70 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF I 14 5 40 #11 30 x 55 #10 10" O.C. #8 4" O.C.
DF BRIDGE 4 4 30 #10 6 x 43 #7 12" O.C. #5 6" O.C.
SHALLOW FOUNDATION SCHEDULE
Retaining Wall Base Width (ft) Base Thickness (ft) Length of Strip (ft) Long. Reinf. Trans. Reinf.
SF A 4 2 174 #8 @ 12" o.c. #8 @ 10" o.c.
SF B 5 2 130 #8 @ 12" o.c. #8 @ 8" o.c.
SF C 4 2 140 #10 @ 12" o.c. #8 @ 10" o.c.
SF D 4 2 220 #10 @ 12" o.c. #9 @ 10" o.c.
SF E 4 2 226 #10 @ 12" o.c. #9 @ 12" o.c.
8
S7
Foundation Details
1" : 3'

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S4
1GrandAvenue
Elevation View Notes
1. Shear walls not shown for clarity. See S6
for location, for detail.13
S7

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S5
1GrandAvenue
Elevation View Notes
1. Shear walls not shown for clarity. See S6
for location, for detail.13
S7

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S6
1GrandAvenue
Framing Plan Notes
1. Parking structure members are typ.
2. If T-beam and girder intersect, remove T-beam.
3. T-beam lengths follow purlin spacing. Purlin lenghts follow
girder spacing. Girder lengths follow N-S column spacing.
4. Column spacing denoted running north to south of the
structure.
5. Parking Structure 2's columns supporting the ped. bridge do
not extend to the top of the structure.
6. All members have 2" clear spacing from edge of member
UNO.
7. All shear walls denoted by are 25' long, 15"
thick. See 13
S7

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S7
1GrandAvenue

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S8
1GrandAvenue
STIRRUP SCHEDULE
Stirrup Stirrup Size
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3
Spacing (in) Distance (ft) Spacing (in) Distance (ft) Distance (ft)
ST1 #4 10 6.16 2.34
ST2 #6 4 23 18 9 1.5
ST3 #6 4 18.5 18 3
ST4 #3 @ 2" and 5" from edge of girder #4 @ 12" 27.5 2.5
RETAINING WALL SCHEDULE
Retaining Wall Stem Height, H (ft) Stem Thickness (ft) Width of Batter (ft) Footing Height, t (ft) Footing Width, B (ft) Toe Width (ft) Heel Width (ft) Wall Rebar Temp. and Shrink Length of Wall (ft)
RW 1 6 1 0.5 2 6 1 3.5 #8 @ 18" o.c. #6 @ 8" o.c. 231
RW 2 14 3 2 4 13 2 6 #6 @ 12" o.c. #6 @ 12" o.c. 328
RW 3 8.5 1 0.5 1.5 6.5 2 3 #6 @ 18" o.c. #6 @ 8" o.c. 220
RW 4 8.5 1 0.5 1.5 6.5 2 3 #6 @ 18" o.c. #6 @ 8" o.c. 251
EB 11 1.05 0.25 2 9 1.4 5.4 #6 @ 18" o.c. #6 @ 6" o.c. 43
BB 8 0.8 0.2 1 6 1 4 #6 @ 18" o.c. #5 @ 6" o.c. 43

AngleEngineering
from All Angles
1 Grand Ave.
S9
1GrandAvenue

Pos. Moment Slab Design
Beam Type: Simply Supported
DL 10 plf Location Mu
LL 40 plf 1 Spandrel Supported ‐204.17 lb*ft
f'c 4000 psi 1 Column Supported ‐306.25 lb*ft
fy 60000 psi 2 Integral with Supports 350.00 lb*ft
β 0.85 3 Right Side of Span 1 ‐1768.90 lb*ft
γconcrete 150 pcf 4 Interior Spans (‐) ‐1608.09 lb*ft
ε 0.003 5 Interior Spans (+) 2401.00 lb*ft
b 12 in * If clear spans <10 ft (‐) ‐3201.33 lb*ft
Φ 0.9
clear cover 2 in Vu
d 5.625 in Shear 0.51 kips
Bar # 6 Everywhere else 0.49 kips
Lend 5 ft
Linterior 14 ft
Step 6
Thickness 3 in Vu 3.00 kips
t (rounded) 8 in Vu at d 2.91 kips
SW 100 plf Vc 8538.15 lbs
Factored loads,wu 196 plf 8.54 kips
Mu 2070.00 lb*ft phi Vc 6.40 kips
2.07 k*ft phi Vc/2 3.20 kips
24.84 k*in vu‐phiVc ‐3.50 kips
4phiVc 25.61
Checkpoint 4 PASS
guess (a) 0.4 in
As reqd for strength 0.08 in
2
/ft Stirrup requirement NONE REQUIRED
As min (10‐3) 0.21 in2
As min (10.5.1) 0.23 in2
Stirrup # 4
Diameter of Selected Bar 0.75 in Diameter of Bar 0.50 in
Area of Bar 0.44 in
2
Area of Bar 0.20 in2
Spacing 12.00 in #legs 2.00
As 0.44 in2
/ft Av 0.40 in
2
Checkpoint 1 PASS Spacing ‐ zone 1 0.00 in
Zone 2
a 0.65 in Avmin 0.40
c 0.76 in Smax ‐ Spacing ‐ zone 2 42.16 in
εt 0.02
Checkpoint 2 PASS Distance to Min. Reinf ‐17.37 ft
Zone 2 Distance 16.34 ft
ΦMn 10.50 k*ft Final Solutions
ΦMn 125.96 k*in Checkpoint 1: PASS
Checkpoint 3 PASS Checkpoint 2: PASS
Checkpoint 3: PASS
Checkpoint 4: PASS
ρ t+s 0.0018
As t+s 0.17 in
2
t= 8 in
Bar # 4.00 b= 12 in
Diameter of Bar 0.50 in d= 5.625 in
Area of Bar 0.20 in
2
As= 0.44 in2
Spacing 13.89 in Mu= 24.84 k*in
13.00 in ΦMn= 125.96 k*in
spacing 12.00 in
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 5

Neg. Moment Slab Design
Beam Type: Cantilever
DL 110 plf Location Mu
LL 40 plf 1 Spandrel Supported ‐330.67 lb*ft
f'c 4000 psi 1 Column Supported ‐496.00 lb*ft
fy 60000 psi 2 Integral with Supports 566.86 lb*ft
β 0.85 3 Right Side of Span 1 ‐198.40 lb*ft
γconcrete 150 pcf 4 Interior Spans (‐) ‐180.36 lb*ft
ε 0.003 5 Interior Spans (+) 0.00 lb*ft
b 40 in * If clear spans <10 ft (‐) ‐661.33 lb*ft
Φ 0.9
clear cover 2 in Vu
d 3.125 in Shear 1.00 kips
Bar # 6 Everywhere else 0.99 kips
Lend 4 ft
Linterior 0 ft
Step 6
Thickness 4.8 in Vu 3.00 kips
t (rounded) 6 in Vu at d 2.87 kips
SW 250 plf Vc 15,811.39 lbs
Factored loads,wu 496 plf 15.81 kips
Mu 13,500.00 lb*ft phi Vc 11.86 kips
13.50 k*ft phi Vc/2 5.93 kips
162.00 k*in vu‐phiVc ‐8.99 kips
4phiVc 47.43
Checkpoint 4 PASS
guess (a) 0.8 in
As reqd for strength 1.10 in
2
/ft Stirrup requirement NONE REQUIRED
As min (10‐3) 0.40 in2
As min (10.5.1) 0.42 in2
Stirrup # 4
Diameter of Selected Bar 0.75 in Diameter of Bar 0.50 in
Area of Bar 0.44 in
2
Spacing 12.00 in #legs 2.00
As 1.47 in2
/ft Av 0.40 in2
Checkpoint 1 PASS Spacing ‐ zone 1 0.00 in
Zone 2
a 0.65 in Avmin 0.40
c 0.76 in Smax ‐ Spacing ‐ zone 2 12.65 in
εt 0.01
Checkpoint 2 PASS Distance to Min. Reinf ‐17.86 ft
ΦMn 18.49 k*ft Final Solutions
ΦMn 221.88 k*in Checkpoint 1: PASS
Checkpoint 3 PASS Checkpoint 2: PASS
Checkpoint 3: PASS
Checkpoint 4: PASS
ρ t+s 0.0018
As t+s 0.43 in
2
t= 6 in
Bar # 4.00 b= 40 in
Diameter of Bar 0.50 in d= 3.125 in
Area of Bar 0.20 in
2
As= 1.47 in2
Spacing 18.52 in Mu= 162.00 k*in
18.00 in ΦMn= 221.88 k*in
spacing 12.00 in
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 5

Pos. Moment T‐Beam Design
Beam Type: Both Ends Continuous
Moment Design For: Positive Moment Mu
DL 0.11 k/ft Spandrel Supported ‐38.27 k*ft
LL 0.04 k/ft Column Supported ‐57.40 k*ft
f'c 4000 psi Integral with Supports 65.60 k*ft
fy 60000 psi Right Side of Span 1 ‐91.84 k*ft
γconcrete 150 pcf Interior Spans (‐) ‐83.49 k*ft
ε 0.003 Interior Spans (+) 57.40 k*ft
Φ 0.9 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Ltbeam 17 ft
span 1 between t beams 4.5 ft Vu
span 2 between t beams 14 ft Shear 31.06 kips
t 8 in Everywhere else 27.01 kips
bw 12 in
clear cover 2 in
h decided utilizing table 9.5a 25 in
Centroid 0.375 in
Number of Bars 3
Bar # 6
Layers of Steel: 1 layer
Diameter of Selected Bar 0.75 in Vu 63.00 kips
Vu at d 57.04 kips
As 1.32 in2
Vc 34152.60 lbs
bf1 51 in 34.15 kips
bf2 140 in phi Vc 25.61 kips
bf3 123 in phi Vc/2 12.81 kips
a 0.46 in vu‐phiVc 31.43 kips
Checkpoint 1 Less Than t 4phiVc 102.46
Checkpoint 4 Pass
β 0.85 Stirrup # 4
c 0.54 in Diameter of Bar 0.50 in
d 22.50 in Area of Bar 0.20 in2
εt 0.12 #legs 2.00
Checkpoint 2 Pass Av 0.40 in2
Spacing ‐ zone 1 15.46 in
Distance ‐ zone 1 60.52898726 in
wd 2.16 k/ft Zone 2
wl 0.37 k/ft Avmin 0.40 in2
Factored loads, wu 3.18 k/ft Smax ‐ Spacing ‐ zone 2 42.16 in
Mu 115.00 k*ft or Smax ‐ Spacing ‐ zone 2 11.25 in
1380.00 k*in
Distance to Min. Reinf 11.76 ft
Asf 0.00 in2
a 1.94 in
ΦMn1 0 lb‐in Checkpoint 1: Less Than t
ΦMn2 0 lb‐in Checkpoint 2: Pass
ΦMn 1587521.52 lb‐in Checkpoint 3: Pass
1587.52 kip‐in Checkpoint 4: Pass
132.29 kip‐ft
Checkpoint 3 Pass h= 25
bf 51
bw 12
d= 22.5
As= 1.32
Mu= 115.00
ΦMn= 132.29
zone 1 spacing 15.46
Step 4
Step 5
Final Solutions
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Neg. Moment T‐Beam Design
Moment Design For: Negative Moment Mu
DL 0.11 k/ft Spandrel Supported ‐38.27 k*ft
LL 0.04 k/ft Column Supported ‐57.40 k*ft
fy 60000 psi Right Side of Span 1 ‐91.84 k*ft
γconcrete 150 pcf Interior Spans (‐) ‐83.49 k*ft
Φ 0.75 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Ltbeam 17 ft
span 1 between t beams 14 ft Vu
span 2 between t beams 4.5 ft Shear 31.06 kips
bw 14 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.375 in
Number of Bars 3
Bar # 6
Diameter of Selected Bar 0.75 in Vu 63.00 kips
Vu at d 57.14 kips
As 1.32 in2
Vc 39180.62 lbs
Checkpoint 1 Pass 4phiVc 117.54
Checkpoint 4 Pass
β 0.85 Stirrup # 4
d 22.13 in Area of Bar 0.20 in2
εt 0.03 #legs 2.00
wd 2.16 k/ft Zone 2
wl 0.37 k/ft Avmin 0.40 in2
factored loads, wu 3.18 k/ft Smax ‐ Spacing ‐ zone 2 36.14 in
Mu 115.00 k*ft or Smax ‐ Spacing ‐ zone 2 11.06 in
1380.00 k*in
Distance to Min. Reinf 10.58 ft
Asf 0.00 in2
a 1.66 in
ΦMn1 0.00 lb‐in Checkpoint 1: Pass
ΦMn2 0.00 lb‐in Checkpoint 2: Pass
ΦMn 1517769.83 lb‐in Checkpoint 3: Pass
1517.77 kip‐in Checkpoint 4: Pass
126.48 kip‐ft
Checkpoint 3 Pass h= 25
bf 51
bw 14
d= 22.125
As= 1.32
Mu= 115.00
ΦMn= 126.48
Step 4
Step 5
Final Solutions
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Pos. Moment P‐Beam Design
DL 0.341 k/ft Spandrel Supported 0.00 k*ft
LL 0.15 k/ft Column Supported 0.00 k*ft
fy 60000 psi Right Side of Span 1 0.00 k*ft
γconcrete 150 pcf Interior Spans (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Φ 0.75 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Ltbeam 68 ft
span 2 between t beams 14 ft Shear 303 kips
t 8 in Everywhere else 303 kips
bw 30 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.5 in
Number of Bars 7
Bar # 8
Diameter of Selected Bar 1.00 in Vu (SAP) 403.00 kips
Vu at d 384.85 kips
As 5.53 in2
Vc 139456.44 lbs
bf1 204 in 139.46 kips
Checkpoint 4 Pass
β 0.85 Stirrup # 6
d 36.75 in Area of Bar 0.44 in
2
εt 0.13 #legs 2.00
Mu (SAP) 807.00 k*ft Spacing ‐ zone 2 37.10405788 in
9684.00 k*in Distance ‐ zone 2 673.3599948 in
Asf 0.00 Checkpoint 1: Less Than t
a 3.25 Checkpoint 2: Pass
ΦMn1 0.00 Checkpoint 3: Pass
ΦMn 10870945.29 lb‐in
10870.95 kip‐in h= 40
905.91 kip‐ft bf 141
Checkpoint 3 Pass bw 30
d= 36.75
As= 5.53
Mu= 807.00
ΦMn= 905.91
zone 1 spacing 5.40
Step 4
Step 5
Final Solutions
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Neg. Moment P‐Beam Design
Φ 0.75 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Lbeam 68 ft
bw 24 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.5 in
Number of Bars 5
Bar # 8
Vu at d 22.00 kips
As 3.95 in2
Vc 112703.58 lbs
bf1 204.00 in 112.70 kips
bf2 152.00 in phi Vc 84.53 kips
bf3 135.00 in phi Vc/2 42.26 kips
a 2.90 in vu‐phiVc ‐62.53 kips
Checkpoint 1 ‐ a<>t Okay 4phiVc 338.11
checkpoint (vu‐phiVc)<4phiVc Pass
β 0.85 Stirrup # 3
2
εt 0.03 #legs 2.00
Checkpoint 2 ‐ Epsilon Pass Av 0.22 in2
Mu (SAP) 430.00 k*ft
5160.00 k*in Checkpoint 1: Okay
Checkpoint 2: Pass
Checkpoint 3: Pass
Asf 0.00 Checkpoint 4: Pass
a 2.90
ΦMn1 0.00 h= 40
ΦMn2 0.00 bf 135
ΦMn 7609006.99 lb‐in bw 24
7609.01 kip‐in d= 37.125
634.08 kip‐ft As= 3.95
Final Checkpoint Pass Mu= 430.00
ΦMn= 634.08
zone 1 spacing 5.40
Step 4
Step 5
Final Solutions
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Girder Under Bridge
Φ 0.9 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Ltbeam 8 ft
bw 36 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.375 in
Number of Bars 3
Bar # 6
Vu at d 15.43 kips
As 1.32 in2
Vc 40413.91 lbs
a 0.97 in vu‐phiVc ‐14.88 kips
Checkpoint 4 Pass
β 0.85 Stirrup # 6
2
εt 0.02 #legs 2.00
Mu (SAP) 34.00 k*ft
408.00 k*in Checkpoint 1: Less Than t
Checkpoint 2: Pass
Checkpoint 3: Pass
a 0.65
ΦMn1 0.00 h= 12
ΦMn2 0.00 bf 24
ΦMn 598018.24 lb‐in bw 36
598.02 kip‐in d= 8.875
49.83 kip‐ft As= 1.32
Checkpoint 3 Pass Mu= 34.00
ΦMn= 49.83
zone 1 spacing 5.40
Step 4
Final Solutions
Step 5
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Pos. Moment Girder Design
Φ 0.75 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Ltbeam 50 ft
bw 30 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.5 in
Number of Bars 7
Bar # 8
Vu at d 499.42 kips
As 5.53 in2
Vc 139456.44 lbs
bf1 150 in 139.46 kips
Checkpoint 4 Pass
β 0.85 Stirrup # 6
2
εt 0.14 #legs 2.00
Mu (SAP) 511.00 k*ft Spacing ‐ zone 2 37.10405788 in
6132.00 k*in Distance ‐ zone 2 270.5096804 in
Asf 0.00 Checkpoint 1: Less Than t
a 3.25 Checkpoint 2: Pass
ΦMn 10877145.67 lb‐in
10877.15 kip‐in h= 40
906.43 kip‐ft bf 150
Checkpoint 3 Pass bw 30
d= 36.75
As= 5.53
Mu= 511.00
ΦMn= 906.43
zone 1 spacing 5.40
Step 4
Step 5
Final Solutions
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Neg Moment Girder Under Bridge
Φ 0.9 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Lbeam 8 ft
bw 12 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.375 in
Number of Bars 3
Bar # 6
Vu at d 17.00 kips
As 1.32 in2
Vc 13850.78 lbs
bf1 24.00 in 13.85 kips
bf3 216.00 in phi Vc/2 5.19 kips
β 0.85 Stirrup # 4
2
εt 0.01 #legs 2.00
Mu (SAP) 34.00 k*ft
Checkpoint 2: Pass
Checkpoint 3: Pass
a 1.94
ΦMn1 0.00 h= 12
ΦMn2 0.00 bf 24
ΦMn 581246.47 lb‐in bw 12
581.25 kip‐in d= 9.125
48.44 kip‐ft As= 1.32
ΦMn= 48.44
zone 1 spacing 5.40
Step 4
Final Solutions
Step 5
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Neg. Moment Girder Design
Φ 0.75 If spans <10 ft (‐) 0.00 k*ft
Lbeam 70 ft
bw 30 in
clear cover 2 in
Centroid 0.5 in
Number of Bars 5
Bar # 8
Vu at d 223.52 kips
As 3.95 in2
Vc 140405.13 lbs
bf1 210.00 in 140.41 kips
bf3 234.00 in phi Vc/2 52.65 kips
β 0.85 Stirrup # 4
2
εt 0.04 #legs 2.00
Mu (SAP) 511.00 k*ft
Checkpoint 2: Pass
Checkpoint 3: Pass
a 2.32
ΦMn1 0.00 h= 40
ΦMn2 0.00 bf 158
ΦMn 7644295.59 lb‐in bw 30
7644.30 kip‐in d= 37
637.02 kip‐ft As= 3.95
ΦMn= 637.02
zone 1 spacing 5.40
Step 4
Step 5
Final Solutions
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3

Column
Column Type: Spiral
Applied Load: 3300 kips
f'c 4000 psi
fy 60000 psi
γconcrete 150 pcf
β 0.85
Φ 0.75
ε 0.003
b 12 in
h 12 in
clear cover 2 in
Number of Bars 12
Long. Bar # 10
Spiral Bar # 4
factored loads,wu 3300.00 kips Checkpoint 1: PASS
Pu 3300.00 kips Checkpoint 2: PASS
Checkpoint 3: PASS
Checkpoint 4: PASS
min area of long. Reinforcement (10.9.1) 12.57 in2
Checkpoint 5: PASS
max area of long. Reinforcement (10.9.1) 100.53 in2
Checkpoint 6: PASS
min # long. Bars (10.9.2) 6.00 bars
Diameter of Selected Bar 1.27 in h= 12 in
b= 12 in
Diameter of Selected Spiral 0.50 in d= 16.87 in
d 16.87 in As= 15.24 in2
As 15.24 in2
Pu= 3300.00 k*in
ρsmin 2.443695003 ΦPn= 3306.68 k*in
ρs 46.54211339
checkpoint 1 PASS
checkpoint 2 PASS
checkpoint 3 PASS
checkpoint 4 PASS
Step 3
ΦPn Max 3306681.12 lbs
3306.68 kips
checkpoint 5 PASS
pitch, s 3 in
DC 36 in
smax 3.50 in
checkpoint 6 PASS
Givens
Step 1
Step 2
Final Solutions

PARKING STRUCTURES I
INPUTS Weights
Risk Category III    Total weight of building (w) 35200000 lb
Importance Factor (I) 1.25    Weight of 1st
floor (w1) 7200000 lb
Site Soil Classification D    Weight of 2nd
floor (w2) 7200000 lb
Ss 1.124 g Weight of 3rd
floor (w3) 7200000 lb
S1 0.428 g Weight of 4th
floor (w4) 7200000 lb
Fa 1.05    Weight of 5th
floor (w5) 6400000 lb
Fv 1.572
Response Modification
Coefficient ( R ) 6.5    Height ‐ From top of foundation
Total height of building (hn) 53.330 ft
Height to top of 1st
floor (h1) 12.333 ft
Height to top of 2nd
Height to top of 3rd
Height to top of 4th
Height to "top of 5th

OUTPUTS Story Forces (Fx)
SMS 1.180 g 1st
Floor (F1) 384.722 k
SM1 0.673 g Cv1 0.072
SDS 0.787 g 2nd
Floor (F2) 769.444 k
SD1 0.449 g Cv2 0.144
SDC D    3rd
Floor (F3) 1154.166 k
Period of Vibration (T) 0.394692 s Cv3 0.217
Ct 0.02    4th
Floor (F4) 2906.788 k
x 0.75    Cv4 0.546
hn 53.33
Base Shear Coefficient (Cs) 0.151308    Shear wall check
Base Shear (Vb) 5326031 lb Vu 1497.07 k
   5326.031    Vn 1707.629936 k
   PASS

Givens
f'c 4000 psi Diaphragm Forces
fy 60000 psi 1st
Floor (Fp1) 1066.729 k
Φ 0.75    2nd
Floor (Fp2) 1242.102 k
lw 300 in 3rd
Floor (Fp3) 1405.715 k
hw 15 in 4th
Floor (Fp4) 2906.788 k
height of wall 648 in
d 240 in
fpx/fx
1st
Floor   2.773
2nd
Floor 1.614
3rd
Floor 1.218
4th
Floor 1

PARKING STRUCTURES II
INPUTS Weights
Risk Category II    Total weight of building (w) 68037 lb
Importance Factor (I) 1    Weight of 1st
floor (w1) 14413.5 lb
Site Soil Classification D    Weight of 2nd
floor (w2) 32302.5 lb
Ss 1.124 g Weight of 3rd
floor (w3) 21321 lb
S1 0.428 g Weight of 4th
floor (w4)    lb
Fa 1.05    Weight of 5th
floor (w5)    lb
Fv 1.572
Response Modification
Coefficient ( R ) 6.5    Heights ‐ From top of foundation
Total height of building (hn) 33 ft
Height to top of 1st
floor (h1) 10 ft
Height to top of 2nd
floor (h2) 20 ft
Height to top of 3rd
floor (h3) 33 ft
Height to top of 4th
floor (h4)    ft
Height to "top of 5th
floor (h5)"    ft
OUTPUTS Story Forces (Fx)
SMS 1.180 g 1st
Floor (F1) 794.657 lb
SM1 0.673 g Cv1 0.096
SDS 0.787 g 2nd
Floor (F2) 3561.855 lb
SD1 0.449 g Cv2 0.432
SDC D    3rd
Floor (F3) 3879.106 lb
Period of Vibration (T) 0.275    Cv3 0.471
Ct 0.02    4th
Floor (F4)
x 0.75    Cv4    lb
hn 33    5th
Floor (F5)
Base Shear Coefficient (Cs) 0.121    Cv5    lb
Base Shear (Vb) 8235.617

Diaphragm Forces
1st
Floor (Fp1) 1744.699 lb
2nd
Floor (Fp2) 4482.393 lb
3rd
Floor (Fp3) 3879.106 lb
4th
Floor (Fp4)    lb
5th
Floor (Fp5)    lb
fpx/fx
1st
Floor   2.196
2nd
Floor 1.258
3rd
Floor 1
4th
Floor
5th
Floor

Magnel Plot Location other than Ends
Page C2 of C14
Class: CE 467 Date:
Project: BSHP Advance Planning Study Designer: Kelsey L, Angle Engineering
Notes: Moments for loads on a single girder Cross Section: CA I‐42
I = 95400 in4
η = 0.815 Mmin = 2667600 lb*in yt = 20 in
f'ci = 4000 psi Msus = 8474544 lb*in yb = 20 in
f'c = 5000 psi Mmax = 10094544 lb*in Ac 474 in
2
σci = 2400 psi Eq 6A   Zt ≥ 2620 in
3
Zt = 4336.4 in
3
σcs = 3000 psi Eq 6B   Zt ≥ 2511 in
3
Zb = 4770 in
3
PASS
σcsus = 2250 psi Eq 7   Zb ≥ 3186 in
3
σti = ‐190 psi kt = ‐10.06 in
σts = ‐530 psi kb = 9.1485 in
Eq 8 Eq 9 Eq 10A Eq 10B Eq 11
F, (lbs) 1/F, (lbs
‐1
) e0 ≤ , (in) e0 ≤ , (in) e0 ≥ , (in) e0 ≥ , (in) e0 ≥ , (in)
Infinite 0 9.15 ‐10.06 9.15 9.15 ‐10.06
467880 2.137E‐06 15.23 14.52 6.41 2.92 6.11
10000 0.0001 293.61 1140.36 ‐119.09 ‐282.32 746.42
# Strands kip/strand F (kips) e0 (in)
14 33.42 467.88 12.86
6.41
14.52
Givens
Chosen Prestressing and Eccentricity
4/14/2015
Chosen Section ParametersCalculated Parameters for Design Equations
Eccentricity (e0) Range
‐15.00
‐13.00
‐11.00
‐9.00
‐7.00
‐5.00
‐3.00
‐1.00
1.00
3.00
5.00
7.00
9.00
11.00
13.00
15.00
17.00
19.00
0.0E+00 5.0E‐07 1.0E‐06 1.5E‐06 2.0E‐06 2.5E‐06 3.0E‐06 3.5E‐06
e0(inches)
1/F (lbs‐1)
Eq 8 (e<)
Eq 9 (e<)
Eq 10A,
(e>)
Eq 10B
(e>)
Eq 11
(e>)

Debonded Tendons
Page C3 of C14
Distance along
beam (ft)
Moment
(k*in)
F (kips)
Number
Debonded:
Adjusted Top
Stress (ksi)
Adjusted Bottom
Stress (ksi)
0 0.00 433.57 4 ‐0.140 1.969
1 174.88 433.57 4 ‐0.103 1.932 Compression 2.4 kips
2 343.82 433.57 4 ‐0.068 1.897 Tension ‐0.190 kips
3 506.84 433.57 4 ‐0.033 1.863
4 663.94 433.57 4 0.000 1.830
5 815.10 433.57 4 0.031 1.798
6 960.34 433.57 4 0.062 1.768
7 1099.64 433.57 4 0.091 1.739
8 1233.02 433.57 4 0.119 1.711
9 1360.48 433.57 4 0.146 1.684
10 1482.00 433.57 4 0.171 1.658
11 1597.60 433.57 4 0.195 1.634
12 1707.26 433.57 4 0.218 1.611
13 1811.00 433.57 4 0.240 1.589
14 1908.82 433.57 4 0.260 1.569
15 2000.70 433.57 4 0.280 1.550
16 2086.66 433.57 4 0.298 1.532
17 2166.68 433.57 4 0.315 1.515
18 2240.78 433.57 4 0.330 1.499
19 2308.96 433.57 4 0.344 1.485
20 2371.20 433.57 4 0.357 1.472
21 2427.52 433.57 4 0.369 1.460
22 2477.90 606.99 0 0.164 2.398
23 2522.36 606.99 0 0.173 2.388
30 2667.60 606.99 0 0.203 2.358
Debonded Tendons calculated with Minimum Moments
Maximum Allowed Stresses:
Designed by: Kelsey L
Checked by: Portia B

Debonded Tendons
Page C4 of C14
Distance along
beam (ft)
Moment
(k*in)
F (kips)
Number
Debonded:
Adjusted Top
Stress (ksi)
Adjusted Bottom
Stress (ksi)
0 0.00 357.62 4 ‐0.115 1.624
1 249.07 357.62 4 ‐0.063 1.572 Compression 2.3 kips
2 489.71 357.62 4 ‐0.013 1.521 Tension ‐0.530 kips
3 721.89 357.62 4 0.036 1.473
4 945.64 357.62 4 0.083 1.426
5 1160.94 357.62 4 0.128 1.381
6 1367.80 357.62 4 0.172 1.337
7 1566.21 357.62 4 0.213 1.296
8 1756.19 357.62 4 0.253 1.256
9 1937.71 357.62 4 0.291 1.218
10 2110.80 357.62 4 0.327 1.182
11 2275.44 357.62 4 0.362 1.147
12 2431.64 357.62 4 0.395 1.114
13 2579.40 357.62 4 0.426 1.083
14 2718.71 357.62 4 0.455 1.054
15 2849.58 357.62 4 0.482 1.027
16 2972.01 357.62 4 0.508 1.001
17 3085.99 357.62 4 0.532 0.977
18 3191.53 357.62 4 0.554 0.955
19 3288.63 357.62 4 0.574 0.935
20 3377.28 357.62 4 0.593 0.916
21 3457.49 357.62 4 0.610 0.899
22 3529.26 500.66 0 0.446 1.666
23 3592.58 500.66 0 0.460 1.653
30 3799.44 500.66 0 0.503 1.610
Debonded Tendons calculated with Sustained Moments

Debonded Tendons
Page C5 of C14
Distance along
beam (ft)
Moment
(k*in)
F (kips)
Number
Debonded:
Adjusted Top
Stress
Adjusted Bottom
Stress
0 0.00 357.62 4 ‐0.115 1.624
1 780.07 357.62 4 0.048 1.461 Compression 3.0 kips
2 1533.71 357.62 4 0.206 1.303 Tension ‐0.530 kips
3 2260.89 357.62 4 0.359 1.150
4 2961.64 357.62 4 0.506 1.003
5 3635.94 357.62 4 0.647 0.862
6 4283.80 357.62 4 0.783 0.726
7 4905.21 357.62 4 0.913 0.596
8 5500.19 357.62 4 1.038 0.471
9 6068.71 357.62 4 1.157 0.352
10 6610.80 357.62 4 1.271 0.238
11 7126.44 357.62 4 1.379 0.130
12 7615.64 357.62 4 1.481 0.028
13 8078.40 357.62 4 1.578 ‐0.069
14 8514.71 357.62 4 1.670 ‐0.161
15 8924.58 357.62 4 1.756 ‐0.247
16 9308.01 357.62 4 1.836 ‐0.327
17 9664.99 357.62 4 1.911 ‐0.402
18 9995.53 357.62 4 1.980 ‐0.471
19 10299.63 357.62 4 2.044 ‐0.535
20 10577.28 357.62 4 2.102 ‐0.593
21 10828.49 357.62 4 2.155 ‐0.646
22 11053.26 500.66 0 2.024 0.089
23 11251.58 500.66 0 2.065 0.047
30 11899.44 500.66 0 2.201 ‐0.089
Debonded Tendons calculated with Maximum Moments

Final Design Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (18)

Similar to Final Design Report

Similar to Final Design Report (20)

Final Design Report