DOCSLIB.ORG

Public Works Standards

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Public Works Standards 2016 PUBLIC WORKS STANDARDS October 27Novermber 9 , 2016 Public Works Department City of Sammamish 801 228th Ave SE Sammamish, WA 98075 Page intentionally left blank. CONTENTS FOREWORD........................................................................................................ viiivii DIVISION 1 – ADMINISTRATION ............................................................................. 1 Chapter 1. Introduction ................................ ................................ ............................ 3 1.1. General Authority ...................................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Vesting ...................................................................................................................................... 54 1.3. Copy of the PWS..................................................................................................................... 54 1.4. Contact Information ................................................................................................................. 54 Chapter 2. Permits ................................ ................................ ................................ 97 2.1. Public Utilities ........................................................................................................................... 97 2.2. Other Agencies ........................................................................................................................ 97 Chapter 3. Permit Process ................................ ................................ ................. 13 11 3.1. Permit Issuance ................................................................................................................... 1311 3.2. Pre-construction Meeting ................................................................................................... 1311 3.3. Permit Inspections ............................................................................................................... 1311 3.4. Final Project Approval ......................................................................................................... 1412 3.5. Permit Timing and Expiration ............................................................................................. 1412 3.6. Right-of-Way Use Notification ............................................................................................ 1513 3.7. Franchises, Electric and Communication Facilities ......................................................... 1513 Chapter 4. Permit Submittals ................................ ................................ ............. 17 15 4.1. Design Professionals .......................................................................................................... 1715 4.2. Plans and Specifications .................................................................................................... 1816 4.3. Survey .................................................................................................................................. 1917 4.4. Surface Water Report ......................................................................................................... 1917 4.5. Geotechnical Report ........................................................................................................... 2018 4.6. Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) .............................................................................................. 2118 4.7. Traffic Control Plan ............................................................................................................. 2119 4. 8. Declaration of Covenant ..................................................................................................... 2119 4.9. Easements ........................................................................................................................... 2119 4.10. Tracts .................................................................................................................................... 2220 Public Works Standards i 4.11. Dedication ............................................................................................................................ 2220 4.12. Dewatering Plan .................................................................................................................. 2321 4.13. Maintenance Plan ............................................................................................................... 2321 4.14. Financial Guarantee ........................................................................................................... 2321 4.15. Insurance ............................................................................................................................. 2421 Chapter 5. Permit Fees ................................ ................................ ..................... 25 23 DIVISION 2 – RIGHT-OF-WAY ............................................................................ 2725 Chapter 6. Standards ................................ ................................ ........................ 29 27 6.1. Companion Documents ..................................................................................................... 2927 6.2. Deviation from Engineering Standards ............................................................................. 3129 Chapter 7. General Requirements ................................ ................................ ...... 33 31 7.1. Americans with Disabilities Act .......................................................................................... 3331 7.2. Low Impact Development .................................................................................................. 3331 7.3. Maintenance ........................................................................................................................ 3331 7.4. Tree Removal/Pruning ....................................................................................................... 3331 7.5. Connectivity ......................................................................................................................... 3432 7.6. Connectivity to Substandard Roadways .......................................................................... 3432 7.7. Underground Utilities .......................................................................................................... 3533 7. 8. Frontage Improvements ..................................................................................................... 3634 7.9. Dedication of Right-of-Way ................................................................................................ 3836 7.10. Illumination ........................................................................................................................... 3836 7.11. Curbing ................................................................................................................................. 4038 7.12. Traffic Calming Devices...................................................................................................... 4038 7.13. Pavement Cut Moratorium ................................................................................................. 4139 Chapter 8. Traffic Impact Analysis ................................ ................................ ...... 43 41 Chapter 9. Street Classification ................................ ................................ .......... 45 43 9.1. Arterial Streets ..................................................................................................................... 4543 9.2. Non-Arterial Streets............................................................................................................. 4745 9.3. Alley ...................................................................................................................................... 4947 9.4. Woonerf ................................................................................................................................ 5048 9.5. Private Street ....................................................................................................................... 5048 Chapter 10. Access Management ................................ ................................ ........ 52 50 10.1. General ................................................................................................................................. 5250 Public Works Standards ii 10.2. Access Requirements ........................................................................................................ 5452 Chapter 11. Access Design ................................ ................................ ................. 56 54 11.1. General ................................................................................................................................. 5654 11.2. Access Width ....................................................................................................................... 5654 11.3. Access Clearance ............................................................................................................... 5755 11.4. Access Approach ................................................................................................................ 5755 11.5. Driveway .............................................................................................................................. 5856 11.6. Parking Lot Throat Lengths ...............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • City of Cornelius Public Works Standards
    City of Cornelius Public Works Standards Terry W. Keyes City Engineer 3.17.17 Table of Contents Chapter 1 General .................................................................................................................... 4 1.01 Philosophy ................................................................................................................... 4 1.02 Work Covered by these Standards .............................................................................. 4 1.03 Organization of Standards ........................................................................................... 4 1.04 Using Standard Details ................................................................................................ 5 1.05 Definitions .................................................................................................................... 5 Chapter 2 Administrative Procedures .................................................................................... 7 2.01 Adoption and Changes to Standards ........................................................................... 7 2.02 Other Standards .......................................................................................................... 7 2.03 Permitting .................................................................................................................... 7 a. Erosion Control Permit ........................................................................................ 8 b. Right-of-Way Permit ...........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • John Hirsch Place – Winnipeg’S First Woonerf
    John Hirsch Place – Winnipeg’s First Woonerf As part of the City of Winnipeg’s Northeast Exchange District Renewals project, WSP Canada Group Limited was contracted to redesign John Hirsch Place as a unique shared space roadway in Winnipeg. The project involved the reconstruction of John Hirsch Place in Winnipeg’s historic exchange district and redesigning the right of way to a curbless shared street based on the Dutch ‘Woonerf’ (living street) model, which involves traffic yielding to pedestrian activity and significant landscaping to enhance the pedestrian environment. The curbless design was used to avoid defining areas and boundaries that restrict pedestrian movement but rather allow pedestrians to move freely within the site. Limited parking within the roadway is available, and vehicles are slowed by traffic calming measures such as bollards, narrow path of travel, and limited sight distance to discourage a large volume of vehicle traffic and enhance pedestrian safety and environment. The project is notable for its links to the district’s cultural context, technical innovations, and quality of design. To accommodate the significant landscaping along John Hirsch Place, a soil retention system was installed to provide uncompacted soil volume necessary for tree growth and provide opportunity to greatly increase plantings and trees in the public right of way, while not restricting the roadway for all road users. Strata Cells, capable of withstanding vehicular traffic and pavement loads, were placed beneath the roadway due to the proximity of existing trees to the roadway that required additional soil volume. Stormwater enters the systems along the roadway through a series of catch basins to reduce loading on a combined sewer while providing water for the tree roots.
    [Show full text]
  • North Adams Downtown Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
    North Adams Downtown Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan City of North Adams, MA Northern Berkshire Community Coalition Berkshire Regional Planning Commission January 2021 Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................... 3 Health Benefits of Walking and Biking ................................................... 4 Relevant Planning Documents ............................................................ 4 Impacts of Urban Renewal ................................................................ 7 Existing Conditions .................................................................................. 9 Roadway Characteristics ................................................................... 9 Walking and Biking Network .............................................................. 9 Commute Characteristics ................................................................. 9 Indicators of Potential Need for Investment in Alternative Transportation ..... 10 Safety Data ................................................................................ 10 Challenges and Barriers ................................................................. 11 Public Process ...................................................................................... 12 Business and Civic Organization Meetings ........................................... 12 Public Survey .............................................................................. 12 Open-House Style Meeting .............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Roadway &Traffic Operations Strategy
    ESTABLISHING MULTI-MODAL STRATEGIES | CHAPTER 4 ROADWAY & TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STRATEGY To serve planned growth, the future transportation system needs multi-modal improvements and strategies to manage the forecasted travel demand. This chapter presents a detailed strategy to improve Moscow’s roadway network and traffic operations over the next 20 years, including network connectivity options, regional circulation enhancements, intersection modifications, and multi-modal street design guidelines. MULTI-MODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN This page intentionally left blank. Moscow on the Move 4 ROADWAY & TRAFFIC OPERATIONS STRATEGY Supporting the guiding principles of Moscow on the Move, the Roadway & This Transportation Traffic Operations Strategy strives to provide a truly multi-modal Commission “check mark” icon signifies transportation system and improve safety, access, and mobility for all street which actions have unanimous users by identifying strategies, policies, and projects that help achieve support from the Commission. Moscow’s vision for mobility and access. This strategy of Moscow on the Move The icon is a way to illustrate the level of support for identifies opportunities to retrofit existing streets in Moscow and develops the implementation. street grid to improve citywide connectivity for motor vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users. This strategy specifically provides an overview of the existing traffic conditions and how conditions might change by 2035, a street network plan, various design tools that could be applied throughout the city, and descriptions of recommended street projects. FUTURE DEFICIENCIES AND NEEDS Existing and future roadway and traffic operation conditions were assessed to determine the needs and deficiencies of the system. The key areas projected to require improvement or to present future challenges are summarized below.
    [Show full text]
  • Shoreline EDM Section 12.10 Woonerf Attachment C
    Proposed DA for Shoreline Place - Att. C - Shoreline EDM Section 12.10 Woonerf Attachment C Shoreline Engineering and Design Manual 12.10. Woonerf A woonerf (also known as a home zone, living street, or shared street) is a street that facilitates pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic within a shared space. Woonerfs typically lack separate pavement and include a variety of surface treatments, bollards, street lighting, and landscaping to define a shared space. Woonerfs can be private or public and are intended to be designed to meet the needs of the immediate community. The following standards are generalized and provide a starting point for woonerf design. Each woonerf is a unique shared space. Woonerfs designs should achieve the following objectives: A. Shared pedestrian, vehicular, and bicycle traffic; B. Safe transitions for between woonerfs and standard facilities; C. Traffic calming measures, such as sitting areas, planters, parking spaces, and bollards; and D. ADA-compliant access. Woonerf design requirements include the following: A. Entrance/Exit: 1. The international woonerf sign is required at all entrances and exits. Informational signs may be placed under the international woonerf sign. 2. Traffic calming measures may be required at entrances and exits. B. Designated Spaces: 1. The design shall not give the impression of a roadway and sidewalk. 2. To designate pedestrian-only spaces, the use of bollards, landscaping, and other protection are encouraged. Curbs are not allowed. 3. Parking and/or loading spaces are acceptable. Parking spaces shall be distinguished by pavement markings, surface treatments, or other means. C. Surface Treatments: 1. The use of a variety of surface treatments is encouraged.
    [Show full text]
  • Residential Street Standards & Neighborhood Traffic Control
    Residential Street Standards & Neighborhood Traffic Control: A Survey of Cities' Practices and Public Officials' Attitudes Eran Ben-Joseph Institute of Urban and Regional Planning University of California at Berkeley Abstract The failure of the local street system to provide livability and safety in the residential environment can be seen in the application of neighborhood traffic management programs by local authorities to mitigate traffic problems. In order to further identify the extent of the conflict associated with "livability" and geometrical design of residential street, the following issues are examined: (1) Existing and proposed residential streets standards and regulations as practiced by various cities and their evaluation by public and city officials. (2) Traffic problems associated with residential streets and their mitigation through traffic management and control programs. Data are collected from Public Works and Traffic Engineering Departments of 56 Californian cities and 19 cities nation-wide. The findings show that most cities are still adhering to published street standards as recommended by different professional and federal organizations. Although some city officials see the need to amend certain aspects of their regulations and create a more flexible framework for street design, most of them believe that the current practice is satisfactory. Yet, the extant of residents' complaints about traffic problems on their streets might indicate an inconsistency between professional practice, as manifested in street design, and its actual performance as experienced by the residents. This can also be seen in the application of traffic control devices used by local authorities to mitigate these problems of which the most common are the installation of speed humps and 4-way stop signs.
    [Show full text]
  • Home Zones: Shared Streets in Halifax
    HOME ZONES: SHARED STREETS IN HALIFAX Chris McBeath PLAN 6000 Instructor: Jill Grant Advisor: Marcus Garnet December 2009 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Jill Grant for all of her help with this and past reports, and Carol Madden for putting up with all of us. Marcus Garnet for providing guidance and all of my interviewees for volunteering their time. A special thanks to my Mom and Aunt Sis for supporting me and ‘encouraging’ me to do the right thing. Thanks to Todd for answering all the little questions, and Girr - just for being Girr. Cover images from Google Images: http://www.kent.gov.uk/static/local-transport-plan/images/462.jpg http://dptac.independent.gov.uk/pubs/pm/homezones/images/ac-04.jpg http://www.sustrans.org.uk/assets/images/home%20zones/diy_L081301_x.jpg http://www.courtyardhousing.org/images/PepysHomeZone.jpg http://www.courtyardhohttp://www.dft.gov.uk/trafficsignsimages/images/SignImages/480x480/881A.jpg TABLE OF CONTENTS iii Executive Summary 1 Introduction 4 Evolution of the Home Zone Approach 6 The European Experience 17 Case Examples 32 Policy and Planning Documents in HRM 36 Local Challenges 39 Recommendations 42 References 45 Appendices LIST OF FIGURES 2 Figure 1 - A typical Dutch woonerf 3 Figure 2 - A typical home zone in the UK 8 Figure 3 - Home zone sign 8 Figure 4 - Gateway feature at Oxbridge home zone 9 Figure 5 - Shared surface in a home zone 10 Figure 6 - Parking spaces with coloured paving stones 11 Figure 7 - Bollards and a planter protecting a play area 18 Figure 8 - Morice Town home zone 19 Figure
    [Show full text]
  • Speed Management Toolbox for Rural Communities
    Speed Management Toolbox for Rural Communities Final Report April 2013 Sponsored by Federal Highway Administration Iowa Department of Transportation Iowa Highway Research Board (IHRB Project TR-630) Midwest Transportation Consortium (InTrans Project 11-393) About MTC The Midwest Transportation Consortium (MTC) is a Tier 1 University Transportation Center (UTC) that includes Iowa State University, the University of Iowa, and the University of Northern Iowa. The mission of the UTC program is to advance U.S. technology and expertise in the many disciplines comprising transportation through the mechanisms of education, research, and technology transfer at university-based centers of excellence. Iowa State University, through its Institute for Transportation (InTrans), is the MTC’s lead institution. About CTRE The mission of the Center for Transportation Research and Education (CTRE) at Iowa State University is to develop and implement innovative methods, materials, and technologies for improving transportation efficiency, safety, and reliability while improving the learning environment of students, faculty, and staff in transportation-related fields. Disclaimer Notice The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the sponsors. The sponsors assume no liability for the contents or use of the information contained in this docu- ment. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The sponsors do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names ap- pear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
    [Show full text]
  • What Is a Woonerf Street?
    Attachment C What is a Woonerf Street? • Definition: A Woonerf Street is designed for both vehicular and non-vehicular traffic, such as pedestrians and cyclists, and can be used as a social gathering or recreation space. Pedestrians and cyclists take precedence in the use of the street. The access for all modes is accommodated on the same surface, and not differentiated by grade separation or other barriers. Woonerfs include traffic calming measure to ensure safe co-existence of vehicles and non- vehicular users. Landscaping features, including patterned paving, planters, trees, benches, or bollards, may enhance pedestrian safety and use. • Purpose: Woonerf Streets provide an alternative cross-section for circulation of multiple user groups. This street design accommodates vehicle traffic, and prioritizes pedestrian and bike movement, as well as recreation. The Woonerf Street option does not require two-lane street construction with parallel sidewalks separating user groups. The Woonerf Street accommodates multi-modal uses within the same street section. Woonerf Streets include traffic-calming strategies and landscaping amenities to address the safety of non-motorized users. Children may feel safe enough to play in a Woonerf. Drivers should be more alert and drive with increased caution. All users should feel welcome and safe. The Woonerf Street option is intended to provide a balanced integration between cars and people. • Alternative Compliance: The Traffic Engineer and the Planning Director may approve an alternative design that meets or exceeds the Woonerf Street standards if, and only if, the variation is from the required street width. Woonerf in Downtown Anchorage by the Municipality of Anchorage City Hall Photo - Kristine Bunnell • Design Elements: The Woonerf Street shall include the following design elements: a.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic-Restricted Streets: Woonerfs and Transit Malls
    Traffi c-Restricted Streets: Woonerfs and Transit Malls Paul chasan Streets for Living: WOONERFS Traffi c restricted streets offer new possibilites for creativley integrating social space with the p. Children play in the right-of-way in this European woonerf. Image: Hamilton 2000 streets often constitute up to 1/3 of the land use in a city yet, in our municipal “Imagine driving down a landscape they are often treated as utilitarian corridors rather than vital public street with no traffi c lights, spaces. This chapter looks at two street typologies that challenge this axiom: stop signs, lane dividers, Woonerfs and Transit Malls. Both of which seek to balance the functional need or sidewalks. Pedestri- for movement of people and goods with the basic desire we share as individuals ans, cyclists, and playing and communities for opportunities for social interaction and cultural exchange. children wander about the road at will, and trees and fl owers are planted in the right-of-way. How do you avoid hitting anyone—or anything? Simple. You slow down, maintain eye contact with people around you, and stay alert.” –Sierra Magazine January/ Febuary 2005 Residents living on Annas Straat in Utrecht set up tempo- rary shelters to watch the Euro 2000 soccer championships. Image: Hamilton 2000 1 | TRAFFIC RESTRICTED STREETS Streets for People Woonerfs are streets built with high quality urban design where the boundary between people space and car space is intentionally blurred. In doing so, the pedestrian space is extended from the sidewalk, and into the traffi c zone. Whereas in a normal street, pedestrians are made to feel like guests in the cars space when they cross the street, woonerfs reverse this axiom.
    [Show full text]
  • Downtown Streetscapes Master Plan
    Downtown Sherwood Streetscape Master Plan Prepared for City of Sherwood Engineering Department Prepared by Lango Hansen Landscape Architects PC kpff Consulting Engineers Glumac International Adopted by Sherwood City Council Resolution No. 2003-095 Ratified by Sherwood Urban Renewal Agency Resolution No. 2003-019 9 December 2003 WCHS Acknowledgements City of Sherwood Engineering Department Special thanks to Sandra Burtzos, Landscape Architect, Senior Project Manager Holli Robinson, Chamber Director, Sherwood Chamber of Commerce Terry Keyes, P.E., City Engineer Charles Harbick, Owner of Railroad Street Antique Mall, downtown resident, SURPAC and Bill Carley, Senior Project Manager FOOT member Sherwood Urban Renewal Planning Advisory Committee (SURPAC) Photographs and illustrations by Lango Hansen except as individually noted. Sherwood City Council Friends of Old Town (FOOT) Lango Hansen Landscape Architects PC Kurt Lango Jane Hansen Liz Crane Greg Matto Kpff Consulting Engineers Curt Vanderzanden Scott Bryan Glumac International Kirk Davis Zachary Suchara Wiser Rail Engineering Tom Wiser lango hansen • kpff • Glumac Downtown Sherwood Streetscape Master Plan 2 Acknowledgements Table of Contents I Overview V Design Detail Guidelines Master Plan Philosophy 4 Materials 28 Master Plan Process 5 Street Trees 29 Study Area & Existing Land Use 6 Street Furnishings 30 Sherwood History 7 Street Lighting 32 Proposed Downtown Development 8 Urban Amenities 33 Festival Accommodations 34 II Downtown Transportation System Plan Vehicular Access 9 VI Implementation
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Is a Key Component of Everyday Life
    6. Multimodal Connectivity & Accessibility 6 Overview Transportation is a key component of everyday life. The places it connects people to and how safe, predictable, and reliable it is affects community quality of life. Transportation costs are also the second largest household expense after housing. It is for these reasons that sustainable, connected, and integrated transportation is fundamental to sustained success and livability of the city. Transportation Impacts Transportation not only impacts the way people move in a city and access day-to-day needs but also has a significant impact on the shape of communities. The transportation network’s design directly affects how people use it. Streets designed with the sole purpose of moving vehicles – with wide travel lanes and no sidewalks – will only attract more cars and the land uses that serve those needs. On the other hand, transportation networks designed to serve people – with bike facilities, wide sidewalks, and other pedestrian accommodations – will attract more pedestrians and bicyclists and support active, livable communities. The transportation network should both inform and respond to the surrounding context, and provide safe accommodations for all users. In order to achieve the vision and goals of this Plan, it is important to focus on enhancing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit access throughout the West End. Example of a well-balanced multi-modal street. 6-1 Mode Share Travel in Falls Church already includes walking, bicycling, and transit use, as well as driving. The current mode split between different modes of travel, for commute trips originating in the city differs fairly significantly from the mode split for all daily trips – trips to work, the gym, the store, to visit friends, etc.
    [Show full text]