DOCSLIB.ORG

Sidewalk, Curb, & Road Standard Details

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sidewalk, Curb, & Road Standard Details Sidewalk Details SD1 Typical Concrete Sidewalk SD2 Sidewalk Ramp Details (Type I) SD3 Sidewalk Ramp Details (Type II) SD4 Curbface Walk & Wingwalk Detail/Curb & Gutter SD5 Concrete Curb Walk Curb Details C1 Pin on Curb C2 Concrete Curb & Gutter Rolled C3 Concrete Curb & Gutter 6”X6” C4 Typical Concrete Section C5 Typical Asphalt Section Drive Approach Details DA1 Typical Residential DA2 Residential Drive Approach Detail (Type I) DA3 Residential Drive Approach Detail (Type II) DA4 Typical Private Drive Approach DA5 Typical Commercial Drive Approach Street & Parking lot Patching/Paving Details SPD1 Pavement Repair Details SPD2 Arterial and Light Industrial Street (Type I) SPD3 Arterial and Light Industrial Street (Type II) SPD4 Local Residential (Street Type I) SPD5 Local Residential (Street Type II) SPD6 Collector Streets (Type I) SPD7 Collector Streets (Type II) SPD8 Residential Driveways (Type I) SPD9 Residential Driveways (Type II) SPD10 Parking Lots (Type I) SPD11 Parking Lots (Type II) SPD12 Parking Lots 20 Heavy Trucks Per Day (Type I) SPD13 Parking Lots 20 Heavy Trucks Per Day (Type II) SPD14 Parking Lots 20‐400 Truck Per Day (Type I) SPD15 Parking Lots 20‐400 Truck Per Day (Type II) SPD16 Asphalt Pavement Section W/Curb SPD17 Asphalt Conc. Repair Construction Details Property Line B Back of Walk Variable Dummy Joint Every 5' A A 4' Min 1/2" Preformed Joint Material Every 50' B Dummy Joint 1/2" 4" Expansion Deep Joint Property Line Tree Line * * Slope 1/4" Per Ft. Slope 1/4" Per Ft. 4" * As shown on Construction Plan Office of City Engineer Huntington, Indiana 2003 SD-3 Construction Details Sidewalk Ramp Detail B Exist. Curb Ramp Sloped From 5' To 4' Wide Detectible Warning Device 2'x4' Proposed 5' Walk A 5' Width Reslope Sod to Ramp PLAN VIEW Scale: 1"=10' Existing Sod Sloped to Meet Ramp Existing Curb Slope 12:1 Max. 4" Min. 4" Min. Ramp 4" 1.4" 6" min. SECTION A-A Detectable Warning Remove Existing Curb Scale: 1"=2' Cast in Place & Replace With Sloped Elements 2'x4' Curb Existing Sod Sloped to Meet Ramp 76" Top Of Curb 14" 48" Gutter Line Pavement Detectable Warning Cast in Place Elements 2'x4' SECTION B-B 1 Scale: 2"=1' Office of City Engineer Huntington, Indiana 2003 SD-3 Construction Details Sidewalk Ramp Detail Exist. Combination Curb & Gutter B Detectible Warning Device Proposed 5' Walk A PLAN VIEW Scale: 1"=10' Slope 12:1 Max. 4" Min. 4" Min. Ramp 4" 1.4" 6" min. SECTION A-A Detectable Warning Remove Existing Curb Scale: 1"=2' Cast in Place & Replace With Sloped Elements 2'x4' Curb 76" Top Of Curb 14" 48" Gutter Line Pavement SECTION B-B 1 Scale: 2"=1' Office of City Engineer Huntington, Indiana 2003 SD-3 Construction Details Concrete Curb and Gutter 6"x6" 2" Topsoil 6" Slope 1/2"/Ft. R1" R1" 7" Slope 1/4"/Ft. 6" R1" Backfill Asphalt Pavement Compacted 2' Subgrade Scale: 1"=1' Curbface Walk and Wingwalk Detail 18" Variable 2" Topsoil 1" R Saw Slope 1/4" / Ft. 6" 12" 45° 8" For Wingwalk Existing Pavement For Sidewalk Existing Curb Compacted Aggregate 12" Scale: 1"=1' Office of City Engineer Huntington, Indiana 2003 SD-3 CONCRETE CURB WALK TYPE .II 1 5 6" APPR. II r- 4 CONCRETE WALK r- 1/21/ I SLOPE 1/4" 1 FT. ~ If ~ I · t/ CONTRACTION../' SCORE EVERY 51 45° APPROX.... 112" EXPANSION JOINT REQUIRED EVERY 50' PAVEMENT ­ CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS CONCRETE CURB a GUTTER - ROLLED BACK OF CURB TO .BE DEPRESSED FOR DRIVEWAYS 2V4" 2" TOPSOIL - SLOPE ~"/FT. .......---- 2'- O"--~ SCALE III = " CONCRETE CURB IS" ...--- 2" TOP SOIL SLOPE: Yo" / FT. 4 Y2'--+!E--~--JOoof- 6 ',ni' 'OFFICE OF CITY ENGJNEER HUNTINGTON, INDIANA 1980 16 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS CONCRETE CURB a GUTTER 6"" 611 III -_----.. R 2" TOPSOIL oc-SLOPE 1/2" / FT. ~~~~~~--------~ SLOPE COMPACTED SU8GRADE 1CiII----- 2' - 0"------..... CURBFACE WALK AND WINGWALK DETAIL VARIA8LE~ 2" TOPSOIL 1 SLOPE 1/4 / FT 4IE: EXISTING PAVEMENT OFFICE OF C1TY ENGINEER SCALE: I" = " HUNTINGTON t INDIANA 1980 17 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS z ,~ 0 .1 ole ',. :;: J­- 4· 0.... (,) " a.. <4.. .i • '4 0 ~ ......... C (5 </ • e: ..., .it .<l 0 W '4 J­ W 0::: (,) Z 0 (,) «..J (,) a.. >- ~ J- "­a:: OFFICE OF CITY ENGINEER HUNTINGTON, INDIANA 1980 18 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS z 0 F= () ~ r :..J <t :::J: 0­en <t ...J <t () ­0­ >­ ~ t- "­ a:: OFFICE OF CJTY ENG INEER HUNTINGTON. INDIANA 1980 19 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL DRIVE DETAIL I II '/2 Preformed Joint Material ----­- -----1------------4­- Property Line A Saw Joint Or Keyway 51 Sidewalk Keyway 8 8 t A t t...!~__--­ 51 Drive Approach II 6 ~II Preformed JOint 1-mTI'I..I..LI..f1:1Til 10 % Max. Slope --...... ~-_--'-_p_Q\'8-ment- / Material Req'd If IXlve .Abuts Concrete Behind Walk SECTION A-A OFFICE OF CITY ENGINEER HUNTIN GTON INDIANA 1980 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS RESIDENTIAL DRIVE APPROACH DETAIL Match Existing (12' Min.) (20' Max.) --- ----A --- r Property Line ~ r 1\ I YZ Preformed I ~ Joint Sidewalk Material -- .1 r ...... Saw Joint Preformed Jant ~ Or Keyway \ A!,:I ER NATE Materia 3 Rod. Minimum ~' 1 t · 5 Rod. Desirable 0 to ~8ack Of Curb.~ 60 - J Keywct'~ B B t ~ A t \.Back Of Walk ~ To~ Of Curb ~fIonf ~ I /xGulfer Lin. ·:.t'····:4··P.'··p.-....· .. A' 'p"'J>" :"," .. '''': ..':,iI;: .......,;. "d' 9:'. v····.A· ... '::Jd:.c...:.,4 ."'f(: ~. .... , ., i5.':'!l~." ",l.~.... ...... ..~t. .' . '. '. .- .' ~"b'>~". -'" ",,'~ .' . .... VIEW FROM STREET LEVEL SEC-rION B-B 11 CONNECTION DETAIL FOR CO N CR ETE CURB 6"x 6 Pro party Line. ----vaflable ----~ I, 1\ / F Max ------rSlope ... '2 t .. , Sidewalk 6 ~ I Preformed Joint M aterlol Pavement Req'd. if Drive Abuts Concrete Behind Wal" S"ECTION A-A OFFICE OF CITY ENGIN EER '* ... As Shown On Constructioo HUNTINGTON I INDIANA Aan 1980 9 Construction Details Match Existing (12' Min.) (20' Max.) A Sidewalk Sidewalk Saw Joint or Keyway Back of curb 60° 6' Max Keyway A B B Front of walk Back of walk Slope 10% Max. 1/2" /Ft Max. Slope Variable 6" Back of curb Slope 6% Max. Sidewalk Drive approach 10% Max Slope Pavement 1/2" Preformed Joint Material Required if Drive abuts Concrete behind walk Office of City Engineer Huntington, Indiana 2003 SD-3 ."IVAI t:. DRIVE APPROACH 'ROPERTY PAVEME LINE KEYWAY CONNECTION DETAIL FOR ROLLED CUR SLOPE 0% MAX. s' --------------~~------ I' "I" I/. .. --.,.. 2 PER FT. MAX. SLOPE -- 6" CONNECTION DETAIL FOR 6"x 6- CURB I SECTION A-A I..,. MIN.12' I MAX. 20' ... 1 ~I/." PREFOR ED JOINT____ 2 MAT RIAL ___ 5' SIDEWALK .,sAW JOINT I BACK OF CURe~ KEYWAY BACK OF CURB KEYWAY, L PLAN VIEW G1l~ ROLLED CURB VARIA8tE rTOP OF CU;B ............. GUTTER -"':':'1J..-(-.... PAVEMENT ... II • •• .~ • ... .., J. !"' .. ROLLED CURB S· l( S" CURB SECTION B- B 28 I 1 ~ICAL COMMERCIAL DRIVE APPROACH DETAIL DRIVE WIDTH (12'Mln,) (30'Max.) PROPERTY LINE -_________ r:~_________ FLARED END SECTION ---______1______----- CULVERT 51 VARIABLE VARIABLE RADIUS IS'MINIMUM 20'DESIRABLE EDGE OF BERM BE REPLACED BY ASPHALT PAVEMENT. LA t. OF STREET ----~------- CONNECTION DETAIL FOR CON CRETE APPROACH .~rI+--------VARIABLE-------~ ~I WI ~I Slope VarIable Slope .. +----: PAVEMENT APPROACH e" Variable Distance CULVERT SECTION A-A CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS PAVEMENT REPAIR DETAIL Existin Surface Subgrade BACKFILL -# 53 or #" 73 Agg In 4" Layers Solidly Tamped To The Sub-grade Of The Street (95 % Dry Density) ..--undisturbed Earth -f---.:+i-f---------I I _ TYPICAL STREET CUT 6" Concrete Reinforced With 10-10- 6 Bricks Should Be Set Bricks Should Be Set In Wet Cement In Grout 1/2" (~53 or # 73Agg) _ Compacked BRICK STREET REPAIR BRICK STREET REPAIR ALTERNATE REPAIR "A" ALTERNATE REPAIR "B" OFFICE OF CITY ENGINEER HUNTINGTON, INDIANA NOTE: (Fill Cracks With Sand) 1982 20 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS ARTERIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL STREETS POOR SUB GRADE , ...........'.,,,,," ........ ","" .......... -, 50mm .. ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE ..... 2" '"''....' -:.,...... .: ':.' ...... , .. "'" :....:.. I. e, *. '.' ••••• :: • : ••: ••••:.. ·.-.... , ..... .., ' ... ' . · . *.... I.' ••••• ' •• •• ' •• I •• ' ' ' - ' ' ·: *....•• ' •••..- •••.. ...., •• ".... .' .'....'. ...• • ..' ........ : .,',.' .... : .. ' 255mm.·• :.' • • •••,. •••• ••••• " •••'.' 205mm : • ASPHALT CONCRETE BASE": ••" 10" ·• ....•••••••••, .' .' ' ......• If ••••••••••'" I.. .. I. ' a" • " ." ' •• ' ., ••• ' •••• I •••••••• ' " ' ~.. '" '. .• • ..'.. .'... .' •• '.' .• •• ......• •••' ,I, ' '. " · ...." ........'.' ." .. .'. •••• I ••: •• .• '.' .....•••• * •• ~ .: MEDIUM SUBGRADE t ',. "- ... _ _ , - ~ ,. ... '" ,. ... ,. tfO ... 'II ' 50mm ~ ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE " ,. ",..... , .. f' ,. .... " ".' ... • t .•• .' ••• ' " ••••••'. " ".. '.,• II ." ...If' • • • : •••••• : ••• rill ••••* •• * •• * ••• ·.•• ••" if.... •• ...... ...••••..... t. .•••... • •• • • • if. • ••••••• • •• • ••• * ••• •• rill· •• • ••••• a" 205mm • . • ASPHALT. CONCRETE BASE·... #•• 6" 155mm *.. I ••• •••• • ••• •• • ,. * * • • • •••••.. ...... ..• ...• I·..... ..... • ....... • • • • • • • ·..; -.. : :... : ....' . .. ... .. ., GOOD TO EXCELLENT. SUBGRADE .. , ................. ,' I .... ' .. ' t 50mm • ASPHALT CONCRETE SURFACE " 2" ,e... ',f•• I .... ' , '" - "'''',41> fill • • 0 • • . • . ­ o • • . • . .. • • • .. • • " • •• •• . • • • " • . • • • 6" . "0 155mm ·... • • • o .• " • .. • . •· " . • ASPHAL T CONCRETE BASE· • l05mm • 4" • • " • • " . ·. o· . " • . • • · " • • FFICE OF CITY ENGINEER HUNTINGTON 1 INDIANA 1983 21 CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS ARTERIAL AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL STREETS POOR SUBGRADE .... I , , ..... , t" ,. t ...... " ,," ,,. • _ , I • , " ". ASPliALT· CONCRETE SURFACI:: .-... 2" ....... ' ''''''','''' ,A. '''' , " .. tI ",I ".... ....... .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Module 6. Hov Treatments
    Manual TABLE OF CONTENTS Module 6. TABLE OF CONTENTS MODULE 6. HOV TREATMENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................ 6-5 TREATMENTS ..................................................... 6-6 MODULE OBJECTIVES ............................................. 6-6 MODULE SCOPE ................................................... 6-7 6.2 DESIGN PROCESS .......................................... 6-7 IDENTIFY PROBLEMS/NEEDS ....................................... 6-7 IDENTIFICATION OF PARTNERS .................................... 6-8 CONSENSUS BUILDING ........................................... 6-10 ESTABLISH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................... 6-10 ESTABLISH PERFORMANCE CRITERIA / MOES ....................... 6-10 DEFINE FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ............................. 6-11 IDENTIFY AND SCREEN TECHNOLOGY ............................. 6-11 System Planning ................................................. 6-13 IMPLEMENTATION ............................................... 6-15 EVALUATION .................................................... 6-16 6.3 TECHNIQUES AND TECHNOLOGIES .................. 6-18 HOV FACILITIES ................................................. 6-18 Operational Considerations ......................................... 6-18 HOV Roadway Operations ...................................... 6-20 Operating Efficiency .......................................... 6-20 Considerations for 2+ Versus 3+ Occupancy Requirement ............. 6-20 Hours of Operations ..........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Design Guidelines for the Use of Curbs and Curb/Guardrail
    DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE USE OF CURBS AND CURB/GUARDRAIL COMBINATIONS ALONG HIGH-SPEED ROADWAYS by Chuck Aldon Plaxico A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering by September 2002 APPROVED: Dr. Malcolm Ray, Major Advisor Civil and Environmental Engineering Dr. Leonard D. Albano, Committee Member Civil and Environmental Engineering Dr. Tahar El-Korchi, Committee Member Civil and Environmental Engineering Dr. John F. Carney, Committee Member Provost and Vice President, Academic Affairs Dr. Joseph R. Rencis, Committee Member Mechanical Engineering ABSTRACT The potential hazard of using curbs on high-speed roadways has been a concern for highway designers for almost half a century. Curbs extend 75-200 mm above the road surface for appreciable distances and are located very near the edge of the traveled way, thus, they constitute a continuous hazard for motorist. Curbs are sometimes used in combination with guardrails or other roadside safety barriers. Full-scale crash testing has demonstrated that inadequate design and placement of these systems can result in vehicles vaulting, underriding or rupturing a strong-post guardrail system though the mechanisms for these failures are not well understood. For these reasons, the use of curbs has generally been discouraged on high-speed roadways. Curbs are often essential, however, because of restricted right-of-way, drainage considerations, access control, delineation and other curb functions. Thus, there is a need for nationally recognized guidelines for the design and use of curbs. The primary purpose of this study was to develop design guidelines for the use of curbs and curb-barrier combinations on roadways with operating speeds greater than 60 km/hr.
    [Show full text]
  • Pedestrian and Light Traffic Applications Introduction Brick Pavers Are Arranged Cost Savings That Upon the Bedding Sand in Supplement the Savings the Desired Pattern
    Flexible Brick Industry Brick Paving Association Pedestrian and Light Traffic Applications Traffic Light and Pedestrian Introduction brick pavers are arranged cost savings that upon the bedding sand in supplement the savings the desired pattern. Sand afforded by the brick is then spread into the itself. In addition, spaces between the pavers replacement of pavers as jointing material. after repair of utilities beneath a flexible brick As the whole paving pavement is easily system compacts with time achieved. and use, the bricks interact with the jointing sand and base materials to achieve the unique quality of “interlock.” Interlock holds the pavers in place Brick paving has been used for thousands and distributes the load of years. The Romans laid brick in roads through the layers down crisscrossing their vast empire, some of to the subgrade, enabling which still exist. Americans have employed the surface to contribute the material since the earliest Colonial days, to the strength of the and brick pathways and sidewalks thread whole system. When through the landmark sites and properly installed, brick As an architect’s medium, historic areas across the country. interlocking pavements are brick is equally flexible. highly stable and durable. Its basic aesthetic appeal is legendary as a material Today, as many property the flexible nature of its This basic advantage begets that exudes warmth and owners and architects foundation and the action others. Because flexible elegance through the attest, brick paving is of the pavers themselves. brick paving provides permanent color of fired timeless, especially for In such flexible pavements, interlock, no rigid concrete clay or shale.
    [Show full text]
  • Pavements and Surface Materials
    N O N P O I N T E D U C A T I O N F O R M U N I C I P A L O F F I C I A L S TECHNICAL PAPER NUMBER 8 Pavements and Surface Materials By Jim Gibbons, UConn Extension Land Use Educator, 1999 Introduction Traffic Class Type of Road Pavements are composite materials that bear the weight of 1 Parking Lots, Driveways, Rural pedestrian and vehicular loads. Pavement thickness, width and Roads type should vary based on the intended function of the paved area. 2 Residential Streets 3 Collector Roads Pavement Thickness 4 Arterial roads 5 Freeways, Expressways, Interstates Pavement thickness is determined by four factors: environment, traffic, base characteristics and the pavement material used. Based on the above classes, pavement thickness ranges from 3" for a Class 1 parking lot, to 10" or more for Class 5 freeways. Environmental factors such as moisture and temperature significantly affect pavement. For example, as soil moisture Sub grade strength has the greatest effect in determining increases the load bearing capacity of the soil decreases and the pavement thickness. As a general rule, weaker sub grades require soil can heave and swell. Temperature also effects the load thicker asphalt layers to adequately bear different loads associated bearing capacity of pavements. When the moisture in pavement with different uses. The bearing capacity and permeability of the freezes and thaws, it creates stress leading to pavement heaving. sub grade influences total pavement thickness. There are actually The detrimental effects of moisture can be reduced or eliminated two or three separate layers or courses below the paved wearing by: keeping it from entering the pavement base, removing it before surface including: the sub grade, sub base and base.
    [Show full text]
  • "2. Sidewalks". "Boston Complete Streets Design Guide."
    Sidewalk Zone Widths The width of the sidewalk contributes to the degree of When making decisions for how to allocate sidewalk space, comfort and enjoyment of walking along a street. Narrow the following principles should be used: sidewalks do not support lively pedestrian activity, and may create dangerous conditions where people walk in the Frontage Zone street. Typically, a five foot wide Pedestrian Zone supports > The Frontage Zone should be maximized to provide space two people walking side by side or two wheel chairs passing for cafés, plazas, and greenscape elements along build- each other. An eight foot wide Pedestrian Zone allows two ing facades wherever possible, but not at the expense of pairs of people to comfortably pass each other, and a ten reducing the Pedestrian Zone beyond the recommended foot or wider Pedestrian Zone can support high volumes of minimum widths. pedestrians. Pedestrian Zone Vibrant sidewalks bustling with pedestrian activity are not > The Pedestrian Zone should be clear of any obstructions only used for transportation, but for social walking, lingering, including utilities, traffic control devices, trees, and furniture. and people watching. Sidewalks, especially along Downtown When reconstructing sidewalks and relocating utilities, all Commercial, Downtown Mixed-Use, and Neighborhood Main utility access points and obstructions should be relocated Streets, should encourage social uses of the sidewalk realm outside of the Pedestrian Zone. by providing adequate widths. > While sidewalks do not need to be perfectly straight, the SIDEWALKS Pedestrian Zone should not weave back and forth in the When determining sidewalk zone widths, factors to consider right-of-way for no other reason than to introduce curves.
    [Show full text]
  • PASER Manual Asphalt Roads
    Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating PASER ManualAsphalt Roads RATING 10 RATING 7 RATING 4 RATING PASERAsphalt Roads 1 Contents Transportation Pavement Surface Evaluation and Rating (PASER) Manuals Asphalt PASER Manual, 2002, 28 pp. Introduction 2 Information Center Brick and Block PASER Manual, 2001, 8 pp. Asphalt pavement distress 3 Concrete PASER Manual, 2002, 28 pp. Publications Evaluation 4 Gravel PASER Manual, 2002, 20 pp. Surface defects 4 Sealcoat PASER Manual, 2000, 16 pp. Surface deformation 5 Unimproved Roads PASER Manual, 2001, 12 pp. Cracking 7 Drainage Manual Patches and potholes 12 Local Road Assessment and Improvement, 2000, 16 pp. Rating pavement surface condition 14 SAFER Manual Rating system 15 Safety Evaluation for Roadways, 1996, 40 pp. Rating 10 & 9 – Excellent 16 Flagger’s Handbook (pocket-sized guide), 1998, 22 pp. Rating 8 – Very Good 17 Work Zone Safety, Guidelines for Construction, Maintenance, Rating 7 – Good 18 and Utility Operations, (pocket-sized guide), 1999, 55 pp. Rating 6 – Good 19 Wisconsin Transportation Bulletins Rating 5 – Fair 20 #1 Understanding and Using Asphalt Rating 4 – Fair 21 #2 How Vehicle Loads Affect Pavement Performance Rating 3 – Poor 22 #3 LCC—Life Cycle Cost Analysis Rating 2 – Very Poor 23 #4 Road Drainage Rating 1 – Failed 25 #5 Gravel Roads Practical advice on rating roads 26 #6 Using Salt and Sand for Winter Road Maintenance #7 Signing for Local Roads #8 Using Weight Limits to Protect Local Roads #9 Pavement Markings #10 Seal Coating and Other Asphalt Surface Treatments #11 Compaction Improves Pavement Performance #12 Roadway Safety and Guardrail #13 Dust Control on Unpaved Roads #14 Mailbox Safety #15 Culverts-Proper Use and Installation This manual is intended to assist local officials in understanding and #16 Geotextiles in Road Construction/Maintenance and Erosion Control rating the surface condition of asphalt pavement.
    [Show full text]
  • PLANNING and DESIGNING for PEDESTRIANS Table of Contents
    PLANNING AND DESIGNING FOR PEDESTRIANS Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary ................................................................1 1.1 Scope of Guidelines.............................................................................. 2 1.2 How the Pedestrian-Oriented Design Guidelines Can be Used........ 5 1.3 How to Use the Chapters and Who Should Use Them ...................... 6 2. Pedestrian Primer ...................................................................9 2.1 What is Pedestrian-Oriented Design? ................................................. 9 2.2 Link Between Land Use and Transportation Decisions .................. 10 2.3 Elements of a Walkable Environment ............................................... 11 2.4 What Kind of Street Do You Have and What Kind Do You Want?... 12 2.4.1 "Linear" and "Nodal" Structures .......................................................................... 12 2.4.2 Interconnected or Isolated Streets ....................................................................... 14 2.4.3 Street Rhythm......................................................................................................... 15 2.4.4 "Seams" and "Dividers" ........................................................................................ 16 3. Community Structure and Transportation Planning.........17 3.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 17 3.2 Land Use Types and Organization..................................................... 18
    [Show full text]
  • Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team
    Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada Project Team Project Leads: Nancy Smith Lea, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Ray Tomalty, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Researchers: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Dr. Marvin Macaraig, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Julia Malmo-Laycock, School of Urban Planning, McGill University Report Design: Jiya Benni, The Centre for Active Transportation, Clean Air Partnership Cover Photo: Tour de l’ile, Go Bike Montreal Festival, Montreal by Maxime Juneau/APMJ Project Partner: Please cite as: Benni, J., Macaraig, M., Malmo-Laycock, J., Smith Lea, N. & Tomalty, R. (2019). Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada. Toronto: Clean Air Partnership. CONTENTS List of Figures 4 List of Tables 7 Executive Summary 8 1. Introduction 12 2. Costs of Bicycle Infrastructure Measures 13 Introduction 14 On-street facilities 16 Intersection & crossing treatments 26 Traffic calming treatments 32 Off-street facilities 39 Accessory & support features 43 3. Costs of Cycling Programs 51 Introduction 52 Training programs 54 Repair & maintenance 58 Events 60 Supports & programs 63 Conclusion 71 References 72 Costing of Bicycle Infrastructure and Programs in Canada 3 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Bollard protected cycle track on Bloor Street, Toronto, ON ..................................................... 16 Figure 2: Adjustable concrete barrier protected cycle track on Sherbrook St, Winnipeg, ON ............ 17 Figure 3: Concrete median protected cycle track on Pandora Ave in Victoria, BC ............................ 18 Figure 4: Pandora Avenue Protected Bicycle Lane Facility Map ............................................................ 19 Figure 5: Floating Bus Stop on Pandora Avenue ........................................................................................ 19 Figure 6: Raised pedestrian crossings on Pandora Avenue .....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Getting to the Curb: a Guide to Building Protected Bike Lanes.”)
    Getting to the Curb A Guide to Building Protected Bike Lanes That Work for Pedestrians This report is dedicated to Joanna Fraguli, a passionate pedestrian safety advocate whose work made San Francisco a better place for everyone. This report was created by the Senior & Disability Pedestrian Safety Workgroup of the San Francisco Vision Zero Coalition. Member organizations include: • Independent Living Resource Center of San Francisco • Senior & Disability Action • Walk San Francisco • Age & Disability Friendly SF • San Francisco Mayor’s Office on Disability Primary author: Natasha Opfell, Walk San Francisco Advisor/editor: Cathy DeLuca, Walk San Francisco Illustrations: EricTuvel For more information about the Workgroup, contact Walk SF at [email protected]. Thank you to the San Francisco Department of Public Health for contributing to the success of this project through three years of funding through the Safe Streets for Seniors program. A sincere thanks to everyone who attended our March 6, 2018 charette “Designing Protected Bike Lanes That Are Safe and Accessible for Pedestrians.” This guide would not exist without your invaluable participation. Finally, a special thanks to the following individuals and agencies who gave their time and resources to make our March 2018 charette such a great success: • Annette Williams, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency • Jamie Parks, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency • Kevin Jensen, San Francisco Public Works • Arfaraz Khambatta, San Francisco Mayor’s Office on Disability Table of
    [Show full text]
  • Sidewalk Construction Standards
    OSHTEMO TOWNSHIP SIDEWALK/SHARED-USE PATH CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS Approved August 28, 2018 CONCRETE SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION The construction of Sidewalks and Shared-Use Paths within Oshtemo is managed through the Township’s issuance of a Sidewalk/Non-Motorized Path Permit. The permitting process includes both a pre-pour inspection of the base and concrete forms, and a final project inspection for acceptance of the work. Concrete sidewalk shall conform to MDOT 2012 (or current edition) Standard Specifications for Construction Section 803, "Concrete Sidewalks, Sidewalk Ramps and Steps" and shall be a minimum of five (5) feet wide unless a different width is required by other Township ordinances or regulations. Driveway Sidewalk Crossings Where public sidewalks (AKA pedestrian route) cross residential driveways, the sidewalk shall be constructed of concrete through the driveway. Where a curb-line concrete gutter pan begins the driveway, the driveway apron between the curb and sidewalk shall also be constructed of concrete. Hot-Mix Asphalt (HMA) commercial driveways that lack a concrete roadway gutter, and which have greater than two lanes or heavy traffic may seek administrative approval to establish a pedestrian route over the driveway in lieu of placing a concrete walkway through the HMA material. When new sidewalks are extended through existing driveways, it shall be administratively determined by the Township to what extent the existing driveway pavements will need to be reconstructed in lieu of providing a pedestrian route over the pavement. Grade The sidewalk shall be constructed to match the existing grade, or as noted on the construction drawings. The sidewalk will have a transverse slope either toward or away from the road to maintain existing drainage patterns.
    [Show full text]
  • Neighborhood Road Design Guidebook a Massachusetts Guide to Sustainable Design for Neighborhood Roads
    NEIGHBORHOOD ROAD DESIGN GUIDEBOOK A MASSACHUSETTS GUIDE TO SUSTAINABLE DESIGN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ROADS A joint project of the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Planning Association Home Builders Association of Massachusetts Prepared for the Citizen Planner’s Training Collaborative March 14, 2012 Overview 2 1. Why a new Guidebook now? 2. Who will use this? 3. What is the general approach 4. Examples of recommended design standards 5. Cross Sections 6. Implementation Why Now? 3 1. Road design for whom? 2. Change in vehicle types 3. What is a win-win approach? 4. Length of time to change rules and regulations Why a new Guide now? 4 Massachusetts guide for Neighborhood Roads to create model guidelines and match local settings. This is called “context sensitive” design. Other road design manuals don’t get at local streets very well Who might use the Guidebook? 5 There are many “actors” in Transportation Design Engineers and designers (private and public sectors) Applicants who are building new infrastructure as part of their projects; Planning Directors/Planners; Planning Boards, Board of Selectmen, Fire and Emergency Service providers; Regional Planning Associations – link to state funding and state projects; Abutters; Land use and environmental advocates; and Finally –build roads that benefit the USERS What kind of Guidebook? 6 Project Goals Reduce environmental impacts of roadway development, operation and maintenance; Encourage Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) in residential roadway design; Provide specific guidelines and references for municipal application; Promote innovative techniques for stormwater management; and Reduce maintenance costs of roadways and stormwater systems. What kind of Guidebook? 7 Project Goals (contin.) Encourage consistency in approach and rationale in residential roadway design across Massachusetts; Promote inter-connectivity of roads; Promote pedestrian and non- motorized access; Promote universal accessibility; and Provide guidance for the design of neighborhood scale residential roads.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimized Design of Concrete Curb Under Off Tracking Loads December 2008 6
    Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. FHWA/TX-09/0-5830-1 Accession No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Optimized Design of Concrete Curb under Off Tracking Loads December 2008 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Chul Suh, Soojun Ha, Moon Won 0-5830-1 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research 11. Contract or Grant No. The University of Texas at Austin 0-5830 3208 Red River, Suite 200 Austin, TX 78705-2650 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report, 09/2005-08/2007 Research and Technology Implementation Office 14. Sponsoring Agency Code P.O. Box 5080 Austin, TX 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. 16. Abstract Most research studies in the portland cement concrete (PCC) pavement area focused on addressing distresses related to pavement structure itself. As a result, the design and construction of other structural elements of the concrete curb and curb and gutter (CCCG) system have been overlooked and not much research has been done in this area. Visual inspection of damaged CCCG systems was conducted in the field. All damaged CCCG systems were the TxDOT Type II system and almost all damaged CCCG systems were found at U-turn curbs due to excessive off tracking of traffic. Although geometric changes of the curb design are the fundamental solutions for the off tracking failure, such changes are not feasible in most cases due to economic and space limitations.
    [Show full text]