DOCSLIB.ORG

Street and Road Design Technical Manual (September 2004)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Street and Road Design Technical Manual (September 2004) STREET AND ROAD DESIGN TECHNICAL MANUAL Development Document #7 Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission September 2004 Street and Roadway Design Technical Manual Table of Contents Page Part I Street and Roadway Design Criteria Section 1 Street and Roadway Classification………………………………… 3 Section 2 Right-of-way Requirements………………………………………... 3 Section 3 Layout Requirements………………………………………………. 4 Section 4 Embankment Construction………………………………………….7 Section 5 Pavement Design…………………………………………………... 7 Section 6 Storm Drainage Control……………………………………………. 8 Section 7 Sidewalks………………………………………………………….. 9 Section 8 Deceleration Lanes………………………………………………… 10 Section 9 Driveways…………………………………………………………. 11 Section 10 Miscellaneous Elements……………………………………………. 12 Part II Environmental Requirements Section 1 Permitting Requirements…………………………………………... 14 Section 2 Disposal of Material……………………………………………….. 14 Part III Materials of Construction Section 1 Storm Drains……………………………………………………….. 15 Section 2 Culverts…………………………………………………………….. 15 Section 3 Miscellaneous Concrete……………………………………………. 15 Section 4 Base and Paving……………………………………………………. 15 Section 5 Bridges……………………………………………………………... 15 Section 6 Incidental Items…………………………………………………….. 16 Section 7 Minor Drainage Structures…………………………………………. 16 Section 8 Earthwork…………………………………………………………... 16 Part IV Maintenance Section 1 Commercial Development…………………………………………. 17 Section 2 Subdivision Development with Public Right-of-ways…………….. 17 Section 3 Private Subdivision Developments………………………………… 17 Part V Update ………………………………………………………………………19 Part VI Appendix ………………………………………………………………………20 2 Part I Street and Roadway Design Criteria SECTION I – STREET AND ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION 1.01 General Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission shall determine street/road classifications for all new developments (public and private) or substantial changes or improvements to existing developments. These classifications shall be based on the following definitions utilizing Average Daily Traffic (ADT) information. The ADT will be determined using the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, current edition. Minor or Residential Streets – Streets that provide access to frontage properties and are designed to carry traffic having origins or destinations within the immediate area traversed. Such streets are not designed to interconnect adjoining neighborhoods, subdivisions, or non-residential areas. They should be designed so that no segment has an ADT greater than 500. A loop street may be considered two separate streets but the design ADT at any point shall not exceed 500. Residential Collector Streets – The highest order of residential street. Conducts and distributes traffic between lower-order residential streets and higher-order streets (arterial or expressways). Such streets function to promote free traffic flow; therefore, curb parking should be prohibited and special setbacks and/or lot widths should be required. Residential collectors should be designed to prevent use by non-neighborhood traffic. Total traffic volume should not exceed 3,000 ADT. Collector Streets - Streets that connect minor or residential streets to higher order streets, either collectors or arterials. Such streets function to promote free traffic flow, therefore curb parking should be prohibited and special building setbacks and/or lot widths should be required. Collectors should be designed so as not to be attractive as shortcuts for traffic that has neither an origin nor destination within a neighborhood or an immediate area traversed. Residential collectors should have sidewalks on at least one side. Collector streets should be designed to accommodate a maximum ADT of 3,000. Arterial Streets – Higher order, interregional streets that convey traffic between centers. There should be no curb parking and ideally there would be limitations on access to frontage properties. Most traffic would not have origins or destinations within the immediate area traversed. SECTION 2 – RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS 2.01 General Right-of-way requirements, for both public and private streets, shall be established based on roadway classification and the proposed geometry of the pavement section. Because 3 design requirements and proposed concepts vary for each proposed project, cross- sectional roadway geometry will vary to provide for the installation of curb and gutter or conversely, shoulders and ditch sections. The following right-of-way requirements and pavement widths have been established for each roadway classification: PROPOSED ROADWAY REQUIREMENTS CLASSIFICATION MINIMUM CURB & GUTTER SHOULDER & DITCH SECTION DESIGN SPEED Right-of- Pavement Width Right-of- Pavement Shoulder Way B/C to B/C Way Width Width Minor 25 60 31 80 24 6 Residential 30 60 31 80 24 6 Residential Collector* 35 80/60 31 80 24 6 Collector 35 80 31 80 24 6 Industrial Access 35 80 31 80 28 6 Arterial** 45 100 53 120 48 8 *Residential Collector streets shall require an 80 foot right-of-way on the first 200 feet of the proposed residential collector street from major intersections. The right-of-way may be reduced to 60 feet for those portions of a residential collector street between major intersections beyond the 200 feet requirement. **Georgia DOT Standard Specifications Type 7 curb and gutter shall be required where speeds are 45 mph or greater. 2.02. Intersections Right-of-ways at intersections shall include a “mitered” configuration. The mitered right- of-way would be established by reducing the property line a total length of twenty-five (25) feet along each right-of-way line from the intersecting point of two (2) right-of-way lines. Connecting the two (2) right-of-way lines at the twenty-five (25) feet distance will create the “mitered” configuration. “Clear View” easements shall not be accepted. No construction, fence, hedge, bushes, or other obstruction to a clear view, which extends over three (3) feet in height, shall be permitted at any corner of intersecting streets. Exceptions shall be made for utility pole lines, lighting standards, post office boxes, traffic signs, and trees, the branches of which are kept trimmed to a height of eight (8) feet above the ground. SECTION 3 – LAYOUT REQUIREMENTS 3.01 Vertical Alignment: The minimum centerline grade for roadways shall be maintained at 0.5% for cross- sections utilizing concrete curb and gutter; all others shall be at least 1%. The maximum centerline grade for roadways shall be maintained at 15 percent. In the event that specific site conditions necessitate the design of roadways in excess of 15 percent, the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission along with the City 4 Engineer shall review and consider an exception. It shall be handled on a case-by- case basis. Street and intersecting street approaches shall not have grades in excess of 5% for a distance of fifty (50) feet from the intersection of centerlines in all directions for all streets. At roadway intersections with normal crown, a vertical curve is required to tie into the grade of the intersecting street. The vertical curve shall be designed with the extension of the cross slope of the through road as the first tangent and the approach grade of the intersecting street as the second tangent. The vertical curve tying into an intersecting street with a through street shall not tie into the edge of the pavement of the through street, but shall maintain at least a 15.0 foot tangent distance from the edge of pavement to the PVT. All intersections shall be designed to avoid cumulation of water. Vertical curves at intersections shall be designed to accommodate a minimum two car stacking distance. The minimum length of a vertical curve through the run of the road shall be 130 feet; the minimum length of a vertical curve used to accommodate an intersection design shall be 50 feet. The minimum stopping sight distance shall be established based on design speed limits in accordance with AASHTO design criteria. The minimum stopping sight distance shall govern the length of vertical curve, but in no case shall the minimum length of vertical curve be less than 130 feet. Excepting minor classified streets, a minimum 30-mph design speed limit should be utilized unless otherwise noted and agreed upon by the Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission or Traffic Engineering. A minimum design speed of 25 mph should be utilized for minor streets. Design exceptions may be granted on a case-by- case basis as approved by City Engineer, Augusta-Richmond County Planning Commission and Traffic Engineer. 3.02 Horizontal Alignment The maximum length of any dead-end/cul-de-sac street shall be 1,000 feet. The Augusta-Richmond County Planning and Zoning Commission will review special conditions necessitating the installation of a roadway in excess of 1,000 feet. Exceptions to this policy shall be granted on a case-by-case basis. All permanent dead-end streets shall be provided at the closed end with a turn-around having a street-property line diameter of not less than eighty (80) feet. Turn-arounds of this nature shall have a paved diameter of not less than sixty (60) feet. Dead-end streets intended to be continued at a later time shall be provided with the same turn- around as required for a permanent dead-end street, but only that portion to be required as right-of-way when the street is continued shall be dedicated and made a public street. Minor and residential roadways should be laid out to avoid long tangent sections and to discourage speeding and cut-through traffic.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • American Title a Sociation ~ ~
    OFFICIAL PUBLICATION AMERICAN TITLE A SOCIATION ~ ~ VOUJME XXXVI JUNE, 1957 NUMBER 6 TITLE NEWS Official Publication of THE AMERICAN TITLE ASSOCIATION 3608 Guardian Building-Detroit 26, Michigan Volume XXXVI June, 1957 Number 6 Table of Contents Introduction-The Federal Highway Program ......... ... ................ .. .................... 2 J. E. Sheridan Highway Laws Relating to Controlled Access Roads ..... .. ....... ........... 6 Norman A. Erbe Title Companies and the Expanded Right of Way Problems ...... ............. .. 39 , Daniel W. Rosencrans Arthur A. Anderson Samuel J. Some William A . Thuma INTRODUCTION The Federal Highway Program J. E. SHERIDAN We are extremely grateful to Nor­ veloped its planning sufficiently to man A. Erbe, Attorney General of the show to the satisfaction of the dis­ State of Iowa, for permission to re­ trict engineer the effect of the pro­ print his splendid brief embracing posed construction upon adjace.nt the highway laws of various states property, the treatment of access con­ relating to the control in access roads. trol in the area of Federal acquisi­ Mr. Erbe originally presented this m tion, and that appropriate arrange­ narrative form before the convention ments have been made for mainte­ of the Iowa Title Association in May nance and supervision over the land of this year. As is readily ascertain­ to be acquired and held in the name able, this is the result of a compre­ of the United States pending transfer hensive study of various laws touch· of title and jurisdiction to the State ing on the incidents of highway regu­ or the proper subdivision thereof." lations. Additionally, we are privi­ It is suggested that our members leged to carry the panel discussion bring this quoted portion to the at­ of the American Right of Way Asso­ tention of officers of the Highway ciation Convention held in Chicago, Department and the office of its legal May 16 and 17, dealing with "Title division, plus the Office of the Attor­ Companies and the Expanded Right ney General within the members' ju­ of Way Problems".
    [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]
  • Maricopa County Department of Transportation MAJOR STREETS and ROUTES PLAN Policy Document and Street Classification Atlas
    Maricopa County Department of Transportation MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES PLAN Policy Document and Street Classification Atlas Adopted April 18, 2001 Revised September 2004 Revised June 2011 Preface to 2011 Revision This version of the Major Streets and Routes Plan (MSRP) revises the original plan and the 2004 revisions. Looking ahead to pending updates to the classification systems of towns and cities in Maricopa County, the original MSRP stipulated a periodic review and modification of the street functional classification portion of the plan. This revision incorporates the following changes: (1) as anticipated, many of the communities in the County have updated either their general or transportation plans in the time since the adoption of the first MSRP; (2) a new roadway classification, the Arizona Parkway, has been added to the Maricopa County street classification system and the expressway classification has been removed; and (3) a series of regional framework studies have been conducted by the Maricopa Association of Governments to establish comprehensive roadway networks in parts of the West Valley. Table of Contents 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................1 2. Functional Classification Categorization.............................................................................1 3. Geometric Design Standards..............................................................................................4 4. Street Classification Atlas..................................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7: Transportation Mode Choice, Safety & Connections
    Chapter 7: Transportation Mode Choice, Safety & Connections Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-2 TRANSPORTATION City of Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan 2040 INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Transportation Chapter is to guide development, maintenance, and improvement of the community’s transportation network. This Chapter incorporates and addresses the City’s future transportation needs based on the planned future land uses, development areas, housing, parks and trail systems. The City’s transportation network is comprised of several systems including roadways, transit services, trails, railroads and aviation that all work together to move people and goods throughout, and within, the City. This Chapter identifies the existing and proposed transportation system, examines potential deficiencies, and sets investment priorities. The following Chapter plans for an integrated transportation system that addresses each of the following topics in separate sections: • Roadway System 7-1 • Transit Facilities • Bikway & Trail System • Freight & Rail • Aviation The last section of this Chapter provides a summary and implementation section which addresses each of the components of the system, if any additional action within this planning period is expected. The Implementation Plan sets the groundwork for investment and improvements to the transportation network consistent with the goals, analyses, and conclusions of this Plan. As discussed in preceding Chapters of this Comprehensive Plan, the Transportation Chapter is intended to be dynamic and responsive to the City’s planned land uses and development patterns. As the City’s conditions change and improvements occur, this Chapter should be reviewed for consistency with the Plan to ensure that the transportation systems support the City’s ultimate vision for the community through this planning period.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Consultants Memorandum
    CIVIL CONSULTANTS MEMORANDUM TO: Town of York Planning Office FROM: Thomas W. Harmon, PE SUBJECT: Waiver Requests – Town of York Ordinance Section 6.3.3A.4, 7.3.1 D9.5.8.A, & 17.18.16 DATE: MAY 6, 2020 PROJECT: GULF HILL SUBDIVISION 1780 US ROUTE 1 (16-295.00) Town of York Site Plan and Subdivision Regulations: SECTION 6.3. Physical environment of property; 3.A 4. vegetation in general, specifically noting any trees larger than 24” in diameter in breast height; As part of the subdivision plan review process, we are requesting a waiver to locate any trees greater than 24” at breast height that are located within any proposed open space. This would be a large undertaking on a parcel of this size and the intent of the cluster subdivision is to leave a large portion of the property in its natural state. This will be turned over to the land trust to manage which should insure vegetative cover is properly managed. An extremely large portion of the property will be left untouched maintaining any large growth in those areas. SECTION 7.1.3 D New slopes established by re-grading a site shall not exceed 20%, except for the allowed 33% shoulder slope along proposed roads. To minimize disturbance, roadway ledge cuts occurring outside the required roadway right of way may have slopes up to a vertical face.a vertical face SECTION 9.5.8 Developments containing fifteen (15) residential units or more, or which generates average daily traffic of 150 trips per day or more, shall have at least two street connections either with existing public streets, or with streets on an approved Subdivision Plan for which a performance guarantee has been filed and accepted.
    [Show full text]
  • Roadway Design Manual
    Roadway Design Manual Adopted: November 3, 1993 Updated: August 2021 Maricopa County Department of Transportation 2901 W. Durango Street Phoenix, AZ 85009 MCDOT Roadway Design Manual Table of Contents Authorization Memorandum Summary of 2021 Roadway Design Manual Changes Chapter 1 Introduction Chapter 2 Transportation Planning Chapter 3 Environmental Analysis, Clearance and Mitigation Chapter 4 Design Procedure Chapter 5 Geometric Design Standards Chapter 6 Intersections Chapter 7 Access To Maricopa County Road System Chapter 8 Bicycle Facility Guidelines Chapter 9 Landscaping Chapter 10 Pavement Design Guide Summary of 2021 Roadway Design Manual Changes Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1.1 Purpose: 4th paragraph: Functional classifications shall determine RW requirements. 6th paragraph, 2nd bullet: Additional design exhibits may be required… 7th paragraph: added “... as described in the Project Development Manual (PDM), Section 2-2-4 Design Exceptions.” 8th paragraph: increased design exception decision from 3 weeks to 4 weeks. 9th paragraph: changed chairman to Engineering Division Manager 10th paragraph (NEW): Encouraging discussions with County staff prior to submitting a Design Exception. Minor updates and rewording. 1.2 Applicability Paragraph 3 - minor text change. Chapter 2 Transportation Planning 2.1 Functional Classifications 2nd paragraph: Added “and ultimate” and “Roadway” Planning “Level Traffic”. Roadway Planning Level Traffic Volumes as shown in Table 2.1. 2.1.1 Rural System: 2.1.1.1 Rural Parkway: added Divided roadway, wide median and Uncurbed. 2.1.1.3 Rural Minor Arterial: added Uncurbed. 2.1.1.4 Rural Major Collector: added, Undivided lanes and Uncurbed. 2.1.1.5 Rural Minor Collector: added Uncurbed. 2.1.1.6 Rural Local Road System (Residential): added Uncurbed.
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Construction Standards Pavement Markings
    Design and Construction Standards Volume 8 Pavement Marking Posted to the City of Edmonton’s Website in April 2012 PAVEMENT MARKING Design and Construction Standards Index April 2012 DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS VOLUME 8 PAVEMENT MARKING PAVEMENT MARKING GUIDELINES For a detailed list of contents refer to the front of the Guidelines SPECIFICATIONS Section Title Issued 02760 Plastic Pavement Markings April 2012 02761 Glass Beads April 2012 02762 Traffic Paint April 2012 02763 Water Borne Traffic Paint April 2012 02764 Crosswalk and Stopline Painting January 1996 02765 Lane Markings - Hot Applied Paint February 1997 02767 Prefabricated Roadmarking Material April 2012 02768 MMA Spray Plastic February 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 1.0 LONGITUDINAL MARKINGS 2 1.1 DIRECTIONAL DIVIDING LINES 2 1.2 LANE LINES 3 1.3 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES 4 1.4 RESERVED LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS 4 1.5 GUIDE LINES 5 1.6 REVERSIBLE LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS 6 1.7 TWO - WAY LEFT TURN LANES 6 FIGURE 1.1 LINE TYPES 7 FIGURE 1.2 LANE AND LEAD - IN LINES 8 FIGURE 1.3 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES AT YIELDS AND 9 MERGE ENTRANCES FIGURE 1.4 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES AT EXITS 10 FIGURE 1.5 PAVEMENT EDGE LINES AT ON - OFF 11 AUXILIARY LANES TABLE 1 RESERVED LANE PAVEMENT MARKINGS 12 FIGURE 1.6.0 ROAD MARKINGS FOR FULL TIME WITH - FLOW 13 AND CONTRA - FLOW RESERVED LANES FIGURE 1.6.1 ROAD MARKINGS FOR FULL TIME WITH - FLOW 14 RESERVED LANE FIGURE 1.6.2 ROAD MARKINGS FOR FULL TIME CONTRA-FLOW 15 RESERVED LANE FIGURE 1.6.3 ROAD MARKINGS FOR PART TIME WITH - FLOW 16 RESERVED LANE FIGURE
    [Show full text]
  • Access Control
    Access Control Appendix D US 54 /400 Study Area Proposed Access Management Code City of Andover, KS D1 Table of Contents Section 1: Purpose D3 Section 2: Applicability D4 Section 3: Conformance with Plans, Regulations, and Statutes D5 Section 4: Conflicts and Revisions D5 Section 5: Functional Classification for Access Management D5 Section 6: Access Control Recommendations D8 Section 7: Medians D12 Section 8: Street and Connection Spacing Requirements D13 Section 9: Auxiliary Lanes D14 Section 10: Land Development Access Guidelines D16 Section 11: Circulation and Unified Access D17 Section 12: Driveway Connection Geometry D18 Section 13: Outparcels and Shopping Center Access D22 Section 14: Redevelopment Application D23 Section 15: Traffic Impact Study Requirements D23 Section 16: Review / Exceptions Process D29 Section 17: Glossary D31 D2 Section 1: Purpose The Transportation Research Board Access Management Manual 2003 defines access management as “the systematic control of the location, spacing, design, and operations of driveways, median opening, interchanges, and street connections to a roadway.” Along the US 54/US-400 Corridor, access management techniques are recommended to plan for appropriate access located along future roadways and undeveloped areas. When properly executed, good access management techniques help preserve transportation systems by reducing the number of access points in developed or undeveloped areas while still providing “reasonable access”. Common access related issues which could degrade the street system are: • Driveways or side streets in close proximity to major intersections • Driveways or side streets spaced too close together • Lack of left-turn lanes to store turning vehicles • Deceleration of turning traffic in through lanes • Traffic signals too close together Why Access Management Is Important Access management balances traffic safety and efficiency with reasonable property access.
    [Show full text]
  • HOV Brochure
    P F 3 e O 3 d 5 e B 3 r o 0 a x l F 9 W i r Contact Us! 7 s t a 1 W y 8 , a W y A S o PUBLIC WORKS 9 u 8 t h 0 “What Your 6 253-661-4131 3 - 9 Washington 7 1 PUBLIC SAFETY 8 Driver Guide Does Not 253-661-4707 Teach E-MAIL This guide will You.” [email protected] ex p la in t o dr iv er s WEB SITE t he b est wa y t o cityoffederalway.com n a v iga t e o ur C it y usin g H O V la n es a n d U-t ur n s sa f ely , lega lly , a n d ef f ic ien t ly . BROUGHT TO YOU BY YOUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT As you may have USING HOV MYTH: When exiting business driveways and LEGAL noticed, Federal entering the roadway, I must drive through the HOV lane and enter traffic directly in the general Way is now home LANES U-TURNS purpose or ”through” lane to HOV lanes The City is along many of our The most common FACT: NO! The HOV lanes are intended as encouraging use of major roadways. question drivers of a single- acceleration lanes for vehicles entering the LEGAL U-turns HOV lanes have been installed on S 348th occupancy vehicle ask is: roadway. Enter the HOV lane to accelerate, and where appropriate. Street, on SR 99 (S 312th to S 324th), and on “When and where am I change lanes at your first safe opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Streets As Connectors: PEDESTRIAN ZONES in CITIES NATIONAL LEAGUE of CITIES
    NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES Streets as Connectors: PEDESTRIAN ZONES IN CITIES NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES About the National League of Cities The National League of Cities (NLC) is the voice of America’s cities, towns and villages, representing more than 200 million people. NLC works to strengthen local leadership, influence federal policy and drive innovative solutions. NLC’s Center for City Solutions provides research and analysis on key topics and trends important to cities and creative solutions to improve the quality of life in communities. About the Authors Brenna Rivett is a program manager, Tina Lee is a senior coordinator, and Brooks Rainwater is the senior executive and director of NLC’s Center for City Solutions. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Laura Cofsky who edited the report, and Paris Williams who designed the report. © 2020 National League of Cities. All Rights Reserved. Table of Contents 2 Foreword 3 Introduction 5 Background 7 What Cities are Doing 10 International Overview 14 Community Impacts 16 Case Studies 22 Key Considerations 23 Conclusion STREETS AS CONNECTORS: Pedestrian Zones in Cities Foreword Streets are built to connect people. They are arteries of communities, connecting residents to the things most central to their lives – friends and family members, their neighborhoods, and the places where they work and learn. Over time, however, cities and towns have prioritized space for cars, pushing people off the streets. Now, the long-term impact of car-oriented design is becoming more apparent. Traffic congestion and air pollution are wreaking havoc in many places. And, the lack of public spaces for people to gather is driving social isolation.
    [Show full text]
  • 30TH STREET ROAD DIET | OMAHA Public Information Meeting
    30TH STREET ROAD DIET | OMAHA Public Information Meeting City of Omaha Public Works Department Transportation Project Brand Guide HSIP-MAPA-5073(1), CN 22706 Updated May 2017 About the Project The City of Omaha has received funding to conduct a road diet project on 30th Street from Cuming Street to Ames Avenue with the goal of improving mobility and access along the 30th Street corridor while improving vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian safety. The proposed improvements would repurpose the roadway from a five-lane cross section to a three-lane cross section with room for on-street parking and bicycle lanes. This design reduces the number of lanes that left-turning vehicles must cross when turning, potentially creating a safer driving situation. Designating space for bicyclists and creating a buffer between the roadway and sidewalks potentially increases mobility and safety for those walking and biking. Proposed Improvements • Resurface 30th Street - Cuming Street to Ames Avenue • Repurpose roadway by restriping the existing five-lane section to a three-lane section with parking and bike lanes Enhance Safety Preserve Transportation Assets Improve Multimodal Connectivity ! 30TH STREET ROAD DIET | OMAHA Project Schedule City of Omaha Public Works Department Transportation Project Brand Guide Exisiting Conditions Updated May 2017 • Five-lane cross section • 7,000 to 14,000 average vehicles per day • Average of 84 crashes annually Goal • Improve mobility and access • Improve vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian safety Proposed Concept • Three-lane cross section This project is proposed to be constructed under traffic • Capacity for 15,000 vehicles per day with lane closures. Access to adjacent properties would • Resurface/Restripe the existing roadwayProject Schedule be maintained during construction, but may be limited • Modify traffic signals and signage30th Street Road Diet| Omaha, Nebraska • Add on-street parking at times due to phasing requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Traffic Calming Program
    Prepared For: City of Paso Robles RESIDENTIAL AND ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR STREET TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM Final Draft Prepared By: 5307-07TCP004cvr.doc Residential and Arterial/Collector Street Traffic Calming Program Final Draft Prepared For: City of Paso Robles Prepared By: RESIDENTIAL AND ARTERIAL/COLLECTOR STREET TRAFFIC CALMING PROGRAM FINAL DRAFT Prepared For: City of Paso Robles Prepared By OMNI-MEANS, LTD. ENGINEERS & PLANNERS 2237 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 100 Roseville, California 95661 (916) 782-8688 September 2004 25-5307-07 5307-07tcp004.doc TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 SECTION 2 - OVERALL PROGRAM GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES .................................... 3 SECTION 3 - PURPOSE.............................................................................................................................. 4 Residential Neighborhood Streets.................................................................................................... 4 Business and/or Commercial Neighborhood Streets ....................................................................... 4 School Zone Streets ......................................................................................................................... 5 SECTION 4 – TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES .................................................................................... 6 Basic Measures ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]