DOCSLIB.ORG

Street Design Manual

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Street Design Manual STREET DESIGN MANUAL THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO Transportation & Storm Water Design Manuals Street Design Manual March 2017 Edition The City of San Diego | Volume 1: Right of Way Design Manuals | July 2016 Edition Part 1: Street Design Manual STREET DESIGN MANUAL THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING The City of San Diego | Street Design Manual | March 2017 Edition STREET DESIGN MANUAL Contents Contents ............................................................................................................................................................... i Figures ................................................................................................................................................................. v Tables ................................................................................................................................................................. vii List of Acronyms .............................................................................................................................................. viii Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... ix Applicability ......................................................................................................................................................... x How to Use This Manual ................................................................................................................................... xi 1. Roadway & Alley Design ......................................................................................................................... 1-1 Roadways ........................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Alleys .................................................................................................................................................. 1-2 Residential Streets ....................................................................................................................... 1-31-4 Cul-De-Sac ................................................................................................................................... 1-4 Low-Volume Residential Local Street ...................................................................................... 1-6 Residential Local Street............................................................................................................. 1-8 Commercial Streets ........................................................................................................................ 1-10 Commercial Local Street ......................................................................................................... 1-10 Industrial Local Street ............................................................................................................. 1-14 Collector Streets .............................................................................................................................. 1-16 TwoLane Sub-Collector ........................................................................................................... 1-16 TwoLane Collector ................................................................................................................... 1-18 TwoLane Collector with TwoWay LeftTurn Lane ................................................................. 1-20 TwoLane Industrial Collector ................................................................................................. 1-22 FourLane Urban Collector with TwoWay LeftTurn Lane .................................................... 1-24 Major Streets ................................................................................................................................... 1-26 Four-Lane Urban Major .......................................................................................................... 1-26 Four-Lane Major ...................................................................................................................... 1-28 Six-Lane Urban Major ............................................................................................................. 1-30 Six-Lane Primary Arterial ........................................................................................................ 1-32 Rural Roads ..................................................................................................................................... 1-34 Rural Local Road ...................................................................................................................... 1-34 Rural Collector Road ................................................................................................................ 1-36 Facilities without the Automobile ................................................................................................. 1-38 Shared Pedestrian/Bikeway Facilities ................................................................................... 1-38 Bikeways ................................................................................................................................... 1-40 Transitways ............................................................................................................................... 1-40 2. Pedestrian and Accessibility Design ...................................................................................................... 2-1 Understanding ADA and Designing for Various Disabilities and Ages ...................................... 2-2 Grades ......................................................................................................................................... 2-2 Sidewalks .................................................................................................................................... 2-3 Curb Ramps at Intersections .................................................................................................... 2-4 Surfaces ...................................................................................................................................... 2-5 Creating a Pedestrian Realm ........................................................................................................... 2-5 Sidewalk Design ......................................................................................................................... 2-6 Issues to Consider ..................................................................................................................... 2-6 New Development versus Retrofit .......................................................................................... 2-6 i The City of San Diego | Street Design Manual | March 2017 Edition STREET DESIGN MANUAL Relation to Transit ..................................................................................................................... 2-6 Establishing “Zones” .................................................................................................................. 2-7 Street Design ..................................................................................................................................... 2-9 Issues to Consider ..................................................................................................................... 2-9 ADA Accessibility ........................................................................................................................ 2-9 New Development versus Retrofit .......................................................................................... 2-9 Relation to Transit ................................................................................................................... 2-10 Guidelines ................................................................................................................................. 2-10 Intersection Design and Operations ............................................................................................ 2-10 Issues to Consider ................................................................................................................... 2-11 ADA Accessibility ...................................................................................................................... 2-11 New Development versus Retrofit ........................................................................................ 2-11 Relation to Transit ................................................................................................................... 2-11 Pedestrian Crossings ...................................................................................................................... 2-11 Issues to Consider ................................................................................................................... 2-11 Accessibility .............................................................................................................................. 2-12 Relation to Transit ................................................................................................................... 2-12 Guidelines ................................................................................................................................. 2-12 Residential Street Crossings ..................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Enhancing Walkability in a Downtown: a Case Study of Adel, Iowa
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Creative Components Dissertations Fall 2020 Enhancing Walkability in a Downtown: A Case Study of Adel, Iowa Yaw Kwarteng Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/creativecomponents Part of the Urban, Community and Regional Planning Commons Recommended Citation Kwarteng, Yaw, "Enhancing Walkability in a Downtown: A Case Study of Adel, Iowa" (2020). Creative Components. 656. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/creativecomponents/656 This Creative Component is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Creative Components by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Enhancing Walkability in a Downtown: A Case Study of Adel, Iowa by Yaw Yeboah Kwarteng A creative component submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING Major: Community and Regional Planning Program of Study Committee: Monica Haddad, Major Professor Brian Gelder Sungduck Lee The student author, whose presentation of the scholarship herein was approved by the program of study committee, is solely responsible for the content of this creative component. The Graduate College will ensure this creative component is globally accessible and will not permit alterations after a degree is conferred. Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2020 Copyright © Cy Cardinal, 2020. All rights reserved. ii DEDICATION This report is dedicated to my mum, Akosua Gyapomaa. Your love keeps me going. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES .........................................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Preferential and Managed Lane Signs and General Information Signs
    2009 Edition Page 253 CHAPTER 2G. PREFERENTIAL AND MANAGED LANE SIGNS Section 2G.01 Scope Support: 01 Preferential lanes are lanes designated for special traffic uses such as high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs), light rail, buses, taxis, or bicycles. Preferential lane treatments might be as simple as restricting a turning lane to a certain class of vehicles during peak periods, or as sophisticated as providing a separate roadway system within a highway corridor for certain vehicles. 02 Preferential lanes might be barrier-separated (on a separate alignment or physically separated from the other travel lanes by a barrier or median), buffer-separated (separated from the adjacent general-purpose lanes only by a narrow buffer area created with longitudinal pavement markings), or contiguous (separated from the adjacent general-purpose lanes only by a lane line). Preferential lanes might allow continuous access with the adjacent general-purpose lanes or restrict access only to designated locations. Preferential lanes might be operated in a constant direction or operated as reversible lanes. Some reversible preferential lanes on a divided highway might be operated counter-flow to the direction of traffic on the immediately adjacent general-purpose lanes. 03 Preferential lanes might be operated on a 24-hour basis, for extended periods of the day, during peak travel periods only, during special events, or during other activities. 04 Open-road tolling lanes and toll plaza lanes that segregate traffic based on payment method are not considered preferential lanes. Chapter 2F contains information regarding signing of open-road tolling lanes and toll plaza lanes. 05 Managed lanes typically restrict access with the adjacent general-purpose lanes to designated locations only.
    [Show full text]
  • Rural Expressway Intersection Synthesis of Practice and Crash Analysis
    RURAL EXPRESSWAY INTERSECTION SYNTHESIS OF PRACTICE AND CRASH ANALYSIS Sponsored by the Iowa Department of Transportation (CTRE Project 03-157) Final Report October 2004 Disclaimer Notice The opinions, fi ndings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Iowa Department of Transportation. The sponsor(s) assume no liability for the contents or use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specifi cation, or regulation. The sponsor(s) do not endorse products or manufacturers. About CTRE/ISU The mission of the Center for Transportation Research and Education (CTRE) at Iowa State Uni- versity is to develop and implement innovative methods, materials, and technologies for improv- ing transportation effi ciency, safety, and reliability while improving the learning environment of students, faculty, and staff in transportation-related fi elds. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. CTRE Project 03-157 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Rural Expressway Intersection Synthesis of Practice and Crash Analysis October 2004 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. T. H. Maze, Neal R. Hawkins, and Garrett Burchett 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Research and Education Iowa State University 11. Contract or Grant No. 2901 South Loop Drive, Suite 3100 Ames, IA 50010-8634 12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Iowa Department of Transportation Final Report 800 Lincoln Way 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Ames, IA 50010 15.
    [Show full text]
  • The Forgotten and the Future: Reclaiming Back Alleys for a Sustainable City
    Environment and Planning A 2010, volume 42, pages 2874 ^ 2896 doi:10.1068/a42259 The forgotten and the future: reclaiming back alleys for a sustainable city Jennifer Wolch College of Environmental Design, University of California, Berkeley, 230 Wurster Hall #1820, Berkeley, CA 94720-1820, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Josh Newellô School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Michigan, 440 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1041, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Mona Seymour Urban Studies Program, Loyola Marymount University, 1 LMU Drive, Los Angeles, CA 90045-2659, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Hilary Bradbury Huang USC Center for Sustainable Cities, 3518 Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0048, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Kim Reynolds School of Community and Global Health, Claremont Graduate University, 150 East 10th Street, Claremont, CA 91711, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Jennifer Mapes Department of Geography, University of Southern California, 3620 South Vermont Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0255, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Received 10 July 2009; in revised form 29 October 2009; published online 20 September 2010 Abstract. Alleys are enigmatic, neglected features of the urban fabric. In this paper we explore the distribution, physical features, activity patterns, and resident perceptions of alleys in one major US city, Los Angeles, California. We do so through an integrated mixed-methods strategy involving participatory research with community-based organizations, spatial analysis, physical audits and behavioral observation of alleys, and focus groups. Results show that most alleys in Los Angeles are underutilized and walkable, quiet, and clean, although they can be, and are often perceived as, dirty and unsafe.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 5 Safety
    5 Safety 5.1 Introduction 103 5.2 Conflicts 104 5.2.1 Vehicle conflicts 105 5.2.2 Pedestrian conflicts 108 5.2.3 Bicycle conflicts 110 5.3 Crash Statistics 111 5.3.1 Comparisons to previous intersection treatment 111 5.3.2 Collision types 113 5.3.3 Pedestrians 117 5.3.4 Bicyclists 120 5.4 Crash Prediction Models 122 5.5 References 125 Exhibit 5-1. Vehicle conflict points for “T” Intersections with single-lane approaches. 105 Exhibit 5-2. Vehicle conflict point comparison for intersections with single-lane approaches. 106 Exhibit 5-3. Improper lane-use conflicts in double-lane roundabouts. 107 Exhibit 5-4. Improper turn conflicts in double-lane roundabouts. 108 Exhibit 5-5. Vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at signalized intersections. 109 Exhibit 5-6. Vehicle-pedestrian conflicts at single-lane roundabouts. 109 Exhibit 5-7. Bicycle conflicts at conventional intersections (showing two left-turn options). 110 Exhibit 5-8. Bicycle conflicts at roundabouts. 111 Exhibit 5-9. Average annual crash frequencies at 11 U.S. intersections converted to roundabouts. 112 Exhibit 5-10. Mean crash reductions in various countries. 112 Exhibit 5-11. Reported proportions of major crash types at roundabouts. 113 Exhibit 5-12. Comparison of collision types at roundabouts. 114 Exhibit 5-13. Graphical depiction of collision types at roundabouts. 115 Exhibit 5-14. Crash percentage per type of user for urban roundabouts in 15 towns in western France. 116 Exhibit 5-15. British crash rates for pedestrians at roundabouts and signalized intersections. 117 Exhibit 5-16. Percentage reduction in the number of crashes by mode at 181 converted Dutch roundabouts.
    [Show full text]
  • Santa Fe's Walkability
    Santa Fe’s Walkability Mapping the City’s Urban Strengths CityCity ofof SantaSanta FeFe LandLand UseUse DepartmentDepartment LongLong RangeRange PlanningPlanning DivisionDivision Photo courtesy: Trover, Creative Commons Santa Fe’s Walkability Mapping the City’s Urban Strengths Lisa Martinez, Land Use Department Director Reed Liming, Long Range Planning Division Director Richard Macpherson, Senior Planner David Barsanti, G.I.S. Analyst Gil Martinez, Graphics Designer July, 2017 Walk Score® is a registered trademark of Redfin Real Estate, Seattle, WA. A special thanks to Aleisha Jacobson at Redfin’s Walk Score® office. i Santa Fe’s Walkability … Defining the City’s Urban Core Santa Fe is famed for its historic buildings and narrow streets. Visitors and Measuring Walkability residents value the historic part of the city for its walkability, reflecting how towns and cities felt to residents and visitors before the dominance of the automobile. Measuring walkability and understanding the “ingredients” that are needed Since World War II, however, much of Santa Fe has reflected land development to make a place more walkable has gained increasing interest. The following patterns with more spread-out, suburban-style subdivisions and large commercial analysis shows those areas of Santa Fe that have the greatest levels of walkability tracts with over-sized parking lots. This development trend is based on the car and as measured by the nearness (usually a 5-10 minute walk) of key daily needs reflects modern development patterns found in virtually every U.S. town and city. and desires of residents, including: Schools, Parks, Grocery Stores, Restaurants, Errands, Shopping and Cultural Activities. Walkability Walk Score® is a tool used to determine which parts of Santa Fe are the most While Santa Feans may enjoy walking around their neighborhood and enjoy the walkable and therefore, from a planning standpoint, reflect the most efficient uses area where they live, “walkability” as used in this report defines those areas in which of land.
    [Show full text]
  • What Are the Advantages of Roundabouts?
    What is a roundabout? A roundabout is an intersection where traffic travels around a Circulatory central island in a counter- Truck Apron Roadway clockwise direction. Vehicles entering or exiting the roundabout must yield to vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Figure 1 presents the elements of a roundabout. Yield Line Splitter Island Figure 1: Elements of a Roundabout What are the advantages of roundabouts? • Less Traffic Conflict: Figure 2 compares the conflict points between a conventional intersection and a modern roundabout. The lower number of conflict points translates to less potential for accidents. • Greater safety(1): Primarily achieved by slower speeds and elimination of left turns. Design elements of the roundabouts cause drivers to reduce their speeds. • Efficient traffic flow: Up to 50% increase in traffic capacity • Reduced Pollution and fuel usage: Less stops, shorter queues and no left turn storage. • Money saved: No signal equipment to install or maintain, plus savings in electricity use. • Community benefits: Traffic calming and enhanced aesthetics by landscaping. (1) Statistics published by the U.S. Dept. of transportation, Federal Highway Administration shows roundabouts to have the following advantages over conventional intersections: • 90% reduction in fatalities • 76% reduction in injuries • 35% reduction in pedestrian accidents. Signalized Intersection Roundabout Figure 2: Conflict Point Comparison How to Use a Roundabout Driving a car • Slow down as you approach the intersection. • Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the roadway. • Watch for signs and pavement markings. • Enter the roundabout if gap in traffic is sufficient. • Drive in a counter-clockwise direction around the roundabout until you reach your exit. Do not stop or pass other vehicles.
    [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]
  • Chapter 9 Intersections
    2005 Intersections CHAPTER 9 INTERSECTIONS 9.0 INTRODUCTION Intersections are intended to operate with vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles proceeding in many directions, often at the same time. At such locations, traffic movements on two or more facilities are required to occupy a common area. It is this unique characteristic of intersections, the repeated occurrence of conflicts, that is the basis for most intersection design standards, criteria, and proper operating procedures. An intersection is defined as the general area where two or more highways join or cross, including the roadway and roadside facilities for traffic movements within it. Each highway radiating from an intersection and forming part of it is an intersection leg. The common intersection of two highways crossing each other has four legs. It is not recommended that an intersection have more than four legs. An intersection is an important part of a highway system because, to a great extent, the efficiency, safety, speed, cost of operation, and capacity depend on its design. Each intersection involves through or cross-traffic movements on one or more of the highways concerned and may involve turning movements between these highways. These movements may be handled by various means, such as signals, signing, and channelization, depending on the type of intersection. 9.1 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND OBJECTIVES The main objective of intersection design is to reduce the potential conflicts between motor vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, and facilities while facilitating the convenience, ease, and comfort of the people traversing the intersection. The design should be fitted closely to the natural transitional paths and operating characteristics of the users.
    [Show full text]
  • Dual Carriageways Dual Carriageways – Know the Dangers
    ROAD SAFETY EDUCATION Dual Carriageways Dual carriageways – know the dangers Never confuse a dual carriageway with a motorway. Both may have 2 or 3 lanes, a central reservation and a national speed limit of 70 mph, but that’s as far as the similarity goes. When driving on a dual carriageway there are many dangers you need to be aware of. Know the difference between dual carriageways and motorways Unlike motorways… • Dual carriageways may have variable speed limits; • Dual carriageways usually permit right turns; • Dual carriageways allow traffic to join from the left and cross from left to right; • Cyclists, mopeds, farm vehicles and pedestrians are allowed to use dual carriageways; • Dual carriageways may have Pelican Crossings, traffic lights, roundabouts and Zebra Crossings. 2 Know the speed limits Dual carriageways often have lower or variable speed limits shown by red circular signs. Rule 124 of The Highway Code NI says you MUST NOT exceed the maximum speed limits for the road and for your vehicle. The presence of street lights generally means that there is a 30 mph (48 km/h) speed limit unless otherwise specified. 3 Know your stopping distances (Rule 126) Always drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear. Leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front so that you can pull up safely if it suddenly slows down or stops. Remember - • Never get closer than the overall stopping distance (see typical stopping distances table); • Always allow at least a two-second gap between you and the vehicle Know how to join a in front on roads carrying dual carriageway fast-moving traffic and in tunnels where visibility is reduced; When joining a dual carriageway • The two-second gap rule should obey signs and road markings.
    [Show full text]