My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 09/15/2009
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Public Works Committee
>
2000 - 2009
>
2009
>
Agenda - Public Works Committee - 09/15/2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/14/2025 9:34:46 AM
Creation date
9/10/2009 4:37:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
09/15/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />PEDSAFE : recommended guidelines/priorities for sidewalks and walkways <br /> <br />Page 60f 12 <br /> <br />analysis, or if there is a large amount of capital available for <br />sidewalk construction. If there are a lot of competing <br />projects, a more sophisticated point system can be useo to <br />explain to the public why certain projects were funded and <br />others were not. <br /> <br />A point system can be developed in many ways; the system <br />should be simple and produce desired outcomes. Any and <br />all of the criteria Ilsted above can be assigned a range of <br />numbers and then be used to analyze the need for <br />Improvement at given locations. For example, a corridor <br />could be assigned points based on the number of "walking <br />along roadway" crashes over a 5-year period, the number of <br />buses that travel the corridor during peak times, and the <br />proximity to elementary schools. This method is time- <br />consuming because it will be necessary to analyze multiple <br />locations with sidewalk needs to create a list of priority <br />projects. <br /> <br />of arterial streets that were within school walking zones, a <br />pedestrian generator area, and a neighborhood <br />commercial area that did not have sidewalks on either side <br />of the street. <br /> <br />There were nearly 4.6 km (:3 mt) of arterial streets that <br />were within school walking areas, but outside of <br />neighborhood commercial areas and pedestrian <br />generators that did not have sidewalks on either side of <br />the street. This was compared to a citywide deficiency of <br />more tha.n 32 km (20 mt) of arterial streets that lacked <br />sidewalks on both sides of the street. <br /> <br />By developing these and other numbers, the pedestrian <br />program was able to put together packages of Information <br />that demonstrated what could be accomplished with <br />additional funding. What everyone thought to be an <br />unsolvable multi-million-dollar problem was reduced to a <br />series of smaller, fundable projects that declslonmakers <br />could endorse. The result was Increased funding and a <br />n~w optimism that meaningful progress could be made on <br />solving Seattle's sidewalk deficiencies, <br /> <br />3. Prioritized Llst- Both the overlapping priorities and the <br />paints methods will produce an Initial list of prioritIzed <br />projects. The next step Is to refine the list so that It works, <br />using common sense. One important consideration is that when roadways are resurfaced, rehabilitated, or replaced, <br />curb ramps must be added if there are pedestrian walkways., In additIon, the U.S. Department of Justice considers bus <br />stops to be pedestrian walkways requiring access for people with disabilltles, so areas hear transit should be given <br />priority accordingly. Improving pedestrian crossings, particularly on arterial streets, may also be an important part of <br />some projects. Other Important questions include: Are priority locations ones that might be expected? Are there many <br />surprises? Are priority locations In line with community priorities and expectations? Are some priorities at locations with <br />very low pedestrian use? If the answer to these questions is "yes," then the criteria or the methodology should be <br />evaluated and possibly revised to create outcomes that better reflect expectations and desires. The methodologies <br />should be used topriorlti:ze known needs, not to create a new set of priorities that don't make sense. <br /> <br />The final step is to create packages of fundable projects. The prioritization process should result in reasonable <br />packages that decision-makers can embrace and support. For example, It may be possible to install sidewalks on both <br />sides of every arterial within a half-mile of every elementary school for $5 million over a period of 5 years. Or, it may be <br />. possible to replace sidewalks in neighborhood commercial areas for $2 million over a period of 3 years. The objective is <br />to take what may appear to be an unsolvable problem (endless need for more funds) and to package it in such a way <br />that It begins to address some of the most critical pedestrian needs in a community. <br /> <br />Sidewalk Design Guidelines <br /> <br />. Sidewalk Placement In Large and Small Cities <br />Continuous sidewalks should be placed along both sides of aU fully Improved arterial, collector, and local streets in <br />urban .and suburban areas. Sidewalks should connect to side streets and adjacent buildings. Accessible crossings <br />should be provided across median islands, frontage road medians, and other raised islands. <br /> <br />Sidewalks, Walkways, and Shoulders In Rural Areas <br />A safe walking area must be provided outside the motor veh.icle traffic travelway. Sidewalks along rural roads should be <br />well separated from the travelway. Isolated residential areas should have a pedestrian connection to the rest of the rural <br /> <br />http://www. walkinginfo. org/pedsafe/moreinfo sidewalks. cfm <br /> <br />8/19/2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.