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 11 of12 <br /> <br />2. Number of driveways: To comply with ADA, many existing driveways must be replaced with ones that provide a <br />level passage at least 0.9 (3 ft) wide. It can also be advantageous to inventory all existing driveways to see if any <br />can be closed, resulting in a cost-savings. <br />3. Number of intersections: While intersections represent a reduction in the sidewalk, curb ramps are required <br />where sidewalks cross Intersections and the cost of providing additional traffic control at each intersection should <br />be considered. <br />4. Obstacles to be removed: The cost for moving or removing obstacles such as utility poles, signposts. and fire <br />hydrants vary too much to be itemized here; however, they are required to be moved if they obstruct access. <br />These costs must be calculated individually for each project. <br />5. Structures: While minor sidewalk projects rarely involve new structures such as a bridge, many projects with <br />significant cuts and fills may require retaining walls and/or culvert extensions. The costs of retaining walls must <br />be calculated individually for each project. <br />6. Right-ot-way: While most sidewalk projects can be built within existing rights-of-way (especially inflll projects), <br />some may require some rlght.of-way easement. An alternative to acquiring right-of-way is to narrow the <br />roadway. which should consider the needs ot bicyclists (e.g., through bike lanes or shoulders, at a minimum of <br />1.5 m (5 ft). <br />7. Miscellaneous factors: Planters, irrigation, benches, decorative lampposts. and other aesthetic Improvements <br />cost money, but they are usually well worth It if the Impetus for the project is to create a more pleasant and <br />inviting walking environment. <br /> <br />VVhen project costs appear to be escalating due to one or more of the above.llsted items, especially retaining walls or <br />acquiring right-of-way, consideration may be given to narrowing the sidewalk in constrained areas as a last resort. The <br />full sidewalk width should be resumed in non.constrained areas-this is preferable to providing a narrow sidewalk. <br />throughout, or dropping the project because of one difficult section. <br /> <br />Tips to Reduce Total Costs: <br /> <br />1. Stand-alone vs. Integrated within another project: Sidewalks should always be included In road construction <br />projects. Stand-alone sidewalk projects cost more than the same work performed as part of a larger project. <br />Sidewalks can be piggybacked to projects such as surface preservation, water or sewer lines. or placing utilities <br />underground. Besides the monetary savings, the political fallout is reduced, since the public doesn't perceive an <br />agency as being inefficient (it Is very noticeable if an agency works on a road, then comes back to do more work <br />later). The reduced Impacts on traffic are a bonus to integration. <br />2. Combining Projects: A cost-savings can be achieved by combining several small sidewalk projects into one big <br />one. This can occur even if the sidewalks are under different Jurisdictions, or even in different localities, If they <br />are close to each other. The basic principle is that bid prices drop as quantities increase. <br /> <br />Bibliography and List of References <br /> <br />American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, A Policy on .Geometric Designs of Highways <br />and Streets, 1984, <br /> <br />Axelson, P. et aI., Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access, Federal Highway Administration. Washington, DC, July <br />1999. <br /> <br />Institute of Transportation Engineers, Design of Pedestrian Facilities-Recommended Practices: Providing Safety <br />and Mobility, 2001. . <br /> <br />:~I <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.