The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About24 Venessa Garza 16Kim I ey ») H 0 r n __________ I n_vo_ic_e_fo_r_P_ro_fe_s_si_on_a_I s_e_rv_ic_e_s cm OF COLLEGE STATION ATTN: VENESSA GAR:ZA PO BOX 9960 2613 TEXAS AVE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77842 Please send payments to: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. P.O. BOX 932514 ATLANTA, GA 31193-2514 Federal Tax Id: 56-0885615 COST PLUS MAX Project Summary Contract Value Previous Billings Current Invoice Remaining Contract Value Description LABOR EXPENSES Subtotal Total COST PLUS MAX Total Invoice: $2,565.32 29,700.00 26,557.98 2,565.32 576.70 Current Amount Due 2,452 .50 112.82 2,565.32 2,565.32 If you have questions regarding this Invoice, please cc/I Amanda Rogers at (972) 770-1342. Invoice No: 9150828 Invoice Date: Mar 31, 2017 Invoice Amount: $2,565.32 Project No: 017510000.3 Project Name: COLLEGE STATION BIKE PED Project Manager: WHITACRE, JEFF Client Reference: 16206392-00 For Services Rendered through Mar 31, 2017 61ALR Kim I ey >)) H 0 r n ___________ I n_v_oi_ce_f_o_r _Pr_o_fe_ss_i_on_a_I _se_rv_i_ce_s CfTYO~Gel::tEGE-s:l~:Qti./ ATTN: ENESSA GARZA PO BOX 613 T AVE COLLEGE STATION, TX 77842 Please send payments to: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. P.O. BOX 932514 ATLANTA, GA 31193-2514 Federal Tax Id: 56-0885615 COST PLUS MAX Project Summary Contract Value Previous Billings Current Invoice Remaining Contract Value Description LABOR EXPENSES Subtotal Total COST PLUS MAX Total Invoice: $6,929.78 29,700.00 19,628.20 6,929.78 ~ Current Amount Due 5,647.50 1,282.28 6,929.78 6,929.78 If you have questions regarding this invoice, please call Amanda Rogers at (972) 770-1342. Invoice No: 8893724 Invoice Date: Jan 31, 2017 Invoice Amount: $6,929.78 Project No: 017510000.3 Project Name: COLLEGE STATION BIKE PED Project Manager: WHITACRE, JEFF Client Reference: 16206392-00 For Services Rendered through Jan 31, 2017 61ALR Kim ley »> H 0 rn __________ l_nv_o_ic_e _fo_r _Pr_of_e_ss_io_n_al_S_erv_ice_s CITY OF COLLEGE STATION ATTN: EDWARD J. MCDONALD P.O. BOX 9973 COLLEGE STATION, TX 77842 Please send payments to: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. P.O. BOX 932514 ATLANTA, GA 31193-2514 Federal Tax Id: 56-0885615 COST PLUS MAX Project Summary Contract Value Previous Billings Current Invoice Remaining Contract Value --- Description LABOR EXPENSES Subtotal Total COST PLUS MAX Total Invoice: $14,494.95 29,700.00 5,133.25 14,494.95 10,071.80 Cu rrent Amount Due 13,857.50 637.45 14,494.95 14,~94.95 Invoice No: 8614474 Invoice Date: Nov 30, 2016 Invoice Amount: $14,494.95 Project No: 017510000.3 Project Name: COLLEGE STATION BIKE PED Project Manager: VO, TRUNG Client Reference: 16206392-00 For Services Rendered through Nov 30, 2016 I f you have questions or concerns, please call Logan Brelsford at (919) 653-2972 or logan.brelsford@kimley-horn.com llLRB COLLEGE STATION M ULTI-USE PATH & SEP ARATED BIKE LANE DESIGN GUIDANCE Progress Report -November 2016 Task Progress I Project Coordination • Conti nued coordination . . . .. . .... ..... ..................................................... ,. ......... ·························-·· ······································-·······-·····---···-·-....................... -··--~ ................................................. , __ ....................................... - ! M ul ti -Use Pa t h Design Document • Created document outline . • Fa c ilitated outline review call. e-----·-·· ___ • Drafted fy1 UP design docu_!1'1 ent . ______ _ I Separated Bi ke Lane Design lnv_en_to_ry'--____ •_C_re_ated SBL des ign inventory. Venessa Garza ent: To: Cc: Subject: cathy.murrell@kimley-horn .com Wednesday, January 11 , 2017 7:26 AM Venessa Garza jeff.whitacre@kimley -horn.com RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click link s or open attachments without positi ve sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or sen sitive information on linked page s from thi s email.***** Hi Venessa, We looked at TxDOT averages and compared to prices we have seen and offer the following as average unit price2 fo r 2" conduit : .... ~ v. <}r c,, Item Description Unit of Three Month measure AV<J Bid Conduit (PVC) (SCH 40) (2") LF $7 .75 Conduit (PVC ) (SCH 80) (2") LF $8 .25 rv~~\I~ JvSol~ ~ ~~ Please note PVC SCH 40 would be used for the majority of the path lighting as it is used in eas n er a roadway and not subject to traffic. PVC SCH 80 is used when it can be subject to traffic whi ch wou ld probably be just under parking lo ts and any roadways . Thanks, Cathy M urrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn 1421 Fa yettev ille St., Ste . 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 6 7 8 4139 I Main : 919 677 20 00 I www.kim ley -horn .com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above!! From: Murrell , Cathy Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 3:34 PM To: 'Venessa Garza' <vga r za@cstx.gov> Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.wh itacre@kim ley -horn .c om > Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Hi Venessa , I have created a matrix to help summa r ize the design elements. Please find attached an excel and PDF version . The page reference in the right column is reflective of the version of the document you are working with. As we ma ke adjustments to the document, it will be updated accord i ng ly. Please f eel free to p r ovide comments on the matrix or ·omplete document, whichever is easier for you al l. Thanks and have a great weekend, 1 Cathy Murrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayetteville St., Ste . 600, Raleigh, NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1Main :919 677 2000 I www .k imlev-horn.com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above !! From: Murrell, Cathy Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 9 :16 AM To: Venessa Garza <vgarza@ cs tx.gov> Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com > Subject: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Good morning Venessa, Happy New Year! I hope were able to enjoy some time off over the holidays. It was nice to get to meet you and your team in person the other week. Below are action items I had noted from the meeting. We are working to address them and will be sending responses in separate email. Please let me know if I missed any action items or if you have any questions . 1. KH to send example of a delegated design boardwalk and bridge (plan view and specifications). 2. KH to provide recommendation in documentation for access breaks in long fence runs . 3 . KH to provide average unit rate for 2" conduit. -Sent 1/11/17 4. KH to provide matrix format of design elements. -Sent 1/6/17 5. City to provide additional comments on the document including any City preferences . 6. KH to revise the document per City comments . rhanks, Cathy 10 --·--·------------I Cathy Murrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayettev ille St., Ste. 600, Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1M ain:919 677 2000 I www .kimley-horn .com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above !! 2 Venessa Garza From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: cathy.murrell@kimley-horn .com Tuesday, January 31 , 2017 10 :04 AM Venessa Garza jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Park Depot Greenway 90 % Plans_(2015 -11 -13 ).pdf; Performance Spec _Precast Concrete Boardwalk Alternative_Smith and Sanford Greenway.docx; Performance Spec _Prefabricated Pedestrian Bridge _Smith and Sanford Greenway.doc; Performance Spec _ Timber Boardwalk_Park Depot Greenway.doc; Smith and Sanford Greenway_ 2015 -11 -05 (2016-02-01 ).pdf; Design Specification_ Timber Boardwalk_Smith and Sanford.docx *****This is an email fro m an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click link s or open attachments w ithout pos iti ve sender verification of purpose . Never enter USE RNAME , PA SSW ORD or se nsit ive information on lin ke d pages from this email.***** Hi Venessa, Thanks! We are looking forward to it. Regarding timing, that sounds good. We will plan to in corporate comments in March . Also, I do have some information on the structures plans . I have attached two sets of plans and specifications for boardwalk and bridges . • The Smith and Sanford Greenway proj ect has performance details and specifications for a prefabricated bridge and precast concrete boardwa lk. It also has complete design details and specifications for a timber boardwalk design . • The Park Depot Greenway has performance details and specifications for timber boardwalk. These are North Carolina designs, but we did review them and the prefabricated pedestrian bridge is consistent with what would be done in Texas as well. The last action item outstanding is input on breaks in fence runs. There is no set standard so I am trying to find some information on what would be a reasonable guideline. Please let us know if you have any questio ns . Thanks, Cathy Murrell, P .E. Kimley-Horn 1421 Fayetteville St., Ste . 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1Main :919 677 2000 I www .kimley -horn .com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above!! from: Venessa Garza [mailto:vgarza@cstx.gov] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:04 AM To: Murrell, Cathy <cathy.murrell@kimley-horn .com> 1 Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com> Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Congratulations! Hope you have a wonderfu l wedding! With how busy thi ngs have been for me, let's just assume that I wouldn't have comments to you in time for you to turn things around before your wedding. Depending on how the meeting goes in February, I may have to schedu le another meeting with staff since I haven't gotten consensus on a number of topics. I'm fine with p ick ing up with things after you get back. Is that ok w ith you? My expectation is one round of comments back to y'a ll and then we fina lize things on your end. There may be a few topics th at we continue discussing internally and I wo uld tweak the document later. Venessa Garza, AICP City of College Stat ion Planning and Development Services Department 979-764-3674 From: cathy .murrell@kimley-horn.com [mailto:cathy.murrell@kimley-horn .com ] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:16 PM To: Venessa Garza <v garza@cstx.gov > Cc: jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source . DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or se nsiti ve info1mation on linked ages from thi s email. ***** Hi Venessa, Thanks for the hea ds up. That should be fine. I will be getting married at the beginning of March and will be out March 1 through Ma rch 20 . I will plan to get the updates incorporated before I leave, but please keep me posted if the meeting date has to slide . Thanks, Cathy Murrell, P .E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayett eville St., Ste. 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 I Main : 919 677 2000 I www.kimley-horn.com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above!! From: Venessa Garza [mailto:vgarza@cstx.gov] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 8:43 PM To: Murrell, Cathy <cathy .murrell@kimley-horn.com> Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com > Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Hey Cathy, he soonest I could find time on everyone's calendars was February 21 51 . I'll give you an update after that meeting in regards to getting comments back to y'all. Thanks!! 2 Venessa Garza, AICP City of Co llege Station Plann i ng and Deve lopment Services Department 79-764-3674 From: cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com [mailto :ca thy.murrell@kimley-horn .com ] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 4 :37 PM To: Venessa Garza <vgarza@cstx.gov > Cc: jeff.whitacre@k imley-horn.com Subject: RE : College Sta t ion -MUP Di scuss ion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or sensitive information on linked pages from this email. * * * * * Hi Venessa, No problem on the delay. I understand completely how things can pile up when you are out. When we get the comments we will get them incorporated . I am still working with Jeff to get the answers for the last couple action items. If you could let me know when your internal meeting is schedule, I will make sure to get you response prior to your meeting. Thanks, Cathy Murrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayetteville St., Ste . 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 I Main : 919 677 2000 I www.kimley-horn.com W e've moved! Please no te o ur new office ad d ress above!! From: Venessa Garza [ma ilto:vgarza@cstx.gov ] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 4 :14 PM To: Murrell, Cathy <cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com > Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com > Subject: RE: College Sta t ion -MUP Discuss ion Action Items Hey Cathy, Sorry for the delay in responding on my end. It was so nice to meet you as well. I did take some time off over the holidays and hit the ground running when I returned . Thanks so much for the additional information you've provided so far. The matrix of design elements will be so helpful. I gave staff until last Friday to give me additional comments but I think everyone is super busy si nce I didn't get anything back . I'm going to have to change my game plan and schedule an internal meeting to continue discussions on our end before I can send you comments. It will probably be a few weeks before you'll see anything from me. Thanks again for all y ou've worked on so far! Venessa Garza, AICP ity of College Station Planning and Development Services Department 979 -7 64-3674 3 rom: cathy .murr ell@kimley-horn.com [ma i lto :cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 7 :26 AM To: Venessa Garza <vgarza@cstx.gov > Cc: jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME , PASSWORD or sensitive info1mation on linked pages from this email.***** Hi Venessa, We looked at TxDOT averages and compared to prices we have seen and offer the following as average unit prices for 2" conduit: Item Des cr iption Un it of Three Month measure Avg Bid Co nduit (PVC ) (SCH 40) (2") LF $7.75 Conduit (PVC ) (SCH 80) (2") LF $8 .25 Please note PVC SCH 40 would be used for the majority of the path lighting as it is used in areas not under a roadway and not subject to traffic. PVC SCH 80 is used when it can be subject to traffic which would probably be just under parking lots and an y roadways. hanks, Cathy Murrell , P.E. Ki m ley -Ho rn I 421 Fay ett eville St., Ste. 600 , Ra lei gh, NC 27601 Direct: 9 19 678 4139 1Main :919 677 200 0 I www.kimley-horn .co m W e'v e moved ! Please note our new office address a bove!! From: Murrell, Cathy Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 3:34 PM To: 'Venessa Garza' <vgarza@cstx.gov > Cc: Whitacre , Jeff <jeff.wh itacre@kimley-horn.com > Subject: RE : College Stat ion -MUP Discussion Action Items Hi Venessa, I have created a matrix to help summarize the design elements. Please find attached an excel and PDF version . The page reference i n the right column is reflective of the version of the document you are working with . As we make adjustments to the document, it will be updated accordingly. Please feel free to provide comments on the matrix or complete document, whichever is easier for you all. Thanks and have a great weekend, 4 Cathy Murrell, P .E. Kimley-Horn / 421 Fayetteville St., Ste . 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1Main :919 677 2000 I www.kim ley-horn .com We 've moved! Please note ou r new office address above!! From: Murrell, Cathy Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 9:16 AM To: Venessa Garza <v gar za@cstx .gov > Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.whitacre@ki m ley -horn .c om > Subject: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Good morning Venessa, Happy New Year! I hope were able to enjoy some time off over the holidays. It was nice to get to meet you and your team in person the other week . Below are action items I had noted from the meet fng. We are working to address them and will be sending responses in separate email. Please let me know if I missed any action items or if you have any questions. 1. KH to send example of a delegated design boardwalk and bridge (plan view and specifications). -Sent 1/31/17 2. KH to provide recommendation in documentation for access breaks in long fence runs . 3. KH to provide average unit rate for 2" conduit. -Sent 1/11/17 4 . KH to provide matrix format of design elements . -Sent 1/6/17 5. City to provide additional comments on the document including any City preferences . 6. KH to revise the document per City comments . Thanks, Cathy 1° -----·-------'"------I Cathy Murrell, P .E. Kimley-Horn 1421 Fayettev ille St., Ste . 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 6 78 4139 1Main :919 677 2000 I www.kimley-horn.com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above!! City of College Station Home of Texas A&M Unive rsity ® City of College Statio n Home of Texas A&M University ® City of College Station Home of Texas A&M Univers ity ® 5 Venessa Garza rom: ent: To: Cc: cathy .murre ll @ki mle y-horn .com Tuesday , March 28, 20 17 8:22 AM Venessa Garza jeff.whitac re@ kimley -horn .com Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Attachments: Mu lti-Use Path Design Standards_Draft to City (2016-12 -08)_R 1 (2017-03-28).docx *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME , PASSWORD or se nsitive information on linked pages from thi s email. * * * * * Good morning Venessa , I hope you are doing well. I am just getting back and settled in and wanted to touch base with you. I did not have a summarized vers ion of our discussion; I had just made notes in the margin of the document. I did go ahead and reflect my notes it in the word document w ith track changes. I had hoped to get this to you before I left, but just ran out of time . Please find attached the latest word document version. The matrix is also a good summary of the items needing City input/confirmation. The matrix referenced the original page numbers. I have done some investigating on requirements for fence and openings in fenc es . Unfortunately, there is no set guidelines on how often there should be an opening. I have discussed some internally and offer the following houghts . I have added this to }fe _document, but we can revise as you all would like. v ~ ( e0 ·1+·,Y\ {t'MllYL--· If a safety railing is not warranted, but a barrier is desired there are options to cons ider for fence types . There are opaque options such as tall (6-foot or greater) wooden fence or chain link fence with a screen. More transparent options could include shorter wooden or chain link fence (4 -foot tall), metal pipe handrail, or placement of multiple bollards . The benefit of a continuous fence line is it directs MUP users to stay on the designated path. The opaque fence options would physically restrict users from veering off the path and provide more privacy to the private property owner. The more transparent fence options would discourage trail users from leavin g the path, but would not fully restrict this movement. Each situ ation will need to be evaluated on a case by case bas is. The need for the fence relative to privacy or restrictions from hazardous areas as well as the overall safety of the path user need to be factored into the selected fence type. If a fence line will run for several hundred feet (greater than 1,000 feet) and the user would be contained to the path due to fences or exist i ng physical features on the other side of the path, options for emergency ingress and egress access points sh be evaluated. Breaks in the fence line for logical access points shou ld be considered 1,000-foot interva . If it is not feasible to provide a logical access point, then use of transparent fence types should be considered on a 500 to 1,500-foot interval to minimize the tunneling effect and provide opportunity for emergency ingress or egress . The proposed fence type will be subject to approval by the City. Please let me know if we should schedule a conference call to discuss any item s that came out of your team meeting. Lastly , I spoke with Jeff and he is going to work on addressing your Separate Bike Lane comments this week. Please let us Thanks, now if you have questions on either of the documents . UV' I? o) h--5·, )~'>· . ~ \>~vwc;~ ~off-, L-t. \J/Y' ~ ~ \ \ t:: re:::. SD~kr . ~ 1 Cathy Murrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayettev ill e St.. Ste . 600 , Ral ei gh , NC 27601 Direct 919 678 41 39 i Ma in: 919 677 2000 I www .kim ley -horn.com We've moved! Please note our new office address above!! From: Venessa Garza [mailto :vgarza@cstx.gov ] Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 1 :57 PM To: Murrell, Cathy <cathy.murre ll@kimley-horn.com > Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Hey Cathy, Do you have any notes from the meeting in December with proposed changes based on the discussion we had during the mee ting? Venessa Garza, AICP City of College Station Plann i ng and Development Services Departm ent 979-764-3674 From: cathy.murrell@kim ley-horn.com [mailto:cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com ] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 10:04 AM To: Venessa Garza <v garza@cstx .gov> Cc: jeff.whitacre@k imley-horn.com Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWO RD or sensitive information on linked pages from this ema il. * * * * * Hi Venessa, Thanks! We are looking forward to it. Regarding timing, that sounds good. We will plan to inco rporate comments in March. Also , I do have some information on the structures plans. I have attached two sets of plans and specifications for boardwalk and bridges. • The Smith and Sanford Greenway project has performance details and specifications for a prefabricated bridge and precast concrete boardwalk . It also has complete design details and specifications for a timber boardwalk design . • The Park Depot Greenway has performance details and specifications for timber boardwalk . These are No rt h Carolina designs, but we did review them and the prefabricated pedestrian bridge is consistent with what would be done in Texas as well. The last action item outstanding is input on breaks in fence runs. There is no set standard so I am trying to find some information on what would be a reasonable gu ideline. 2 Please let us know if you have any questions . Thanks, ..,athy Murrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayetteville St., Ste . 600, Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1Main :919 677 2000 I www.kim ley-horn .com We've moved! Please note our new office address above!! From: Venessa Garza [mailto:vgarza@cstx .gov ] Sent: Tuesday, January 31 , 2017 10:04 AM To: Murrell, Cathy <cathy .murrell@kimley-horn .com> Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.wh itacre@kimley-horn .com> Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Congratulations! Hope you have a wonderful wedding! With how busy things have been for me, let's just assume that I wouldn't have comments to you in time for you to turn things around before your wedding. Depending on how the meeting goes in February, I may have to schedule another meeting with staff since I haven't gotten consensus on a number of topics. I'm fine with picking up with things after you get back. Is that ok with you? My expectation is one round of comments back to y'all and then we finalize things on your end . There may be a few topics that we continue discussing internally and I would tweak the document later. Venessa Garza, AICP City of College Station lanning and Development Services Dep artment 979 -764 -3674 From: cathy .murrell@kimley-horn.com [mailto:cathy.murrell@kimley-ho rn.com] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 9:16 PM To: Venessa Garza <vgarza@cstx .gov> Cc: jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn .com Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose . Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or sensitive information on linked pages from this email. * * * * * Hi Venessa, Thanks for the heads up . That should be fine. I will be getting mar ried at the beginning of March and will be out March 1 through March 20. I will plan to get the updates incorporated before I leave , but please keep me posted if the meeting date has to slide . Thanks, Cathy Murrell, P .E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayetteville St., Ste. 600 , Raleigh, NC 27601 Direct: 9 19 678 4139 1Main :919 677 2000 I www.k imley-horn .com 3 W e've moved! Please note our new office addres s above!! From: Venessa Garza [ma il to:vgarza@cstx.gov ] Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 8 :43 PM To: Murrell, Cathy <cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com > Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.wh itacre@kimley-horn.com > Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Hey Cathy, The soonest I could find time o n everyone's ca lendars was February 21 51. I'll give you an update after that meeting in regards to getting comments back t o y'all. Thanks!! Venessa Garza, AICP City of Col lege Station Planning and Development Services Department 979 -764 -3674 From : cathy.murrell@kimley-horn .c om [mailto:cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 4 :37 PM To: Venessa Garza <vgarza@cstx .gov > Cc: jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn .com Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source. DO NOT cli.ck li nks or open attachments without positive se nder verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or sensitive information on linked pages from this email. ***** Hi Venessa, No problem on the delay. I understand completely how things can pile up w hen you are out. When we get the comments we will get them inco r porated . I am sti l l working with Jeff to ge t the answers for the last coup le action items. If you could let me know when your interna l meeting is schedule, I will make sure to get you response prior to your meeting . Thanks, Cathy Murrell, P.E . K imley-Horn I 421 Fay etteville St.. Ste . 600 , Raleigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1M ain :919 677 2000 I www.kim ley-horn .com W e've moved ! Please note our new office address above !! From: Venessa Garza [mailto:vga r za@cstx .gov ] Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 4:14 PM Jo: Murrell, Cathy <cathy.murrell@kimley-horn.com > Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn .com > Subject: RE : College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items 4 Hey Cath y, Sorry for the delay in responding on my end. It was so nice to meet you as w ell. I did take some time off over the holidays and hit the ground r unning when I returned. Thanks so much fo r th e additional information you 've provided so far. The matrix of design elements wil l be so helpful. I gave staff until last Friday to g iv e me additional comments but I think everyone is super busy since I didn't get anything back. I'm going to have to change my game plan and schedule an internal meeting to continue discussions on our end before I can send you comments. It will probably be a few weeks before you'll see anything from me. Thanks again for al l yo u've worked on so far! Venessa Garza, AICP City of College Station Planning and Development Services Department 979-764-367 4 From: cathy .murrell@kimley-horn.com [mailto:cathy.murrell@kimley-h orn.com ] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2017 7 :26 AM To: Venessa Garza <vgarza@cstx.gov > Cc: jeff.whitacre@kimley-horn.com Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items *****This is an email from an EXTERNAL source . DO NOT click links or open attachments without positive sender verification of purpose. Never enter USERNAME, PASSWORD or sensitive inf01mation on linked pages from this email. ***** Hi Venessa, We looked at TxDOT averages and compared to prices we have seen and offer the following as average unit prices for 2" conduit: Item Desc ri ption Unit of Three Month measure AvQ Bid Conduit (PVC) (SCH 40) (2") LF $7.75 Conduit (PVC) (SCH 80) (2") LF $8 .25 Please note PVC SCH 40 would be used for the majority of the path lighting as it is used i n areas not under a roadway and not subject to traffic. PVC SCH 80 is used when it can be subject to traffic which would probably be just under parking lots and any roadways . Thanks, Cathy Murr ell, P .E . Kimley-Horn I 421 Fay ettev ille St ., Ste . 600 , Ra leigh , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 1Ma in :919 677 200 0 I www.kimley-ho rn.com We've moved! Please note our new office address above!! From: Murrell, Cathy Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 3:34 PM 5 To: 'Venessa Garza' <vg ar za@cs tx .gov > Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.w hi tacre@kimley-horn .co m > Subject: RE: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Hi Venessa, I have created a matrix to help sum marize the design elements. Please find attached an excel and PDF version . The page reference in the right column is reflect ive of the version of the document you are w orking with. As we make adjustments to the document, it will be updated accord i ngly . Please feel free to provide comments on the matrix or complete document, whichever is eas ier for you al l. Thanks and have a great weekend, Cathy Murrell, P.E. Kimley-Horn I 421 Fayetteville St ., Ste. 600 , Rale igh, NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 4139 I Main : 919 677 2000 I www .kimley-horn.com We 've moved! Please note our new office address above !! From: Murrell, Cathy Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 9:16 AM To: Venessa Garza <vg ar za@cstx .gov > Cc: Whitacre, Jeff <jeff.wh itacre@kimley-horn .com > Subject: College Station -MUP Discussion Action Items Good morning Venessa, Happy New Year! I hope were able to enjoy some time off over the holidays. It was nice to get to meet you and your team in person the other week . Below are action items I had noted from the meeting. We are working to address them and will be sending responses in separate email. Please let me know if I missed any action items or if you have any questions. 1. KH to send example of a delegated design boardwalk and bridge (plan view and specifications). -Sent 1/31/17 2. KH to provide recommendation in documentation for access breaks in long fence runs. 3 . KH to provide average unit rate for 2" conduit. -Sent 1/11/17 4. KH to provide matrix format of design elements . -Sent 1/6/17 5 . City to provide additional comments on the document including any City preferences. 6. KH to revise the document per City comments. Thanks, Cathy 1° --·--·-----~~-----I Cathy Murrell, P .E. Kimley-H orn I 421 Fayetteville St., St e. 600 , Rale ig h , NC 27601 Direct: 919 678 413 9 i Main: 91 9 677 2000 I www .kim ley -horn.com We've moved! Please note our new office address above!! 6 City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University ® City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University ® City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University ® City of College Station Home of Texas A&M University ® 7 .. F&vc~ - 1 v1+p~<~5 .~fl<Cl.PVJ-__i----- M ulti-Use Path Design St andards Doc ument Table of Con t ents lntroduction ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Different Uses for Paths ................................................................................................................................ 3 Multi-Use Path Des ign Elements ................................................................................................................... 4 Path Width ................................................................................................................................................. 4 Shoulder Width ......................................................................................................................................... 4 Horizontal Clearance ................................................................................................................................. 4 Horizontal Offsets ........................................................ ~·· ......................................................................... 5 Vertical Clearance ................................................................................................................................... 6 Design Speed .......................................................................................................................................... 6 Ho r izontal Curves .................................................................................................................................. 6 Stopping Sight Distance and Minimum Vertical Curve ......... . ADA Compliance Surface Material ............................................................................................................................... 11 Other Multi-Use Path Design Eleme ts ................................................................................................. 12 Drainage and Erosion Control .............................................................................................................. 12 Structu r es ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Boardwalk ............................................................................................................................................ 12 Br idges and Underpasses .................................................................................................................... 13 Reta i ning Wall s .................................................................................................................................... 15 Easements ............................................................................................................................................... 16 Temporary Construction Easement .................................................................................................... 16 Permanent Public Access Easement .................................................................................................... 16 Clearing Lim its ..................................................................................................................................... 16 Tra i l Access .............................................................................................................................................. 16 Trail heads ............................................................................................................................................ 16 Ne ighborhood Access (Foot Traffic) .................................................................................................... 17 llP age Multi-Use Path Enhancements .................................................................................................................... 17 Railings, Fences, and Bollards ................................................................................................................. 17 Safety Railing and Fences .................................................................................................................... 17 Bollards ................................................................................................................................................ 18 Signage .................................................................................................................................................... 19 Wayfinding Signage ............................................................................................................................. 19 Pavement Markings ................................................................................................................................. 22 Lighting ..........................................................................................•••.•................................................. 23 Landscaping ..............................................................................• ; ••........................................................ 24 Multi-Use Path Amenities .....................................................•.•••••....•••••................................................... 24 Intersections ............................................................................................•.•.•............................................. 25 Multi-Use Path ...................................................................................................................................... 25 Mid -Block Crossings ............................................................................................................................... 25 Signalized Crossings ............................................................................................................................. 30 Construction ..................................................................................................................... ~ ....................... 31 21P age Introduct ion A mufti-use path (MUP), also known as a shared use path, is define ~e ay that is physically separated from motorized vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier. It can be within a roadway right- of-way (ROW) or within an independent ROW . When a multi-use path is within the roadway ROW, it can also be referred to as a sidepath. Generally, these paths follow the same guidelines as a multi-use path in an independent ROW but do have some variations, which are noted in the Multi-Use Path Design Elements section. The following document is intended to provide the City of College Station staff and consultants a consolidated resource of design standards and provide the City uniform guidance it can implement on future multi-use paths . Engineering judgement still needs to be applied to ensure that the application makes sense within the context of each project but the following guidelines were referenced in the compilation of this document. • The Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices {MUTCD} • • • • USAB Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestri n Fa i ities in the Public Right-of-Way {PROWAG}, July 2011 • USAB Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking {ANPR Use Paths • • • • Different Uses for Pa th s Multi-use paths provide connectivity be , e neighborhoods, schools, parks, downtowns, and commercial areas and are considered part a ransportation systern,.a11'(f recreational facility . Typically, non-motorized users make use of these paths and may consist of: ~ ~IV) A • Adult bicyclists ~~ • Bicyclists pulling trailers • Tandem b icyclists • Child bicyclists • Skaters • Skateboarders • Kick scooters • Pedestrians, including walkers, runners, wheelchair enabled users, people pushing baby strollers, people walking dogs, etc. The path use, user volumes, and user types will have an impact on the path width, amenities provided, and pavement marking and signing . The various design elements for different situations are noted in the Multi-Use Path Design Elements section. 3I Page , . · D,+~j ~ -tk ~ ~~ u.;,Lr k'pp~~ M u lti -Use Path Desig n Elements Path Width Most paths are designed for two-way travel. The AASHTO minimum paved width is 10-foot and is the City's preferred width. There are situations when the width may need to vary and engineering judgement needs to be applied. Table 1 provides some guidance on when different widths should be implemented . 8-Foot Path • Large pedestrian use ,., (anticipate more than 30% pedestrians) • • High user volume (anticipate more than 300 users per hour) • Significant use by skaters • n seep gra passing area Shoulder Widt h Table 1 10-Foot Path • City standard situation • Path to residential, business parks, or retail centers • Located along greenway park l: g spur or spur connection for high level of A graded shoulder with a recovera le ross slop e ds to be provided. A 3-to 5-foot shoulder with a maximum cross -slope of 1V :6H shou . B rovided on oth sides, At a minimum, a 2-foot shoulder needs to be provided to meet horizont I cl ranee requirements . The City's desired shoulder width is 3 feet, but 2 feet can be used in cons t raine oc ions . A wider shoulder provides more space for incorporating furnishings and signage, gives users an area to stop alongside the path, or serves as a separate jogging path . Ho riz ontal Cle arance A minimum 2-foot horizontal clearance from the edge of the path needs to be provided to allow clearance from lateral obstructions such as bushes, signage, large rocks, above-ground utilities, bridge piers, abutments, and poles . Refer t o Figure 1 on the following page for a typical cross section . 41P age '• .. 0 POST MOUNTED SIGN EXISTING } GROUND --- t -MUP - [ EXISTING GROUND MULTI-USE PATH NOTES: ' IN:6HJ MAXIMU M SLOPE I TY P J B MORE IF NECESSARY TO l.IEET ANTICIPATED VOW MES AND UIX OF USES c NOT LESS THAN 2-FEET Figure 1 : AASHTO Gu i de to Bicycle Facilities Typ i cal Cross Section of Two -Way, Shared Use Horizo ntal Offsets Condition Bank in sidual soils · Bank in fill soils Projected Slope from Bottom of Bank* 1 .5 :1 ' 2.0 :1 J.... --1 2 :5 ~1------- '············B······a······n········k··-·····i··· n········a······~····,·0···u····i·v··'··~·····a·······,-· -so-'i .. ls_* .... * .................... -~-):Q.~x·····-···· ·~~--~~-~ j *Only valid if bank height or 4ess Anything greater than 15 feet should be assessed individually. Depend i ng on the bank height and conditions at the bottom of the bank, a physical barrie r, such as a fence, railing, or dense shrubbe ~ecessary . Engineering judgement should be applied to evaluate the risk of running off the path versus the risk posed by the physical barrier. If a m i nimum 5- foot recoverable area (i.e., the distance between the edge of the path and the hinge point) cannot be achieved , a physical barrier or rails are recommended. Refer to the Railing , Fences , and Bollards section for add itional information . 5I Page / ,_k\v 1. <rtical Clearan ce The preferred vertical clearance to overhead obstructions is 10 feet. In constrained locations, the vertical clearance can be reduced to 8 feet, but must be clearly marked to be visible at night and warn of low clearance. The City's preferred clearance is 10 feet. If passage of maintenance of emergency vehicles will be necessary, a vertical clearance of 12 feet hould be provided. '{QV/ ~hen over ~tilities exist a 16-foot vertical clearance is recommended. ~ Design Speed The design speed can fluctuate depending on the context of the path, the user types expected, the path terrain, and other path characteristi cs. The typical riding speed (AASHTO} varies from 8-to 15 -mph for cyclists . Engineering judgement will need to be applied on a case-by-case basis but AASHTO provides the following guidance for determining design speed : ~pe~cf ~~ • Relatively flat areas -18 mph \ cv--LJL \o' ~ ~ • Hilly terrain -allow for 30 mph 1 ~ V~ Horizontal Curves The horizontal curve radius should be based on the chos ign 18-and 30 -mph case. AASHTO provides the following guidan e o Design Speed (mph) Minimum Radius (ft) 12 27 >----·~-----~~~---....-r~--'.._--~~~- 25 30 The Cit of College Station desired minim orizontal curve is 60 feet 18 MPH desi n s eed but, .. when ample room exists, curves greater than 0-foot radii should be implemented . The path alignment should follow the contours of the land closely and, to the extent possible, preserve the natural terrain and vegetation. Meanders in the path should be limited and appear to have a purpose . Meanders can be evaluated to provide potential tree p reservation . ::::> -- Curve Widening In some circumstances when environmental or physical constraints limit the geometrics, a slower design speed/(12 to 16 mph) may be appropriate and sharper horizontal curves may be used. In these situations, wider paths {12 feet or greater) or curve widenings are recommended to let users navigate the effects of substandard curves. Curve widening f 2 to 4 feet should be implemented, as shown in Figure2. ~+ ~d-~\~~~ ~ 6IP ag e ,, Maximum widening = 1 ·2 m (4 ft) Minimum stopping sight distance (SSD) is controlle determ i ne minimum SSD, use the stopp i ng sight distan v gra e fi ures in AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bi cycle Facilities. The minimum SSD cant curve figure in AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle c · "ties to determine the minimum vertica l curve length . These figures are shown as Figures 3-5. The f vert ical curve is 3 feet . - 350 ~ 300 8 c 250 Cl> t; WO Ci .. .<:: 150 ~ .... 100 c Q.. 50 a. 2 II) 0 St opping Sight Distance vs. (;r;ide -:=l Velocity 1 E::: -_-,.. ...... __ ,,_ _____ ..,. ___ _ ~ .::--+r:n . -............. . .. =-.. ·.· .. ·=-... · ... -. ··. -.,._ 'if ~ ... :__~-~ ~. E. ---~· -==-"-: 0 0.05 0.1 Grade {AsC*od} 0 .15 (mph) -12 ....--•14 -•16 -• ·•18 --2o 0 .2 .... u :~O Figure 3 : AASHTO Gu i de for the Development of Bicycle Facilities Minimum Stopping Sight Distance vs Grades -Ascending 7 jPage g s ·c s ., i5 ... :§ "' ... t g- ~ Stopp ing Sight Distance vs. Grade 1800 ~·-.~------·----------- 1600 1400 1200 1000 300 600 400 ].()O 0 . . . . . . . :: I : , ' I } I .. , ... , I I .. ·· ~ I . ,'·.I . ~ 0.05 OJ. 0.1S Gr;i d ~ (Oesc end} Velocify {mph ) -12 ., B l P age tu. Cintommy A ~) 2.0 -?O co .eo 100 1W 240 2b0 16(} 300 2 ~ 70 110 150 3 2.,0 60 100 140 1eo 220 :260 300 4 5 <> 7 a 9 10 H 12 llt l" 15 16 . 17 18 I 19 20 Zl 22 23 24 3 25 4 Figure 5 : AASHTO Gu i de for the Development o ADA Compliance Multi-use paths must be accessible to people with disabilities and be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and PROWAG. The path must also comply with the Texas Accessibility Standards (TAS}. TAS requires that any pedestrian improvement project with a construction cost greater than $50,000 be registered with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulations (TDLR). The TDLR process requires plan approval and post-construction inspection by a Registered Accessibility Specialist (RAS). Any deficiencies identified during construction have to be addressed within 90 days . " Cross Slope and Superelevation Maximum cross slope is 2%. The preference is to have the trail sloped in one direction . If a center crowned typical section is needed, the maximum cross slope is 1%. The City of College Station's desired cross slope is 1.5% to 'account for minor deviations during construction and still be ADA compliant. Supe r elevation is not required since it is accounted for with the horizontal curvature . If cross slope does need to transiti n, the transition length shall be a minimum of 5 feet per one percent Of chan ~. 9I Page Longitudinal Grades Longitudinal grade is also referred to as running grade. In 2011, the United States Access Board (USAB) issued the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) on Accessibility Guidelines for Shared Use Paths and, in 2013, a subsequent notice of supplemental notice of rulemaking (SNPRM) to provide clarification on the longitudinal grade requirements. The following requirements have been issued and will be the City's preferred grades . -' Cithin Street or Highway RO • • Multi-use paths or side paths shall not exceed the general grade established for the adjacent street or highway Within an ndepend ~W (not within street or highway ROW) j • Maximum five percent gr ~ However, USAB acknowledged that there will be circu tances in which full compliance with the grade requirements may not be practical due to physic o egulatory constraints. Physical constraints would include existing terrain or infrastructure, ROW avail ih y notabl atural features, or any similar existing physical constraint. Regulatory constraints wo I 1 lude fe era I, state, or local laws with the purpose of preserving threatened or endangered species; e en • onment; or archaeological, cultural, historical, or significant natural features that would be advers ly ffected b the additional radient . In these situations, compliance is required to the extent practicab Outdoor Developed Area provides guidelines for recreational trails and will serve as longitudinal slope no to exceed. The following grades shall be provided when physical or regulatory constraints exist . Table 3: Maximum Running Slope and Segment Length When Physical or Regulatory Constraints Exist Running Slope of Trail Segment ---""" Maximum Length of Segment l B t_f:J_E_~-~~~~P~fE~9-_'!_.!'-. ------------------- 1:12 (8.33%) · __ _?99 fe~t ......... ......... ·--- ..,...._,···············-····························-t ·--- 1. g{~9.~L ______ ·······---·-----·-........................................ 3 ..... 0 ........ f ... e ...... e ...... t ..... ························-····························································-·······-·············· .... ___ __2:8 (1~~) __ -·-····----------10_~~~!------·----··- n er than the allowable distance, resting intervals need to be ea h segment. J;. resting interval js also required any time the runnj gg Resting intervals may be pr v1Cle ithin or adjacent to the path tread. When the resting area is within the path tread, it must be 60 rnehes long and at least as wide as the path . When the resting area is c-ci adjacent to the path, it must be 60 i nches long and 36 inches wide and provide a minimum 4-foot by 4-SX. 0 ~ foot turning space . The surface of the resting area cannot exceed 1:48 (two ercent) in anY, direction. The minimum longitudinal grade shall be 0.5 percent, with 0.3 peFcent being a lowed only in constrained lOIPa g e ., ( Ramps and Landings The opening for multi-use path curb ramps shall be equal to the width of the multi-use path. Any side flares associated with the ramp shall be outside the path width. Detectable warnings shall be placed across the path width, adjacent to the roadway. The running slope of a curb ramp shall not exceed 1:12 (8 .33%). PROWAG requires a minimu 4 ot by 4-foo @ rni ~ sp?cem e top of curb ramps. This requirement shall also be reflected in multi-use paths. V7_ ~O~AG states han~rails are required on ramp runs with a rise i~~at . # ~~u1red for edestfla c1rcu a ion paths. <, ' than 6 inches, but are no ~ ... ~ "' te. l -~~'Skta -1 j ~ The soil stability is site-specific and side slopes should be based on geotecll -y:;;.~ Side Slopes According to the erosion control section of the Unified Stormwater Design Guia~ ines, a cut slope that ~ will be within a publicly maintained area is recommended to be 1V:4H or flatte eat -to e ill be·-M-.- . rivately=e wned it=ca-n be stee pened'to 1V :3Pi ~ Fill slopes are recommended to be _V:3H or flatter. All exposed slopes should be vegetated or fotected by a <l.Jl roved surface treatmen otect the'm from erosion. Refer to the Horizontal Offset and Railing, when physical D( barriers maybe required . Surface Material The City of College Station standard pavement se ortland cement concrete with lllPa ge - FINISH GRADE, PROVIDE POS ITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM CONCRETE; SLOPE AWAY FROM TRAIL AT MAX. 2% COMPACTSUBGRADET095% STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY Figure 6: Typical Section 3'-0" MIN. SHOULDER Other Mu lt i-Use Pat h Design Elements Drainage and Erosion Control 3'.(f' MIN. SHOULDER Drainage and erosion control is necessary to maintain a ith minimal maintenance . To the extent possible , the path should be designed to closely follo the natural drainage patterns. Sloping the _,. path at the recommended two percent cross slope in the same irection as the existing ground will ~ ~ allow water to sheet flow over the path. During design, setting th at h grade to follow the land l I, contours will he lp minimize dFai age , reduce erosion problems, and · im ize maintenance. f v., If stormwater collectio 1s cess rv, t he use of dis persed infiltration sys ems, such as gr ass y swales , i ~ recommended over c se -pipe sto ~rain systems . Grassy swales will provide some water treatme\ t , reduce maintenance, an · i rove aest etics . If uphill water is collected , it should be directed under the path via a cross pipe. A min of inche of cover between the top of the pipe and bottom of the concrete path is re commende Cf- The City of College Station has mar str-·ngent regt.tl tio sin their Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance han standard FEMA Flood Insurance uo (FIS) regu ations. Under the ordinance, a multi-use path ould be considered a proposed street a d 1 eligible for exemption from some of the regulations . To be allowed to construct the path within the spe i flood hazard area (i.e ., the floodplain), a professional engineer would have to document that the proposed path results in no i ncrease in the base flood elevation; otherwise, a variance would need to be granted . For additional information on the flood hazard restrictions, refer to sect ions 5.E .11 through 5.E.14 of the Flood Hazard Protection Ordinance . If a multi-use path is constructed within the floodplain , it is recommended that the path edge be a minimum of 30 feet away from the stream to p of bank to provide a buffer ad j acent to the sensiti ~e natural are jl . There are certain situations when engineering judgement should be employed to evaluate if the path could be closer to the stream . An example would be if a lookout/observation could be constructed that would provide the public with an educational opportunity of how the stream functions . ~ ~\., :rt~;p St ru ctures Boardwalk Boardwalks prov ide an opportun ity to construct a path in a sensitive natural or inundated area while limiting the potential environmental impacts . They are typically used to cross wetlands or small creeks . 12 I Page '• J.~ ~cl\~\~ / Boardwalks are usually constructed of timber, concrete, or recycled plastic decking . The Cit 's ref e is for timber or concretes ctures. Span lengths can vary but typically, the longest boardwalk span is 20 feet . If a longer span is needed, a pedestrian bridge maybe more applicable. The max imum boardwalk span will vary some depending on the material used. The following guidance is provided. PrfV-.-~ tv.LJ...uJ... ~ AASHTO prefers a boardwalk to be wide enough to provide a 2-foot clearance on both sides of the A [ }- pathway, but under constrained conditions, may allow the boardwalk clearance width to taper to the \"'1'. path width . The City's desired clearance is 12 feet (1-foot clearance on each side of the path). ~ A 6-inch curb rail is recommended on boardwalks elevated less than 30 inches. Any boardwalk elevated 30 inches or greater will requ i re a minimum of a 42-inch railing ; however, a 48-inch minimum is preferred to prevent bicyclists from falling over the railing during a crash . The Ci 's desired rail hi his 48 inches. In accordance with AASHTO requirements, opening s be t een horizontal and vert ical members on a ~ railing should be small enough that a 6-inch sphere c nno pass through them in the lower 27 inches and an 8-inch sphere cannot pass through the po lit1on inches or higher. PROWAG also requires that a 4-inch sphere not pass under the lowest horizont mber. ans of capacity (HS loading) design will need to be completed by a evation s o Id be designed to provide a minimum of 6 inches of clearance nd t e e isting ground to allow debris to pass under the boardwalk. If the boardwalk is with i n a floo ain, it )s preferred to set the boardwalk grade hi gh enough to keep the bottom stringer out of the rnQ-yl ar flood elevation . If the boardwalk crosses a small creek, an engineer n eeds to hydraulically evaluate what elevation the boardwalk should be set as to not restrict flow . When a boardwalk is proposed in a wetland or over a blue line stream , local , state, and federal permit) will be required . Contact the regional reviewer to receive the latest guidance on what elevation to set the boardwalk to avoid permanent im pacts to wetlands. _ Bridg es and Underpasses Bridges or underpasses can be use cGhen grade separation is neede ~ cross a wider stream , roadway , or railroad. The type and size of the bridge can vary depending on the multi-use path and specific site requirements. The City desires pre-fabricated steel truss bridges be use ~ Bl Page •• If the grade separation is for crossin g a roadway or railroad, a bridge or underpass may be used . The adjacent topography typically guides which option is more practical but bridges are typ icall y p referred because they provide less security and drainage challenges . The preferred option should be discussed with the City prior to completing de sign . ~ p.}o ~ f..Vl(... ~ The following guidance is provided for bridges . AASHTO prefers a bridge be wide enough to provide 2 feet of clearance on both sides of the pathway but, under constrained conditions, may allow the bridge clearance width to taper to the path width . The City's desired clearance is 14 feet (2-foot clearance on each side of the path). tt.-rh-A... l D.(1-r A minimum 42 -inch railing is required; however, a 48-inch minimu from falling over the railing during a crash . The City's desired ra· fii In accordance with AASHTO requirements, openings betwe n horizo referred to prevent bicyclists is 48 inches. should be small enough that a 6-inc h sphere cannot pass t ro t e in the lower 27 inches and an 8- inch sphere cannot pass through the portion 27 inches or hig er. PROW.A: also requires that a 4-inch sphere not pass under the lowest horizontal member. The bridge shall be provided with continuous handrails on both sides of the or:"d .. Handrails shall be provided with a minimum 1-to Yz-inch knuckle space between the railing and tti tr ss verticals and diagonals, fencing, or other portions of the rail assembly . The rails shall be located 1 ches above the deck surface . The handrail will also senve a a rubrail to protect handlebars from being aught in the vertical members . If aut orized vehicular traffic is antici All pedestrian bridges will req1:.1t e local building, stormwater, land disturbance, and floodplain development permits as well as FEMA approval. Refer to the Drainage section for additional FEMA regulations. The following guidance is provided for underpasses . • Preferably, the underpass should be 14 feet wide and 10 feet tall. Headwalls and wing walls should be installed at both ends . • Minimum day time lighting levels should be 10-foot candles and night time levels 4-foot candles . Lighting can be provided by natural or artificial light sources . 14 I P age .. Proper drainage must be established to keep the underpass from ponding. The use of trench drains at the approaches can help minimize the amount of water in the underpass . the City will approve them on a case by case basis due to high maintenance costs. v.,-ticol ono ttor1 2onto 1 Con tr"O I Point Extst•no J Cu't Section ~Pr opos.d Excovot 1on TYPICAL SECTION w1oen ino Cot Secf'lon wi 1'n MSE Retoinlno Wo l 11.~ ... FI •ISl£DTCM~ ·-CONO!ETE OITC H "'' IF •P!'UCA !!LE. ~ --~/ '-"-=m<- ' ,~, 1' ~~~~ ......... SECTION INo Lorth ?.c i nforcerientsJ -n ....._ ::--.-.. fl'N l~:J ---_,..,,__,_-ri~..i-t--it--"-t-------,---, ....... BCP-0 ~(AAEJ' WI TH aITCHi> Examples only. Not to be used as standard details. Figure 7: Mechanically stabilized earth {MSE} wall, concrete block wall, and solider pile walls are shown above. 15 I Page . . Easements Temporary Construction Easement The area provided for a temporary construction easement (TCE) should be sufficient for the contractor to construct the path but not so extensive as to unnecessarily impact trees and the surrounding natural area. Generally, providing a temporary construction easement limit that is offset 5 feet from tl)e construction lim its is adequate . This allows the contractor 3 feet from the construction limit to work and • 2 feet behind the si lt fence to maintain it. ? ~ Permanent Public Access Easement Permanent public access easement (PAE) is required when a path is outside of public ROW . PAE gives the path owner permission to maintain the path and gives the path user permission to access it. The p referred PAE width is 30 feet (15 feet centered about the path) and the constrained PAE wi dth is 20 feet (15 feet centered about the path). The additional 10 feet of PAE in the preferred situation provides the City flexibility to adjust the path location during construction without having to acquire additional access . Clearing Limits A multi-use path within the shade of trees provides a more pleasant experience for the user. Existing trees within the TCE and PAE do not ne e sarily need to be removed . Only trees that are within 5 feet of the edge of path, within the fill slope a d have inches or more of fill, or have a cut slope too close to the trunk should be removed . To determt e T e cu slope would be too close to the tree, evaluate the following equation . (Diameter of tree in inches) x (3) =critical roo Trail Access Trailheads Trailheads provide an oppo uni for a transition between motorized and nonmotorized transportation and recreational systems. Trail eads can also provide a location for many amenities, including automobile and bicycle parking, restrooms, drinking fountains, picnic areas, trash and recycling receptacles, dog waste stations, bicycle repair stations, and path wayfinding signs. There is no set standard for the frequency of trail heads . The best way to determine where and how often to install a trailhead is to con uc user s, vehicle counts, and surveys across the existing multi-use path system . Not all trailheads need to be the same size . There can be major and minor trailheads. A major trai l head would p rovide parking f~ehi c:!f s, while a smaller trail head would provide parking for 10 vehicles or less . Both need to be A A compliant but a minor trailhead could be gravel if ADA requirements are still met. All trailheads should provide the following : 16 I Pa ge .. • Emergency and maintenance vehicles access and turnaround • At least one ADA accessible parking space per every 25 spaces • Bike racks (ap ro d by the City} that provide one bike space for every one parking space, with no less tha five 1ke spaces at any trail head • Wayfinding signage that directs greenway users to the path • An accessible pathway from parking and other accessible elements to the path • Lightin g at the parking lot and trail intersection . Refer to the Lighting section for additional re q uirement ~. t • One bench for every 3 parkin g spaces ~l ~ l:/. CJ/v•11f,,, ... (/ • At least one water fountain When planning a trailhead, consider 300 to 375 square feet for ach parking space. Additional area will be necessary to install the completed trailhead but this ill P.ro ide an approximation on the ¥ parking limits. · An easy way to provide access to a path is to use existing public facilities s Hall, and parks . Neighborhood Access (Foot Traffic) Multi-Use Path Enha nc ements Railings, Fences, and Bollards • • • 17 I Page Palh - Path 111 .,._(0.3m) Min. t.ess 1han $1!(1.5m) HI .,..__{o .sm) Min. Less ~.an 5 ft(1.5 m) Salel)'Ral l ~ ,.. ~!~ /""Hl~·-1l --~~~-_t .~ ... ~ a-e. ~ 1it --t _C:S!'.ll --co.sm) Min. Laa~ tha11 5ftf1.5m) Figure 8: Examples of when safety fence is required. The safety railing should begin prior to and extend beyond the area of need and be at least 1 foot offset from the path edge. The beginning and end of the safety rail needs to be outside the 2-foot clear area or should be marked with an object marker. The safety rail can also be flared out at the beginning and end to provide clearance from an abrupt object. If a safety railing is being used to provide protection from slopes or to discourage path users from venturing off the path corridor, the railing can have relatively large openings. A standard design includes two to four horizontal elements with vertical elements s aced fairl far a a e City standard for this type f safety railing is a two-picket ooden fence with posts spaced . If a safety railin ·,.,..,,,~.., required for a high vertical drop or body of water, a 48-inch railing height or the requirements of a bridge railing may be necessary. Engineering judgement should be used to determine what the specific situation requires . Refer to the Bridge section for additional railing requirements . Bo/lords ~ In certain situations, bollards may be required to restrict unaut orized use of p ths by motor vehicles . If bollards are used, the associated "No Motor Vehicles" signage (MUTCD RS-3) should also be installed to enforce the rule . Bollards should meet the following guidelines. • Be a minimum height of 40 inches and minimum diameter of 4 inches . • Be retroreflective on both sides or marked with an appropriate object maker. • e set back ram he roadwa ed . ea minimum of 30 feet. his allows path users to nav·ga e around the bollard before approaching the roadway. • If more than one bollard is used, an odd number of bollards should be used and 6 feet apart . • .. • Have a striping envelope around the bollard to help guide users around the vertical object. • Be lockable or removable to allow entrance by authorized vehicles. If hardware is installed in the ground to allow the bollard to be removed, it should be flush with the surface to avoid creating an additional obstacle . Rigid bollards are only recommended after other methods such as signage, landscaping, flexible bollards, targeted surveillance, and curb cut design have been considered, since bollards do create a vertical obstacle in the middle of the path. Sign age Standard regulatory signage shall be retroreflective and follow Pa o the TMUTCD standards. Path signage can be smaller than roadway signage . Refer to Table 98-int e TMUTCD for allowable path signage dimensions . Regulatory signs warn users of various path conditions, sue a steef:! grades, sharp turns, or hazardous trail conditions . These signs should be placed at least 50 feet in advance of the change or hazard. Some examples of common path signs are listed below. If a path cro e a roadway, reg la ory signage will need to be added to the roadway to alert motorists of the crossing. e r to the Intersection section for recommended roadway signage . A wayfinding signage sy e information. Wayfinding si location of access points. is unified approach to providing path users with different s ca indicate direction of travel, location of a destination, and/or 19 I Pa ge One sign type to include in the wayfinding sign system is a mile marker post. These signs would be disbursed along the path in X -, Yi-, or 1-mile increments . These posts provide users with an understanding of their location along a path. In case of an emergency, a path user can provide emergency personnel with the closest mile marker, which can help improve response time .A L a minimum, a mile marker post should include the path mile b~t could also include the path name and distance to t he nearest trail head. A mile marker should be at least 36 inches tall and typically is made of wood, recycled plastic, or stone . Figure 10 illustrates an example of a ma r ker. Another helpful sign is a path entrance sign . As its name indicates, these signs are placed at the entrance to a path . They provide i the ground, or elevate 'o I ·.., :,, . I <O Figure 10: Example Mile Marker Post ---6)(6X5' PRESSURE TREATED WOOD BO LLARD (YELLOW PINE) /rlNISHEO GRADE 1 r,· SLOPE 6" or #5 WASHED STONE 20 I P age COHCRCTE PAO a· f~ ~ IN AU. OIRECl!OtfS Figure 11 : Example of Trailheod Signage Figure 12: Examples of Directional Signs SCH r.tiec; t/a· M..U.....,. 5tC ~N SP£ontATJOHS 10R F'lNISt<S. r-a •. II: ... ~l M.otn "'l5SUll T11!EATCD 'lllOOO ~ FRO!fl E'I MJ!ON 21 I P age , .. Pavement Markings ~ ... ~-Pavement markings help enforce signage . They should be retroreflective and strategically placed . Do not place pavement markings at critical stopping or turning points as they can become slick to bicyclists when wet. A centerline is not required but should be considered when the path is heavily travelled and the two-way traffic pattern needs to be clearly marked, on curves with restricted sight distance or on sharp cu~es, on unlit paths that do not restrict nighttime ridi , , o on the approach to underpasses and in underpasses. As in roadwav. ule a passing is protirbJ ed an a a Clashed line when passing is permitted. The centerline should be a 4-inch yellow line . Dashed lines would be 3-foot segment with 9-foot gap . The City's preference is to not provi of the situations above is applicable Figure 13: Examp le of Directional Sign . Figure 9C-8 . Examples of Obstruction Pavement Markings Ill A • Obstruction within lhe path \ Wldtdt~ft(Wt~3A.Q6) "*'~~or~~* ----DINctloC'I of ~·tNWf B • Obstruction at edgo of path or roadW-V l • WS, ~ W a too wet lrtflH!t and S ~ l!WfOlleh ~in mph * PtO'lld!> an -0ddiiloMJ loot or olfs4l t« a ralsod cbstrootlon and ute tho loonuln l • V•l)SlorU\o~ ngth Figure 14: Pavement Markings associated with obstructions 22 I Page Stop bars are not required; however, they should be considered in the following situations: • The path intersects a heavily traveled roadway • The path intersects with a roadway and has minimal sight distance • Any other need to help emphasize that the path user must stop If added , the stop bar should be a minimum of 12 inches wide , placed along the width of the path , and be a m i nimum of 2 feet behind the truncated domes . Refer to the Intersection section for details on crosswalks. Lighting Lighting can improve visibility and enhance safety . Lighting optio s s uld be evaluated on a case-by - case basis. The following are some conditions/locations thats oul e considered during the evaluation : • • • • • • The path is intended to be used after dark -p The path is in an urban area and a convenient connection tot shopping, or employment areas The path is under vehicular bridges , underpasses, tunnels , and multi us Path locations with limited visibility Path intersections Major trail entrances Regardless of whether a path will be use r:i l t , "tis recommended that lighting be provided at path-roadway intersections and at major ai l ead • f', viding light i ng at intersections will improve sight distance and help alert motorized veh l' le of pe trr s. Providing light at tra i lheads would help de t er vandalism . If lighting is preferred , the following guidelines a ~ p ovi ed. • ~ ~ (SI v-v"' ~ • The illumination should be adequate to ide Ati a face up to 20 yards away. ~- • Full cut -off fixtures should be used to reduce · , pollution and comply with the International Dark Sky regulation . • Electrical components need to abide by Article 862 of the National Electrical Code (NFC) in flood prone areas. • Avera e horizontal illumination levels should be between 0.5 -to 2-foot candles . Metal halide lamps should be used . Even if li ghting is not provided, it is recommended that a 2-inch conduit be installed parallel to the p ,ft? to allow for light i ng to be i Different pedestrian light types to consider are pedestrian height posts (15 -foot poles) and pedestrian (Jj/J A_J . 1 bollards. The pedestrian posts will provide more adequate light than a bollard light but bollard light can -~ provide a more pleasing aesthetic . Due to using full cut-off fixtures, several bollards would ne ed to be used to provide the equivalent light level of one light post and would have to be very close to the path to adequately illuminate it. T_ti erefore pede stri an pasts are recommended for the pr i mary lighting type and bollards can be used as accent lighting. Another element of lighting is the power source. Pedestrian lights can be solar powered or hard wired. Solar power could be preferable when utility collection is difficult or when alternative energy sources are desired . The amount of tree canopy does need to be factored into the effectiveness of solar power. 23 I Page Landscaping Landscaping can enhance the experience on a multi-use path. It can provide shade , shelter, and serve as a natural privacy screen. When possible, the path should be designed and constructed to protect, preserve, and maintain the exist i ng native vegetation . If the native vegetation is impacted or was sparse , trees and shrubs can be planted in logical places along the path . The only vegetation along the shoulder should be grass . All trees and shrubs should be planted outside of the path shoulder. Native species will be more tolerant and require less maintenance . The topography and existing soils will affect the type of plants chosen . For safety, it is recommended that shrubs adjacent to the path be a maximum of 24 inches in height as to not obstruct the line of sight . Canopy trees should be trimmed to provide a minimum of 8 feet of vertical clearance and be placed as to not obstruct path lighting if installed . Mu lti-Use Path Ame ni t ies As noted in the Trailhead sectio n, the following ameni ·e hould be considered throughout the path . The City's preferred amenity style is included with each • Trash Cans • • o Trash cans should be placed at eacli ra ead and at i ng area . One trash can per every picnic table and one per two benches. o Trash cans should be a minimum of 3 feet rom t e path edge and be secured to a 12 - by 24 -inch concrete pad. o Trash cans need to be accessible by all users anC:f o Trash cans should be animal proof. o ouR ovide combo trash/recycling conta i 0 0 imimum of 3 feet from the path edge and secured to a minimum 0 0 0 rest areas. o Racks should be shaped to allow users to lock the frame to one or both wheels with a U-lock. o Nearest post of the rack should be a minimum of 4 feet from the path edge. o Adjacent racks should be a minimum of 3 feet apart . o Rack should be sec u red to a concrete or asp halt pa d. l Water Fountains o Water fountains should be located near restrooms, trail heads, larger rest areas, and other public gathering places along the path. Installation of water fountains will be dependent on avai lable utility connections. o Water fountains should be a minimum of 5 feet from the path edge and installed on a concrete pad. o Water f~hould be accessible by all path users and be ADA compliant. ~ 24 I P age • Bic ycle Repair Stations o Bicycle repair stations are recommended in areas with high activity as they tend to be a target for theft and vandalism . o Bicycle repair stations should be offset a minimum of 5 feet from the path edge and on a concrete or asphalt pad . • Art o Artwork can add interest along the trail. o Artists could be commissioned to provide art to be displayed along the path . o A concrete pad could be offset from the path to allow for rotating art displays . A 1 st r uctural engineer should design the concrete pad. - ·--~~~__::;_,~~~~~~~~~~~~-7'"' • Restrooms o Restrooms should be placed at major trail head or 1ty parks. o Restrooms should be ADA compliant and i od i all local, state , and federal codes. o To the extent possible, restrooms should e signed t make use of natural light and ventilation. When possible, consider grouping the amenities together at trail heads or a rest areas . Intersect ions The sign types, pavement markings, and cross ·n Multi-Us e Path When two paths intersect, the users should b Ur\'}ignalized or mk.1 -DI ck crossin s hould be properly signed and marked. The crossing should be perpendicular to mini , iz the er ,ssi g length . The approaching path can also have a horizontal curve i n advance of the crossing lielp lo down the path users . The m id-block crosswalk is re om mended to be a h igh -visib i lity crosswalk to help alert motorist of the crossing . Warning signs , such as the Combination Bike Pedestrian Crossing {Wll-15) and any associated plaque {W11-15P, W16-7P, or W16-9P), Turning Vehicles Yield to Peds (Rl0-15), Yield/Stop Here for Pedest ri ans {R1 -5a , R1 -5b, R1 -5c), Yield {Rl-2), and Stop {Rl-1) should be considered along t he roadway . Refer to MUTCD Table 2B -1 for sign dimensions and 2C -4, "Guidelines for Advanced Placement of Warning Signs" for specific sight condition requirements . Depending on the crossing pavement markings, yield bars, stop bars, or crossing bicycle symbols could also be installed . Signs can also be installed along the multi-use path to &varn the path users of the intersecting roadway . MUTCD's Intersection Warning signs (W2 -1,2,3,4 ,5}, Stop, Yield , Ahead (W3 -1,2), Yield {Rl-2) and Stop (Rl-1) should be evaluated for use . Signage along t he path can be reduced from the standa r d roadway 25 I Pa g e sign dimensions. Refer to Table 9B-1 in the MUTCD for allowable path signage dimensions. The corresponding pavement markings can also be added . Additionally, a solid yellow centerline can be added to help keep path users on t h e correct side as they approach the intersection. Mid -block crossings are not recommended on roadways with posted speeds;::: 40 MPH unless a signal is installed. Illustrations from AASHTO Guide to Bicycle Facilities for Examples of Mid-Block Path -Roadway Intersections are shown in Figures 15-19 . . . _....,. --. ~ . ~ ... -~ . . ' v • ~ • • : . • • ~ • <>\ ·: ~~ ~lV\~ ot .. St~n.t~\ 1\P\Wt. 26 I P age MO MOlOll , tuirus Nom: II> .fi\(1.l tn) 511(1 IT!) U (1.2rn) • Adf!l ftlling sl;m ond.solidcen1 rl ' sulping sho.xd be placed or the required stow" s9if d51o ho111 t!.e roodiroy ~. b t noHess then SO ft (JS ). ' Dl-1 Ji911 is oplioncl , RI -2 slgn is rtq'uired . At hi bne rood ~s. · 'R1 • faries (Yield llm To/Slop Hen fGf Pede$1ricns signs 111d llCl'iinQS, plead i ~.of o ~k 10 rod• mu!Jpl.-1lueoJ imhas} lll<Jf be o llXn opproprlete solutlce . Figure 16: Mid-Block Crossing -Roadway is Yield 27 I P age t~es: ' {1.Zml 6 (1,$ II>) U~(C~M} • A.dlnnce wrni g signs ud Ullld ta~ striping 1bould be plm.d ot !be required sto11Pi11S sight boot hC\ll lhe rooht'l'f edge, bll not lesl !hon SO ll {15 m). • W'l 1 wles fis o is raqll!red, supp~! plaques 011 optionot 28 I Page J. ------~MIJ TCO 2c-.t-------.... Rl>-3 110 NOTO ll f!SICUS .&#(Um) 61\(1.Sm} Cft(1.2 m) Mme. war ng .llgnt and .solid aWerlitlf s!Jipl · g sbctld be plind at rhe reqlllred ~ 1 g I disto1<e from the roodl\1'1)' edgt, but 101 lest tho 50 ft{ISm). Wl I Sl!ties sign Is ~, swpltnuniol ploques ore op!ionol . Figure 18: Mid-Block Crossing -Path is Stop 29 I P a ge Notes: t ~ ~\Y2.l bc~ ~VM?is~ Mi(t!)lll warnlog llgns end soltd t!derlilll Sl riping slodd bt plcc.td ct !he required "oppW19 sigh GISl\'M f10111 the rcaclwoy ed;o, bur nor hi.t I im S:O & OS ). 03 -1 itin h optional. R1·2 sign b rtqoind. Al muhaone rood 110$.S ~.tho Rl -5 serlet {Yield l*e ~ Heie for f'edastrl!ll.i tlS and 11aikll!llt. pl!Qd in odYOnuJ of the O"OSMllk to redoce mul p!t-!Lretd crosbes) may he o mare approptlote solulion. Figure 19: Mid-Block Crossing-Roadway is Stop Co rolled vJ\vJ; G. ~~~V)I\-~·,A_ f J(A.t;h Additionally, raised pedestrian refuge island and High-Intensity Activated crossWalK beacons {HAWK) ~~f1l_ should be evaluated . Jjig her speeds/volume roadwa ys or multi-roadwa y lane crossing; (i.e, greater th ~{1.~· D ') three lanes of traffic) pose a greater need to install the refuge island or provide a HAWK . ~ The refuge island should be a minimum of 6 feet wide, extend at least 6 feet in each direction prior to the crossing, and have proper taper for roadway users . The island width should be maximized to the widest available width to help provide additional protection to path users . It is preferred that the walkway through the island be an at-grade passage rather than ramps and landings. Engineering judgement needs to be applied when determining if a HAWK beacon is warranted . Refer to Chapter 4 of the MUTCD for guidance on when a HAWK is appropriate . Signa liz ed Cross ings Signalized crossings provide the most controlled crossing. If a signalized crossing is within 400 feet of the path crossing, it is recommended to try and route the users to the signalized crossing . Pedestrians will 30 I Page want to take the most direct route, so start meandering the path towards the signalized crossing a few hundred feet prior to the intersection to help encourage users cross at the marked location. The crossing can be actuated or included in the standard signal timing. If several signals are timed together, it is recommended to include the crossing in the timing as to not interfere with the motorized traffic patterns . The crosswalk is recommended to be a high visibility crosswalk. Co nstruct ion Construction inspections should follow the TxDOT Minimum Inspection Recommendations . 31 I Page ~ 12-/14 3!.~ I G>t~ v~", ~\lAi, ~"""' PCM.~ ,:J~ J n~·,o\ s. Summary of Key Multi-Use Path {MUP) Design Elements Element MUP Width MUP Shoulder Width Horizontal Clearance Horizontal Offset Vertical Clearance Design Speed Horizontal Curves urve W idening Cross Slope Superelevation Transition longitudinal Grades Ramps Side Slopes City Guidance 10-feet -\-Z: 3-feet Minimum 2-feet from edge of path 5-feet or offsets shown in Table 2, wh ichever is greater 18 mph Minimum of 60-feet Sharper radii maybe used in conjunction with curve widening and City prior approval ~ ~ ~'~ iff ~ MUP = 1.5% maximum &,t?1~ ( 'l/'l... ~c;~~) Shoulder= 6V :1H maximum ~ ~f. •.,,,.f,t..(J. Minimum 5-feet per 1% ~ t.«.A« ( l~ Maximum of 5%, minimum of 0.5 % In circumstances of physical or regulatory constraints as described in the document, longitudinal grades maybe steepened. Refer to Table 3. Width equal to width of the MUP Maximum running slope of 1V :12H Minimum 5-foot by 5-foot turning space at the top 1V:4H -nch thick Portland cement concrete wit #4 ars 18" O.C. (both ways) blJ.d.wi.~ fZ-o '>Lt~·· ~ ... i\d~ ..,..! 1f Diameter= Minimum 15-inch, but should be hydraulical~y sized "'~..., \___ Material= fil.ei11for ted concret e pipe (R EP-· Cross Pipe \ "S. length= Designed to transverse under the pat and fill slopes (,~~ Cover= Minimum 4-inch cover from top of pipe and bottom of Floodplains Pis within floodplain it should be: •A minimum of 30-feet offset from the stream top of bank Additional Information Page 4 Page 4 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 6 Page 6 Pages 6 and 7 Page 9 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 11 Page 12 {f) CJOf'~L~c,· Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Ele ;J-u.tol'~ ,. Additional ,,,. f \eM Information Element Boardwalks Bridges Retaining Walls Temporary Construction asements (TCE) ermanent Public Access Easements (PAE) Clearing Limits City Guidance c\~'(_~~· Railing Height : Minimum of 48 -inches (refer to AASHTO requirements for openings) Loading: Minimum five tons of capacity (H -5) with "No Motor Elevation : Bottom stringer a minimum of: • 6-· h above existin round • 12-inches above base floodplain elevation, • 2-feet above wetland, or • hydraulically designed per stream flows, whichever is greater Material : Pre-fabricated steel truss bridge Width : 4-feet wider than MUP {i-feet each side) Railing Height: Minimum of 48-inches (refer to AASHTO requirements for openings) , ~If- Loading : Minimum ten tons of capacity (H-10)-1 \S \ Offset: End bents 10 to 20 feet offset from top of bank Elevation: Hydraulically designed for minimum of 25-year storm or 100-yr if needing FEMA approvals. When feasible design for 100-year storm. Dimensions : Minimum 14-feet wide and 10-feet tall with eadwalls and wing walls • Lighting : Minimum 10-foot candles for daytime lighting and 4- foot candles for night time lighting In accordance with TxDOT retaining wall standards and sealed by a Texas registered professional engineer. Safety rails required when a fill wall greater than 30 inches is proposed . Upon approval from the City, safety rail could be s Page 13 Pages 14 and 15 Page 15 eliminated if a 5-foot shoulder can be provided. ~tL/\~""'-' Remove trees: • Within 5-feet of the edge of path •Within the fill slope and have 6-inches or more of fill • Cut slope within critical root damage radii (diameter of tree in inches) x 3 =critical root damage radii Evaluate impact to tree's critical root zone (CRZ Page 16 Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Additional Element City Guidance Information Include: • Emergency and maintenance vehicle access and turnaround •At least one ADA accessible parking space per every 25 spaces • Bike racks (approved by the City) that provide one bike space for every one parking space, with no less than five bike spaces Trailheads at any trailhead Pages 16 and 17 . • Wayfinding signage to direct users to the path ~ '(V' \"' ..fi; •An accessible pathway from parking and other accessible ~JefV elements to the path • Lighting at the parking lot and trail intersection ~' • One bench for every 3 parking spaces (major trail head only) •At least one water fountain (major trailhead only) ;; Neighborh :>od Access Provide at least one controlled location per neighborhood for Page 17 neighborhood connection to the trail \ Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Additional Element City Guidance Information • Minimum of 42-inches. If railing is providing protection from a body of water or high vertical height then minimum railing height shall be 48 -inches . Safety Railing and Fences • Railing should be offset 2-feet from edge of path . Pages 17 and 18 •Standard railing is 4-inch tubular black iron pipe with posts spaced 6-feet apart. If railing is providing protection from a body of water or high vertical height then it shall meet bridge railing requirements. Bollards restricting traffic shall be : • Minimum of 40 inches, • Minimum of 4 inches in diameter, • Retroreflective on both approach sides, •Setback a minimum of 5-feet from edge of roadway, but setback will be site specific, Bollards •Spaced a minimum of 6-feet apart when more than one Pages 18 and 19 bollard is used. When a single bollard is used it should be placed in the center of the path. • Removable to provide authorized vehicular access . If more than one bollard is used , only the center bollard shall be a hinged bollard . • Prefer TrafficGuard Single Post -4" Clearance Regulatory Signage In accordance with part 9 ofthe TMUTCD standards. Page 19 Mile Marker Posts: • Shall be 6"x6"x5" pressure treated yellow wood pine, buried 2 feet. •Spaced at an interval of 1/2 mile increments . • Include at minimum the path mile . Entrance Sign: • Placed at the trailheads at the entrance to the path. Wayfinding Signage •Shall be elevated/fixed to the ground/mounted to a post. Pages 20 through • Include at minimum path name, entity maintaining the path, 22 path rules and safety information. Directional Sign: • Place at locations of intersecting paths or locations a path changes direction. • Can be mounted to a post, fixed to the ground , or elevated on a post. • Include at minimum the direction of destination Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Additional Element City Guidance Information • Ideally path will not have a centerline or stop bars. •Situations when a centerline shall be considered i nclude : • Path is heavily travelled and two-way traffic pattern needs to be clearly marked (City 's discretion) • Path has restricted sight distance or sharp curve • Path is unlit and will have permitted nighttime access • Path includes underpass. The approach and Pavement Markings underpass shall have a centerline . Pages 22 and 23 •Situations when stop bar shall be considered i nclude : • Path intersects heavily traveled roadway • Path intersects a roadway with minimal sight distance •Any other situation that would need to emphasize that the path user needs to stop . • If edge line or centerline is applied it shall be 4-inches wide. If stop bar is applied it shall be 12 -inches wide. • Markings shall be retroreflective. •At City's discretion lighting shall be considered in the following situations: • Path is intended to be used after dark • Path is in an urban area • Path is underpass , tunnel, bridge or under vehicular bridge • Path has lim ited visibility Lighting • Path intersections another path or roadway Page 23 •Average horizontal i llumination levels should be between 0.5 to 2-foot candles . • 15-foot pedestrian height posts are preferred . • Bollard lights can be used as accent lighting. • Preferred hard wired lighting source . • 2-inch PVC conduit shall be installed parallel to the path (one side) for future light installation . Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Additional Element City Guidance Information • Design path to protect, preserve, and maintain existing native vegetation to the extent possible. •Trees and shrubs shall be planted a minimum of 5' offset from path shoulder. Landscaping • Native species are preferred. Page 24 •Shrubs adjacent to path shall be a maximum of 24-inches in height. • Canopy trees shall be trimmed to provide a minimum of 8- feet of vertical clearance. Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Additional Element City Guidance Information lld:>ll L.dll. • Placed at trailheads and seating areas. •Offset minimum of 3-feet from edge of path • Prefer Dumor Receptacle 87 {Steel) with zinc rich epoxy and black polyester powder coat. Bench: •Placed at trailheads and along MUP at 1-mile spacing. • Offset minimum of 3-feet from edge of path . • Prefer Dumor Bench 58 (Steel) with zinc rich epoxy and black polyester powder coat. Bicycle Rack: • Placed at trailheads, restrooms, points of interest, and rest areas. MUP Amenities •Offset minimum of 4-feet from edge of path and spaced a Pages 24 and 25 minimum of 3-feet between adjacent racks. • Prefer Dumor Bike Rack 125 and 130 (steel) with zinc rich epoxy and black polyester powder coat. Water Fountain: • Placed at trailheads, restrooms, and other public gathering places . • Offset minimum of 5-feet from edge of path. •Prefer Bicycle Repair Stations: • Place in areas with high activity and visibility. • Offset minimum of 5-feet from edge of path. •Prefer Art: a r-.n L.-...I~--·-· -.J ..,.1-----"-L.. Element I ntersections Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements City Guidance MUP Intersections: • Place TMUTCD intersect ion warning signs or d i rectional sign alert of crossing •Can place TMUTCD advance warn i ng signs for path users. • Refuge island should be minimum of 6-feet wide, extend at least 6-feet in each direction prior to the crossing, have a 10- foot opening, and include adequate taper for roadway users. • Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) should be considered to supplement warning signs at unsignalized intersections or mid -block crossings . S( \.\ ~ •High -Intensity Activated crossWalK (HAWK) beacons should r e.Je~lrM ~ ,. ~be used if they are warranted according to Part 4 of the \"'1 i,rt..ol TMUTCD . Signalized Crossings: • When a MUP crossing is within 400 -feet of a signalized crossing , the path should designed to route the users to the signalized crossing . Begin meandering the path a couple hundred feet prior to the crossing to encourage use of the signalized crossing . Additional Information Pages 25 through 31 Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Element f Additional ("1ent City Guidance Information MUP Width 10-feet Page 4 MUP Shoulder Width 3-feet Page4 Horizontal Clearance Minimum 2-feet from edge of path Page4 Horizontal Offset 5-feet or offsets shown in Table 2, whichever is greater Page 5 Vertical Clearance 10-feet Page 6 Design Speed 18 mph Page 6 Minimum of 60-feet Horizontal Curves Sharper radii maybe used in conjunction with curve widening; Page 6 signage and City prior approval Curve Widening 2 to 4 feet additional width on inside curve Pages 6 and 7 MUP = 1.5% maximum for design; 2% maximum for Cross Slope construction Page 9 Shoulder= 6V :1H maximum ~relevation MiAiR:nJm S feet per 1%; If cross slope does need to transition, the transition length shall be a minimum of 5 feet Page 9 Transition per one percent of change. Maximum of 5%, minimum of 0.5% Longitudinal Grades In circumstances of physical or regulatory constraints as Page 10 described in the document, longitudinal grades maybe steepened. Refer to Table 3. Width equal to width of the MUP Ramps Maximum running slope of 1V:12H Page 11 Minimum 5-foot by 5-foot turning space at the top Side Slopes 1V:4H Page 11 5-inch thick Portland cement concrete with #3 on 12" O.C. or #4 bars 18" O.C. {both ways); 6-inch thick for emergency Pages 11 and Surface Material access routes Subgrade -6-inch thick compacted to 95% standard proctor 12 with -2% to +4% optimum Comments Staff discussed possibly going to 12 but need to look at cost difference Check with Fire/PD on minimum height Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Comments ent Drainage and Erosion Control Cross Pipe l=looelplains Location Boardwalks City Guidance If stormwater collection is necessary, the use of dispersed infiltration systems, such as grassy swales, is recommended over closed-pipe storm drain systems. If uphill water is collected, it should be directed under the path via a cross pipe. Additional Information Diameter = Minimum 15 -inch, but should be hydraulically sized Page 12 Material= rt..Wf~~f ed concrete pipe (RCP) or pre<jiiSlbox-,,._f..-f4,. ~ ~~) ettfverts; stee l pral~s no~ ~ lur p~'r<Jv,,t.l, it-.. ~~ --o.,._.."'_,....."e,.A,... Length = Designed to transverse under the path and fill slopes ~ Cover = Minimum 4 -inch cover from top of pipe and bottom of I"" ft"-'A ~ concrete path rrrt.?1'' l~ r.-) Ideally, MUPs are outside ofthe floodplain . • MUP ·.vo1:1lel ee A minimum of ee witl:1in 10-feet from a ef.. parking lot • Significant retaining 'Nall reEJ1:1ireel? Situations City would consider MUPs to be within floodplain include+where a functional horizontal and vertical design illustrating the constructability of the path without the need for significant structures has J:>een completed and approved by the City v tr;r..#.._ Met•"~ c...t . If MUP is within floodplain it should be at least : • Outside the floodway and/or •A minimum of 30 -feet offset from the stream top of bank Material : Concrete preferred or recycled plastic w/concrete piers, tiA'leer, to be City approved Span : Maximum 20-foot between piers/support beams Width : 4-feet wider than MUP (2 -feet each side) Railing Height: Minimum of 48 -inches (refer to AASHTO requirements for openings) Loading : Minimum five tons of capacity (H -5) with "No Motor Vehicles" signage Offset : Endbents 10 to 20 feet offset from top of bank Elevation: Bottom stringer a minimum of: • 6-inch above exist ing ground, • 12 -inches above base floodplain elevation, • 2-feet above wetland, or • hydraulically designed per stream flows, whichever is greater Page 12 A~ lb>i<tk--CJ. p ~ this section needs ~{J more work -J ~ht-- v1ef- ~~ \c;,C \ ~~ !(·· s~ -5\~~ c~ * ~~ »1ttV'* I Y\,.fi J Page 13 Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements ent Bridges Underpasses Retaining Walls Temporary Construction Easements (TCE) City Guidance Material: Pre-fabricated steel truss bridge Width : 4-feet wider than MUP (2 -feet each side) Railing Height: Minimum of 48 -inches (refer to AASHTO requirements for openings) Loading : Minimum ten tons of capacity (H -10) Offset: Endbents 10 to 20 feet offset from top of bank Elevation: Bottom stringer a minimum of: 6-inch above existing ground, • 12-inches above base floodplain elevation,... , • 2-feet above wetland, or • hydraulically designed per stream flows, whichever is greater l-lyaFal:llieally aesigRea foF FRiRiFRl:lFR ef 2S yeaF steFFR Dimensions: Minimum 14 -feet wide and 10 -feet tall with headwalls and wing walls Lighting: Minimum 10-foot candles for daytime lighting and 4- foot candles for night time lighting In accordance with TxDOT retaining wall standards and sealed by a Texas registered professional engineer. Safety rails required when a fill wall greater than 30 inches is proposed . Upon approval from the City, safety rail could be eliminated if a 5-foot shoulder can be provided . Excessive drops may still require additional railings -use engineering judgement Material: Concrete -stamped, dyed or textured (See UDO for guidance) Minimum of 5-feet offset from construction limit Minimum PFefeFFea: 30-feet width (additional width may be needed based on design -trail width, curves for sight lines, . etc.) Permanent Public ( ) Constrained: 20 -feet width Access Easements PAE If PAE is for future path, a conceptual of horizontal and vertical alignment needs to be submitted to illustrate constructability of the path I Additional Information Comments Need to ask if the Pages 13 and Loading minimum 14 is really Pages 14 and 15 Page 15 Page 16 Page 16 necessary? ('_ loV l?C-~ ~·[1\'" b~~ t--' ,.w,.;...,_~ v <;'r.J 1~_s need to add specs for underpasses that may be longer/greater distances for safety and use/comfort need clarification on what's excessive ~ _. " lf .. Lf~ 7 vi' \\J l)V-. J\ ~- \if ~'~,vv" ~ ~~~· lA ~c_ o+ (l v--> s~J.~ ~,n '1M(r~- '1t ~~ ~,l( ~~N ~p~~ ~· Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements ~ent City Guidance Remove trees : •Within 5-feet of the edge of path Clearing Limits •Within the fill slope and have 6-inches or more of fill • Cut slope within critical root damage radii (diameter of tree in inches) x 3 =critical root damage radii Evaluate impact to tree 's critical root zone (CRZ) Include: • Emergency and maintenance vehicle access and turnaround •At least one ADA accessible parking space per every 25 spaces • Bike racks (approved by the City) that provide one bike space for every one parking space , with no less than five bike spaces at any trailhead; trailhead with parking ... without ... Trailheads • Wayfinding signage to direct users to the path •An accessible pathway from parking and other access ible elements to the path • Lighting at the parking lot and trail intersection ? should we require this if trail is only open dawn to dusk •One benc h for every 3 parki ng spaces (major trailhead only) •At least one water fountain (major trailhead only) - dependent upon availability If possible, pµrovide at least one coRtrolled location per Neighborhood Access neighborhood for neighborhood connection to the tra il Additional Information Page 16 Pages 16 and 17 Page 17 Comments minor vs . major; guidance on where/how often to place each; recommend fewer bike racks Summary of Key Multi-Use Path {MUP) Design Elements r 1ent City Guidance • MiAiFfnim af 4~ iAel:les. If FailiAg is J3F0•w'ieliAg 13FateetiaA fFam a eaely af wateF aF l:ligl:l vertieal l:leigl:lt tl:leA miAim1:1m Fai l iAg Reigl:lt sl:lall ee 48 iAERes. Safety Railing and • RailiAg sl:la1:1 lel ee affset ~ feet fFam eelge af 13atl:l. Fences • ~taAelaFel FailiAg is 4 iAER t1:181:1laF steel elael~ iF0A 13i13e witR 13asts s13aeeel e feet a13art. If Fai l iAg is J3F0 1w'ieliAg J3F0teetiaA fFam a eaely af •.vateF aF l:ligl:l vertieal l:leigl:lt tl:leA it sl:lall meet BFielge FailiAg Feei1:1iFemeAts. Bollards restricting traffic shall be: • Minimum of 40 inches, •Minimum of 4? inches in diameter, • Retroreflective on both approach sides, • Setback a minimum of 5-feet from edge of roadway, but setback will be site specific, Bollards •Spaced a minimum of 6-feet apart when more than one bollard is used. When a single bo ll ard is used it should be p laced in the center of the path. • Removable to provide authorized vehicular access. It FReFe tl=laR eRe hellanit is wsed, eRly tl:le GeRteF hellaFd sl:lall he a l=liRged hellaFd • . ~ • Prefer TrafficGuard Sin g le Post -4" Clea r ance ~e{u latory Signage In accordance with part 9 of the TMUTCD standards. M ile Marker Posts: • Shall be 6"x6"x5 " pressure treated yellow pine wood piAe, buried 2-feet -equivalent or better?. • Spaced at an interval of 1/2 mile increments. • Include at minimum the path mile. Entrance Sign: • Placed at the trail heads at the entrance to the path. Wayfinding Signage •Shall be elevated/fixed to the gro u nd/m ou nted to a post. • Include at minim u m path name, entity m aintaining the path, path rules and safety information . Directiona l Sign: • Place at locations of intersecting paths or locations a path changes direction. • Can be mounted to a post, fixed to the ground, or e levated on a post. • Include at minimum the direction of destination Additional Information Pages 17 and 18 Pages 18 and 19 Page 19 Pages 20 through 22 Comments update based on full document; look at existing standards; refer to BCS Design Guidelines feet vs. inches 4X4 post is what Parks currently uses Su mma ry of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements :->ent City Guidance • Ideally path will not have a centerline or stop bars . • Situations when a ce nterline shall be considered include: • Path is heavily travelled and two-way traffic pattern needs to be clear ly marked (City 's discretion) • Path has restricted sight distance or sharp curve • Patl:l is ~rn l it a Ra will t:ia·w'e 13ern:iittea Rigl:lttiA'le access • Path includes underpass. The approach and Pavement Markings underpass shall have a centerline . • Situations when stop bar shall be considered include: • Patl:l iRteFsects a l:lea•w'il•t tFa'w'e lea Feaawa•f • PatR iRteFsects a rnaaway •nitR A'liRiA'lal sigl:lt aistaRCe • Any ethef situation that would need to emphasize that the path user needs to stop . • If edge line or centerline is app l ied it sha ll be 4-inches w ide . If stop bar is applied it shall be 12-inches wide. rJ • Markings shall be retroreflective . •At City's discretion lighting shou ld sRa.u be considered in the following sit uations: • Path is intended to be used after dark • Path is in an urban area • Path ??? underpass, tunnel , bridge or under vehicu lar bridge • Path has limited visibility Light i ng • Path intersecti&As another path or roadway •Average horizontal illumination levels shou ld be between 0.5 to 2-foot candles. • 12-15-foot pedestrian height posts are preferred. • Bollard l ig hts can be used as accent lighting. • If PFeterred hard wired lighting source.??? •consider 2-inch PVC conduit ~be installed parallel to the path (one side) for future light installation . Additional Information Pages 22 and 23 Page 23 Comments urban definition - as defined in BPG MP ; Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements ~ent City Guidance "" • Design path to protect, preserve, and maintain existing native vegetation to the extent possible . •Trees and shrubs shall be planted a minimum of 5 ' offset from path shoulder. Landscaping • Native species are preferred. • 51mdas a~jaseRi ie pail:! shall tae a R=1aadR=1YR=1 et ~4 iRsl:les iR l:leigl:li. •Canopy trees shall be trimmed to provide a minimum of 8 - feet of vertical clearance. Additional Information Page 24 Comments adjacent -how close?; 8 vs . 10 foot vertical clearance Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP} Design Elements ~nent City Guidance Trash Can : • Placed at trailheads and seating areas . • Offset minimum of 3-feet from edge of path • Prefer Dumor Receptacle 87 (Steel) with zinc rich epoxy and black polyester powder coat. Recycling bins should be considered Bench : •Placed at trailheads and along MUP at maximum 1-mile spacing. •Offset minimum of 3-feet from edge of path . • Prefer Dumor Bench 58 (Steel) with zinc rich epoxy and black polyester powder coat. Bicycle Rack : • Placed at trailheads, restrooms, points of interest, and rest areas . • Offset minimum of 4-feet from edge of path and spaced a min i mum of 3-feet between adjacent racks . MUP Amenities • Prefer Dumor Bike Rack 125 and 130 (steel) with zinc rich epoxy and black polyester powder coat. Water Fountain : • Placed at trailheads, restrooms, and other public gathering places . •Offset minimum of 5-feet from edge of path . •Prefer . w/dog water fountain Bicycle Re pair Stations: • Place in areas with high activity and visibility. • Offset minimum of 5-feet from edge of path . •Prefer Art: • Can be displayed along path . • Concrete pad can be installed for rotating art display. Restrooms: • Placed at major trail heads or City parks . Additional Information Pages 24 and 25 Comments trash can spec from Parks and Rec or approved equivalent; compare rack to UDO; include dog bag info • Summary of Key Multi-Use Path (MUP) Design Elements Comments Additional ~nent City Guidance Information ~ Remove trees : • Within 5-feet of the edge of path Intersections •Within the fill slope and have 6-inches or more offill Pages 25 • Cut slope within critical root damage radii through 31 (diameter of tree in inches) x 3 =critical root damage radii Evaluate impact to tree's critical root Context Se nsitive Bike Facility Design Guide Matrix Arlington BAC /TAC Roadway Restriping Working Group -December 2014 Introduction Given the increasing number of bicycles on Arlington's roads, it is the ABAC/TAC Roadway Restriping Working Group's (RR W G) desire to find appropriate accommodations to enhance accessibility and safety for bicyclists and to reduce co nflicts w ith o ther roa d users, including drivers of motor vehicles and pedestrians . With appro priate planning, opportunities for improvements arise when roadways are repaved by the Town . The intent of this memorandum to provide a guide for restriping the roadway that prov ides the appropriate facility for bicyclists depending on the traffic, topographic and lan d use context. The various types of potential bicycle facilities include: Ty pe of facility Considerations Shared use path 1. Provides the greatest separation from motor vehicle (MV} traffic 2. May have some bicycle -pedestrian conflicts 3. Typically, a separa t e right-of-way is required, such as a rail bed 4 . Rare ly provides the same level of access to homes and bus inesses as roads. "The presence of a shared use path near a roadway does not eliminate the need to accommodate bic yclists withi n a roadway" 1 Cycle Track A cycle track is a one or two-way bicycle faci lity located next to a road , either at road or sidewalk grade . 1. On roads with few driveways or intersections, provides good se parat ion from motor vehicle traffic 2. Substantial motor veh ic le conflicts in areas with many driveways or intersections (for example, Route 16 at Fresh Pond Mall) 3. Busy road intersections requ ire specia l design treatment, illustrated well in the NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide 4. Substant ial right-of-way is required (minimum 8' for two-way, 5' for one -way plus a 3' minimum buffe r to parked cars) Buffered bike A painted bike lane , parallel to traffic flow, with a painted or otherwise lane delineated buffer between the bike lane and MV traffic2• A buffer might also be provided between the bike lane and parked cars 1. Provides better MV-bike separation than a conventional bike lane 2. Useful where the space available for a bike lane is wide enough that it might be mistaken for a motor vehicle t ravel lane Bike lane 1. The 20 0 6 Mass Highway Design Guide stated that "Bicycle lanes are genera ll y considered the preferred treatment for bicyc le accommodation"3 2. Minimum width of 5' (minimum 12' for combined parking and bike lane , 13 -14' preferred) Rideable 1. A marked shoulder, typical ly at least 4' wide shoulder 2. Useful where little parking is expected 3 . Provides reasonab le accommodation w here available right -of-way is 1 MassDOT Highway Design Guide, Section 5.3.2.4 2 See http://nacto.org/cities-for-cycling/design-guide /bike-lanes/buffered-bike-lanes 3 Mas sDOT Highway Design Guide, Section 5.3.2.1 Example Minuteman Bikeway Vassa r Street or Concord Avenue , Cambridge Congress Street, Downtown Boston Park Avenue , Arlington Lake Street, Arlington 1 limited, bike traffic is low to moderate, there is only occasional parking, and there is little truck I bus traffic. Wide curb lane A w ide curb lane is a travel lane that provides enough space for bikes and Western motor vehicles to share side -by-side 4 portion of Mass 1. Width is 14 -15' Ave , Arlington 2. Requires somewhat less right of way than a marked bike lane (11 ' travel plus 5' bike lane) 3 . Shared lane markings may be placed just to the right of normal MV travel path , at least 11' from the curb 4 . In State-funded highway projects, may require a design exception Shared Lane 1. Used where there are moderate -to-high bicycle and motor vehicle Markings traffic volumes sharing the same space (Sharrows) 2. If not in a wide curb lane (i .e. <14'), place in the center of the travel lane 3. In State -funded highway projects, may require a design exception No special 1. Acceptable on local streets where traffic volumes and speeds are both accommodation low(< 3000 vehicles per day ; < 25 mph) Scope of this Design Guide This design guide is intende d to provide guidance for the Town on si mple repaving and restriping projects , where, with the exception of curb extensions at crosswalks, curb lines and drainage are not changed. Therefore, the remainder of this document is focused on bike lanes, rideable shoulders , wide curb lanes and shared lane markings . It is not meant to preclude the consideration of cycle tracks and buffered bike lanes where they would be feasible (typically, on more extensive projects) Restriping Decision Matrix and Design Guide While in an ideal world, the Town of Arlington should continue to search for opportunities to develop additional shared -use paths and cycle tracks , realist ically , new bicycle facilities are more -likely to include bike lanes, usable shoulders and sharrows. Where possible , the greatest number of users would benefit if space for striped bike lanes can be found on repaved and rebuilt roadways . The reconstruction of Mass Ave in East Arlington is a notable case -in -po i nt of the latter. Studies have shown that bike lanes encourage some cyclists to ride further from parked cars , can promote a more orderly and predictable traffic flow, signify to drivers that bicycles belong, and encourage potential cyclists to overcome their fears of traffic . Cities throughout the US with robust programs to introduce bike lanes and other infrastructure have seen both significa nt increases in ridership and reductions in crashes . Additionally, surveys both nationally and locally indicate that bike lanes are popular with both existing cyclists and those wish ing to ride more often but are i ntimidated by traffic conditions. Therefore , 4 http :f/www.bicycli nginfo.org/engineering/faci lities-widelanes .cfm Bike lane along Mass Ave in Cambridge 2 along with other programs and policies to encourage bicycling in Arlington (bike parking, education, enforcement, road maintenance, etc.) the RRWG would like to support and promote the creation of well - designed bike lanes, especially along streets where the politically-charged removal of traffic lanes and/or parking is unnecessary . To implement this policy, the RRWG feels it is important to establish a procedure for evaluating streets and developing recommendations for specific bike lane applications in the Town. The attached checklists were developed to 1) help DPW determine if bike lanes are the appropriate treatment for any particular street and 2) if so, help determine recommended dimensions for the restriping plan. For the latter, the attached checklist informs the design by adding or subtracting width to minimum travel, bike, and parking lane dimensions in 6" or 12" increments to accommodate vehicle and bike traffic under various contextual conditions . The Guide acknowledges that bike-lane design need not be characterized as "one size fits all". Although AASHTO, NACTO and MassDOT and others have set standards for minimum and recommended bike-lane widths, the RRWG believes that flexible guidelines for travel-lane, bike-lane, and parking-lane dimensions should consider contextual issues such as typical traffic speed, topography, and adjacent land uses . For example, bike lanes need to offer a greater comfort level for cyclists when traffic is moving at a higher speed or if the street is a busy route for trucks and/or buses. Additionally, safe travel distance from parked cars, i.e. protect ion from the "d oor zone," should be flexible and respond to the rate of parking turnover and probability of the opening of the driver's-side door (keeping in mind that cyclists should be aware that motor vehicle doors could unexpectedly open at any time, and should keep a minimum of three feet between themselves and any parked vehicle). Design of bike lanes should also take into account areas where motor vehicle traffic is likely to cross the painted bike lane line. In these areas, assume the following guidelines : • Include dashed bike lane lines for a length of 50 ' on the approach to intersections with cross streets • Include dashed bike lane lines for a length of 20 ' on the approach to, and departure from, bus bays • Bike lane lines (o r shoulder edge lines) should not "curl in " towards side streets and driveways . They should be discontinuous across intersections of side streets . At busy inte rsections , dashed bike lane lines should continue through the intersection to improve bicyclists' navigation and positioning, and to create greater level of awareness for motorists. At intersections where conflict is most acute, consideration for the use of green bike lane markings should be carefully considered as well . Finally, it is important to note that many final recommendations may not fit within the existing or proposed curb-to-curb width for a particular street. When the recommendation exceeds the curb-to-curb width by 12 " or less for the entire street, reduction of either the travel, bike or parking lane should be considered . When it exceeds the curb-to-curb width by more than 12", alternative methods to provide bike access such as shoulder stri pes , or a wide outside lane with "sharrows" should be employed. 3 DRAFT Roadway Restriping Guide to Providing Bicycle Facilities Arlington BAC!T AC Roadway Restriping Working Group STREET CURB -TO-CURB WIDTH YES NO 1. Is the roadway part of the designated bike network* in the Town? D D Go to Question #2 -4 Bike facility not necessary or appropriate 2. Parking allowed on both sides: is the roadway at least 44' in width 3. Parking allowed on one side: is the roadway at least 36 ' in width 3. Parking prohibited: is the roadway at least 28'in width D Go to Bike Lane Design Guide D Go to Bike Lane Design Guide D Go to Bi ke Lane Desig n Guide D See Shared Lane Marking Matrix D See Shared La ne Ma rki ng Matrix D See Shared Lane Marking Matrix * -network includes : Mass Ave , Park Ave , Summer Street, Lowell Street, Gray Street, Mill Street, Jason Street, Pleasant Street, Mystic Street, Mystic Valley Parkway (OCR), Medford Street, Broadway, Wa rre n Street, Bates Road , River Street and Lake Street Share d Lane Mar king Pl acem ent Mat ri x Post ed or as •h percentile roa d w ay Shared lane marking placement speed (whichever ls lower) Curb -si de travel lane < 13' curb-side travel lane ~ 13' ~ 25 mph w ithout parking center of travel lane 4' -0" from curb !> 25 mph with parking center of travel lan e 11 '-0" from curb 26 -35 mph without par king 4 '-0" from cur b ** 4 '-0 H from cu rb 26 -35 mp h with parki ng 11 '-0" from cur b ** 11 '--0" from curb > 35 mph w i th or with out park i ng SLM not appropriate SLM not appropriate ** -there is a certa in trade off that will need to be acknowledged as SLM placement 4' or 11 'from the curb within travel lanes <13'will suffer more wear and tear, but very few cyclists should be encouraged to ride in the center of the travel lane when speeds typically exceed 26 mph . DRAFT Context-sensitive Bike Lane Design Guide Arlington BAC!T AC Roadway Restriping Working Group STREET CURB-TO-CURB WIDTH NO YES TRAVEL LANE D start with: 10'-0" Limited* or no bus/truck traffic? D D no change Moderate** bus/truck traffic? D D add 6" Frequent*** bus/truck traffic? D D add12 " -OR - Typical traffic speeds <3 0 mph? D D no change Typical traffic speeds 30-40 mph? D D add 6" Typical traffic speeds >40 mph? D D add 12" SUB-TOTAL D BIKE LANE D start with : 5'-0" Absence of curb-side parking? D D OK to subtract 6" Limited * or no bus/truck traffic? D D OK to subtract 6" Moderate** bus/truck traffic? D D no change Frequent*** bus/truck traffic? D D add 6" Typical traffic speeds <30 mph? D D no change Typical traffic speeds 30-40 mph? D D no change Typical traffic speeds >40 mph? D D add 6 " SUB -TOTAL D PARKING LANE D start with: 7'-6" No storefront retail along street? D D OK to subtract 6" Some areas of storefront retail? D D no change Continuous storefront retail? D D add 6-1 2" depending on level of turnover Significant downhill stretch? D D add 6" (hig her cycling speeds when >2%) Significant uphill stretch ? D D OK to subtract 6" (lower cycling speeds when >2%) SUB-TOTAL D IDEAL TOTAL * -Limited bus/truck traffic: fewer than 10 buses and trucks in each direction per weekday peak hour ** -Moderate bus/truck traffic: between 10-40 buses and trucks in each direction per weekday peak hour *** -Frequent bus/truck traffic: more than 40 buses and trucks in each direction per weekday peak hour ~ \ dfo d 850 1,700 3,400 5 ,100 6 ,800 i.iiiil!!!!5iiiiiil!!'!!i!iiiiioiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiil!i!!!!!!!'!!!!!!!!!'!§i;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;ii)Feel Proposed Bike Facility Network Map Prepared by the Town of Arlin g1on l!ngineering Divi sion Date : 91912014 -Lllne-Sllaring Ne~ (Towt1Conv0Hed) 1 ••1 ; Lane St-.ring ~twcwk (Non-T°""n Conlroled) W1tei9ody -Btook(~) ---·Bloolr(iwblurlac:e) AleWlfe BrookGreeowoy Minul1manBik1way APPENDIX MUTCD Excerptsi These excerpts pertain to shared road accommodation . There are other excerpts, not included here, that pertain to shared -use paths. For All Situations Section 9A.02 Standard : The absence of a marked bicycle lane or any of the other traffic control de vices discusse d in this Chapter on a particular roadway shall not be construed to mean that bicy clists are not permitted to trave l on t hat roadway. Section 9B.13 Bicycle Signal Actuation Sign (Rl0-22) Option : The Bicycle Signal Actuation (R10-22) sign (see Figure 98-2) may be installed at s igna lized intersections where markings are used to indicate the location where a bicyclist is to be pos itioned to actuate the signal (see Section 9C .05). Guidan ce: If the Bicy cle Signal Actuation sign is in s talled, it should be placed at the roa dside adjacent to the marking to emphasize th e connection between the marking and the sign. For Bike Lanes Section 9B.04 Bike Lane Signs and Plaques (R3-17, RJ-17aP, RJ-l 7bP) Standard: The Bike Lane (R3-17) sign and th e R3 -17aP and R3-17bP pl a ques (see Figure 9B -2) shall be u sed onl y in conjunction with marked bicycle lanes as described in Section 9C.04 . Guidance: If used, Bike Lane sign s and plaques should be used in advance of the up stream end of the bicycle lane, at the downstream end of the bicycle lane , and at periodic illlervals along the bicycle lane as detetmined by engineering j udgment based on prevailing sp eed of bicycle and other traffic, block length, distances from ·adjacent imersections, and oth er con siderations. Sec tion 9B.OS BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE YIELD TO BIKES Sig n (R.4-4 ) Option : Where motor vehicles entering an exclusive right-tum lane must weave across bicycle traffic in bicycle lanes , the BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE Y IELD TO BIKES (R4-4 ) sign (see Figure 9 B-2) may be used to infomi both the motorist and the bicyclist of th is weaving maneuver (see Figures 9C-1 , 9C-4 , and 9C-S). Guidance: The R4-4 sig n should not be used when bicyclists need to move left because of a right-tum lane drop situation . Section 9C.04 Markings For Bicycle Lanes Support : Pavement markings des ignate that portion of the road way for preferential use by bicycl ists . Markings infomi all road users of the restricted nature of the bicycle lane . Standard: Longitudinal pave ment markings shall be use d to defin e bicy cle lan es. Guidan ce: If used, bicycle lane word, symbol, and/or arrow ma rf..i ngs (see Figure 9C-3) should be p laced at th e beginning of a bicycle lane and at periodic intervals along the bicycle lan e ba sed on engineering judgment Standard : If t he bicycl e lane sy mb ol marking is used in co njun ctio n with word or arrow messages, it sha ll precede them. Option : If the word , symbol , and/or arrow pavement markings shown in Figure 9C-3 are used , Bik e Lane signs (see Section 9B .04) may also be used , but to avoid overuse of the signs not necessarily adjacent to every set of pavement markings . Standard : A t hrough bicycle lan e s ha ll not be positioned to th e r ight of a r ig ht turn only lane or to th e left of a left turn only la ne. Support: A bicyclist continuing strai ght through an intersection from the right of a right-tum lan e or fro m the left of a left-turn lane would be inconsistent with nomial traffic behavior and would violate the expecta tio ns of righ t- er left-turning motorists . Guidance: When the right through lane is dropped to bec om e a right tu rn only lane, th e bicycle lane markings s ho uld stop at least 100 fe et before the beginning of the right-turn lan e. Thro ugh bicycle lan e markings should resume to the left of the right turn only lan e. 1 From 2009 MUTCD , re lease 2 : http://mutcd.fhwa .dot.gov/pdfs/2009rlr2/part9 .pdf BEGIN RIGHT TUR LANE It YIELD TO BlKES 8 ~ Tre atment at Right Turn o nly lane Figure9C-3. 1.Vord. Symbol and Arrow Pa11emen1 Markin gs for Bicyel~ Lane' 7:l lndl4 72~ I I 71.~s I ~ I 2 lnc:ihes 44 ~ J A • Br!<b Sy mb<)I For Shared Lanes Section 9C.07 Shared Lane Marking Option : The Shared Lane Marking shown in Figure 9C-9 may be used to : A. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in a shared lane with on-street parallel parking in order to reduce the chance of a bicyclist's impacting the open door of a parked vehicle , Figure 9<:·9. Slu!red U!nc Marki ng B. Assist bicyclists with lateral positioning in lanes that are too narrow for a motor vehic le and a bicycle to travel side by side within the same traffic lane , C . Alert road users of the lateral location bicyclists are likely to occupy within the traveled way , D. Encourage safe passing of bicyclists by motorists, and E. Reduce the inci dence of wrong-way bicycling . Guidance: The Shared Lane Marking should not be p laced on roadways that have a speed limit above 35 mph. Standard: Shared Lane Markings shall not be used on shoulders or in designated bicycle lanes. Guidance: If used in a shared lane with on-street parallel parking, Shared Lane Markin gs shou ld be placed so that th e centers of the markings are at least 11 feet from the face of the curb, or from the edge of th e pavement where there is no curb. If used on a street with out on-street parking that has an outside travel lan e that is less tha n 14 feet wide, the centers of the Shared Lan e Markings should be at least 4 feet from the face of the curb, or fro m the edge of the pavement where th ere is no curb. If used, the Shared Lane Marking sho uld be placed immediately after an intersection and spaced at in tervals not greater than 250 feet thereafter. Option: Section 98 .06 describes a Bicycles May Use Full Lane sign that may be used in additi on to or in stead of the Shared Lane Marking to inform road users that bicyclists might occupy the travel lane . Section 9B.06 Bicycles fay Use Full Lane Sign (R4-11) Option : The Bicycles May Use Full Lane (R4-11) sign (see Figure 9B-2) may be used on roadways where no bicycle lan es or adjacent shoulders usable by bicyclists are present and where travel lanes are too narrow for bicyclists and motor vehicles to operate side by side . The Bicycles May Use Full Lane sign may be used in locat ions where it is important to inform road users that bicyclists might occupy the trave l lane . Section 9C .07 describes a Shared Lane Marking that may be used in addition to or instead of the Bicycles May Use Full Lane sign to inform road users that bicyclists might occupy the travel lane . .&f0 MAY USE I FULL LANE ; l.Y-1 l Support: The Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC) defines a "substandard widt h lane " as a "lane that is too na rrow for a bicycle and a vehicle to travel safely side by side within the same lane ." References http://n a cto.org/c it ies-for-cycl ing/des ign -gu ide/ http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/engin e ering http ://www . m hd .st ate . ma . us/ de fa u It.asp? pgid=content/ designg u ide&sid=a bou t http ://mutcd.fhwa .dot.gov/pdfs/2009rlr2/part9 .pdf ' .. .icvu icu11..: ine oesr srreet sweepers for clearing protected bike lanes I PeopleForBikes SHAR TECH TALK: THE BEST STREET SWEEPERS FOR CLEARING PROTECTED BIKE LANES Ap r il 21, 2014 Michael Andersen, Green Lane Project staff writer As protected b i ke lanes have spread, so has a new problem: how to keep protected bike lanes clean. Traditional sidewalk sweepers are often narrower than needed for t his job. Conventional street sweepers don't fit between curb and barrier. And t hough there's a wide array of industrial sweepers on the market, machines designed for indoor use have hoppers that fill up too quickly. That sa id, if you ask around for long enough, you will find a few sweepers that fit the separated bike lane niche. Building on a directory started by Austin engineer Nathan Wilkes, here 's what we've found . Madvac LSlOO Page 1of6 http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/tech-talk-the-best-street-sweepers-for-clearing-p... 1/31/2017 J Tech Talk: The best street sweepers for clearing protected bike lanes I PeopleForBikes (pictured above) Minimum operating width: 48 inches Max operating width: 89 inches Suction head width: 24 inches Hopper capacity: 0 .9 cubic yards Top non-sweeping speed: 16 mph Price range: $80,000 to $110,000 Used by Montreal, this product formerly known as the CNlOO is among the smallest and narrowest sweepers (http:Uwww.caliberequipment.com/manuals/CNlOO-brochure.pdf) in its class. It only needs four feet of clearance at a bikeway pinch- point, but can ex tend its brushes more than seven feet. The narrow vacuum head and sweeper underneath the body mean that it's best suited to bike la nes protected from road debris by curbs. SHAREMacDonald Johnson CN201 Minimum operating width: 52 i nches Max operating width: 123 inches Suction head width: 32 inches Hopper capacity: 2.3 cubic yards Top non-sweeping speed: 25 mph Price range: $124,000 to $140,000 Used by San Francisco, the CN201 sweeper (http://www.mje .com.au/CMS/Uploads/file/CN201 % 20Specificat ion%20Sheet%20-%20Septem ber%202011 %20Low% 20Res.pdf) has the widest operating-width range of any sweeper we could find, capable of squeezing its body into less than five feet and stretching to more than 10. Its "optimum sweeping width ," however, is 7.5 feet. Another machine that's better suited to curb-protected lanes than post-protected ones. Page 2of6 http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/tech-talk-the-best-street-sweepers-for-clearing-p... 1/31/201 7 J Tech Talk: The best street sweepers for clearing protected bike lanes I PeopleForBikes SHAR Ravo 5 Series Minimum operating width: 94 inches Max operating width: 94 inches Suction head width: 24.8 inches Hopper capacity: 5 cubic yards Top non-sweeping speed: 55 mph Price range: $226,000 RAVO FAYAT CIROOP Used by Port land, the Ravo 5 (http://www.atlanticmachineryinc.com/Ravo 5 serie-Lit 8 23 12.pdf) needs almost 8 feet of clearance but has almost the largest-capacity debris hopper in its class. Stewart-Amos R4, RG and Starfire S4 Page 3of6 http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/tech-talk-the-best-street-sweepers-for-clearing-p... 1/31 /2 017 ) Tech Talk: The best street sweepers for clearing protected bike lanes I PeopleForBikes Minimum operating width: 102 inches Max operating width: 120 in ches Suction head width: 80 inches Hopper capacity: 4 .65 cub ic yards for t he R4, 6.12 for the R6. The S4 has a 4 -yard hopper that 's equivalent to a 6-ya rd regenerative air alternative. Top non-sweeping speed: 65 mph Leased by Chi cago for $5,000 per week, the S4 Page 4of6 (https://drive.google.com/file/d/OB8t0k7 upXv5d3V4WmtGMEtBLUVkR1RhbmZKeTdQTGOyaVFz/ed it? usp =sharing) (pictured) is another sweeper on the large , wide side of the spectrum. The R4 (https://drive .google .com/file/d/OB8t0k7 upXv5RUJHU2VwRUlHSUhQSENCWGJfWEFURWJJR kh v/edit? usp =sharing) and R6 (https:Udrive.google.com/file/d/OB8t0k7 upXv5X2xNGtlZW14bllXMjVfYk5KM3FHczZ4eCln/e d it ? usp=sharing) are bigger still. All three can travel at highway speeds to SHAREand from works ites . The rea r broom can "handle miles and miles of heavy debris" w ithout clogging, said M i ke Amsden of t he Ch icago Department of Transportat ion. Schwarze A4 Storm Minimum operating width: 90 inches Max operating width: 120 inches Suction head width: 80 inches Hopper capacity: 4.5 cubic yards Top non-sweeping speed: 70 mph Price range: $160,000 The A4 Storm (http:Uschwarze.com/wp- content/uploads/2013/05/A4 -Storm-web-spread.pdf) has a fairly large body and a massive suction head. Like the Starfire , its big suct ion head and rear broom suit it to debris-laden streets. Tennant Sentinel http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/tech-talk-the-best-street-sweepers-for-clearing-p... 1/31/2017 Tech Talk: The best street sweepers for clearing protected bike lanes I PeopleForBikes Minimum operating width: 70 inches Max operating width: 126 inches SHAREElevatorwidth: (used instead of a suction head) 51 inches Hopper capacity: 3.4 cubic yards Top non-sweeping speed: 25 mph Price range: $155,000-$190,000 Tennant is one of the big North American brands in the industrial sweeper business, and the Sentinel is their largest product ( http://assets. ten na ntco. co m/globa lassets/webassets/prod u ct% 20assets/sentinel-specs.pdf ). A re latively narrow wheelbase and four-wheel d r ive makes it unusually maneouverable. Tennant Green Machines 636 Minimum operating width: 47 inches, with a hard vehicle w idth of 45 i nches and minimum clearing width of 51 inches Max operating width: 80 inches Suction hose width: 12 inches Page 5of6 http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/tech-talk-the-best-street-sweepers-for-clearing-p... 1/31/2017 1. Tech Talk: The be st street sweepers for clearing protected bike lanes I PeopleForBikes Hopper capacity: 1.3 cubic yards Top non-sweeping speed: 25 mph Price range: $95,000-$105,000 The narrowest of all the street sweepers in this directory ( http://assets. ten na ntco. com/glo ba lassets/webassets/outdoo r% 20and%20city%20cleaning/636% 20brochure 1.501.001.am.en.pdf) by one inch, the 636 has a sl igh tly larger hopper and slightly higher top speed than its closest peer, the LSlOO. This is another that works best in relatively low- debris situations like curb-p rotected lanes. Have you seen other makes or models of street sweepers in action keeping bike lanes clear? Let me know: michael@peopleforbikes.org. We'll add it to this list. The Green Lane Project (http://peopleforbikes.org!green-lane- SHAREproject/) is a PeopleForBikes program that helps U.S. cities build better bike Janes to create low-stress streets . You can follow us on Twitter (http://twitter.com/GreenlaneProOor Facebook (http://facebook.com/TheGreenlaneProject)or sign up for our weeklv news digest (http://www. peopleforbikes. org!pages/green-lane-project- weekly-news -digest)about protected bike lanes . Story tip? Write michae/@peopleforbikes.org. SHARE ON FACEBOOK SHARE ON TWITIER (https://www.facebook.com /sharer/sharer.php? Chttps://twitter.co m/home? u=http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entrv/tech -status= The %20best%20street% talk-the -best -street-s weepers -for-clearing-20sweepers %20for%20clearing% protected-bike-lanes) 20protected %20bike%201anes % 20http://t.co/I UDFH 2VAa8% 20http://t.co/Wa 799DL9tr) See all Protected Bike Lanes blog entries (!blog/category/protected-bike-lanes) Page 6of6 http://www.peopleforbikes.org/blog/entry/tech-talk-the-best-street-sweepers-for-clearing-p ... 1/31/2017