Dinuba City Council
October 14, 2025

NOTES:

1. VINES SHALL BE OF QUALITY AS PRESCRIBED IN THE ROOT OBSERVATIONS DETAIL AND SPECIFICATIONS.

2. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR FURTHER REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THIS DETAIL.

FACE OF WALL OR BUILDING
LEAN NURSERY STAKE AGAINST THE WALL.

STAKE TO BE REMOVED AT THE END OF THE

MAINTENANCE (WARRANTY) PERIOD AFTER

THE VINE HAS ATTACHED TO THE WALL
VINE

ROOT BALL
4" X 8" WIDE ROUND - TOPPED SOIL

BERM ABOVE ROOT BALL SURFACE

SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE
ROOT BALL. BERM SHALL BEGIN AT

ROOT BALL PERIPHERY
4" LAYER OF MULCH. NO MORE THAN
1" OF MULCH ON THE TOP OF THE
ROOT BALL (SEE SPECS. FOR MULCH)

PRIOR TO MULCHING, LIGHTLY TAMP SOIL
AROUND THE ROOT BALL IN 6" LIFTS TO
BRACE SHRUB. DO NOT OVER COMPACT.

WHEN THE PLANTING HOLE HAS BEEN

BACKFILLED, POUR WATER AROUND THE

ROOT BALL TO SETTLE THE SOIL

FINISH GRADE

PAVEMENT

SLOPE SIDES OF LOOSENED SOIL
LOOSENED SOIL. DIG AND TURN THE SOIL

TO REDUCE THE COMPACTION TO THE

AREA AND DEPTH SHOWN

ROOT BALL RESTS
ON EXIST. OR

RECOMPACTED SOIL
EXIST. SOIL
3X'S WIDEST DIM. OF

ROOT BALL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
L-42

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

VINE - UNMODIFIED SOIL

PLAN VIEW

SECTION VIEW

PREVAILING WIND
1" X 9' SINGLE METAL STAKE WITH

METAL ARM BAR SECURED TO STAKE

AND RUBBER STRAP AROUND TRUNK
REMOVE NURSERY STAKE. IF

CENTRAL LEADER NEEDS TO BE

STRAIGHTENED OR HELD ERECT, IT
IS ACCEPTABLE TO ATTACH A 1/2"
X 8' BAMBOO POLE TO THE

CENTRAL LEADER AND TRUNK

HEIGHT OF THE ARM

BAR SHALL VARY PER
TREE. CONTRACTOR TO

ADJUST AS NEEDED TO

HOLD TREE ERECT
1" X 9' SINGLE METAL
STAKE. INSTALL PER
MANUFACTURER'S SPECS.
& RECOMMENDATIONS.

STAKE LOCATION SHALL

NOT INTERFERE WITH

BRANCHES
7'
4' - 7'
2'
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
L-43

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TREE STAKING - SINGLE

METAL STAKE

NOTES:

1. SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL TREE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS.

2. IF THERE IS NO EXISTING IRRIGATION, SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR WATERING REQUIREMENTS.

3. NO PRUNING SHALL BE PERFORMED EXCEPT BY APPROVED ARBORIST.

4. NO EQUIPMENT SHALL OPERATE INSIDE THE PROTECTIVE FENCING INCLUDING DURING FENCE INSTALLATION AND REMOVAL.

5. SEE SITE PREPARATION PLAN FOR ANY MODIFICATIONS WITH THE TREE PROTECTION AREA.

KEEP OUT
TREE

PROTECTION
AREA

CROWN DRIP LINE OR OTHER LIMIT OF TREE

PROTECTION AREA (SEE TREE PRESERVATION

PLAN FOR FENCE ALIGNMENT)
4'

8.5" X 11" SIGN

LAMINATED IN PLASTIC
SPACED EVERY 50'

ALONG THE FENCE

TREE PROTECTION
FENCE: HIGH DENSITY

POLYETHYLENE
FENCING W/ 3.5" X 1.5"
OPENINGS; COLOR:

ORANGE. STEEL POSTS
INSTALLED AT 8' O.C.
2" X 6" STEEL

POSTS OR

APPROVED EQUAL
5" THICK LAYER OF MULCH
MAINTAIN EXIST.

GRADE W/ THE TREE

PROTECTION FENCE

UNLESS OTHERWISE

INDICATED ON THE
PLANS

SECTION VIEW
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
L-44

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TREE PROTECTION

NOTES:

SECTION VIEW

1. APPLY 10 GALLONS OF WATER PER 1" OF TRUNK SIZE MEASURED AT DIAMETER BREAST HEIGHT EVERY 2-3 WEEKS.

2. WATER APPLICATION SHOULD BE DETERMINED BY IRRIGATION EMITTER. IE. OVERHEAD, DRIP, OR HAND HELD.

3. LONGER, SLOWER APPLICATION OF WATER IS IDEAL WHICH ALLOWS WATER TO SLOWLY PERCOLATE INTO THE TREES ROOT ZONE AND BE UTILIZED BY THE TREES ROOT SYSTEM.

4. DO NOT SPRAY THE TREE TRUNK OR APPLY WATER DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE TRUNK.

CROWN DRIP LINE OF TREE
ROOT

PROFILE
2' - 5'

ROOT WATERING ZONE
5" THICK LAYER OF MULCH
MAINTAIN EXIST. GRADE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
L-45

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATERING MATURE TREES

NOTES:

PLAN VIEW

1. ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER'S
SPECIFICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

2. ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEN ROOT BALL IS LOCATED WITHIN 8' OF PAVEMENT.

PLAN VIEW

SECTION VIEW
TOP OF ROOT BARRIER 1"

ABOVE FINISH GRADE
CURB
18" DEEP LINEAR

ROOT BARRIER
(SEE SPECS.)
EXIST. SOIL
FINISH GRADE 2"

BELOW ADJACENT

PAVEMENT
8'
5' MIN.
(SEE
SPECS.)
3"
MAX.

CURB
18" DEEP LINEAR

ROOT BARRIER
(SEE SPECS.)

TAMP SOIL

ADJACENT TO

ROOT BARRIERS

TO STABILIZE THEM
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
L-46

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

LINEAR ROOT BARRIERS - PARKING

LOT ISLANDS

NOTES:

SECTION VIEW

1. ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED

PER MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

2. ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE INSTALLED
WHEN ROOT BALL IS LOCATED WITHIN 8'

OF CURB, PAVEMENT, WALL OR OTHER
HARDSCAPE.

FINISH GRADE 2" BELOW

ADJACENT PAVEMENT
18" DEEP LINEAR ROOT
BARRIER (SEE SPECS.)
EXIST. SOIL

PLAN VIEW
8' OR
LESS
TOP OF ROOT BARRIER 1"

ABOVE FINISH GRADE

CURB, PAVEMENT, WALL,

OR OTHER HARDSCAPE
4' MIN.
3" MAX.
8'
8'

PAVEMENT

CURB, PAVEMENT,

WALL, OR OTHER

HARDSCAPE

TAMP SOIL

ADJACENT TO

ROOT BARRIERS

TO STABILIZE THEM
18" DEEP LINEAR

ROOT BARRIER
(SEE SPECS.)
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
L-47

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

LINEAR ROOT BARRIERS

FLUSH WELD 3 1/2"

ROUND CAP AND GRIND

SMOOTH WITH PIPE
INSTALL 3 1/2" O.D. GALV.

STEEL PIPE POST 5' LONG
INSTALL 7 BANDS OF 2"

YELLOW REFLECTIVE TAPE,
SPACED 3" APART (TYP.)

CONSTRUCT FOOTING

FLUSH WITH SIDEWALK
CONSTRUCT 12" DIA. CONCRETE
FOOTING, CLASS B, (6 SACK) PCO
INSTALL 4" I.D. GALV. STEEL PIPE
SLEEVE, 2'-8" LONG
INSTALL 1" DIA. STOP PIN 9" LONG
DRILL THROUGH WELD TO 4" SLEEVE
INSTALL 12" DIA. DRAIN PIT.

FILL WITH 3/4" CRUSHED ROCK
WELD 1/4" X 2" X 2" STEEL PLATES

TO PIPES FOR LOCK TAB AND DROP
SLOT. DROP SLOT TO BE 1/2" WIDE
3/8" DIA. HOLE,
TYP. FOR LOCK

TO BE PROVIDED

BY CONTRACTOR
1" RADIUS (TYP.)

FINISHED GRADE

LOCKING DETAIL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-1

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

GALVANIZED STEEL BOLLARD

TYPICAL LAYOUT FOR FIRE HYDRANT NEAR STREET INTERSECTION BOLLARD (3 REQ'D)

PAINTED YELLOW

FIRE HYDRANT
R/W
EP
3' MIN.
4' MAX.
4' MAX.
3' MIN.
3' MIN.
4' MAX.

BOLLARD

PAINTED
YELLOW

FIRE HYDRANT
R/W
EP
3'-6"
3'-6"
6"
CLASS "B"

CONCRETE
(6 SACK MIN.)
2" NEW GROUND 6" 6"
6" STD. WT. PIPE,

PAINT ACCORDING TO
SPECS. (YELLOW)
FILL PIPE WITH CONC. & ROUND TOP
TYPICAL LAYOUT FOR FIRE HYDRANT >50 FROM STREET INTERSECTION

BOLLARD
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-2

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPICAL FIRE HYDRANT

BOLLARD LOCATION

4'
7'-4"

TRASH ENCLOSURE
GREASE
BARREL

SEE NOTES
6 FOOT WIDE 8" THICK CONCRETE APRON
WITH #4 REBAR AT 18" O.C. BOTH DIRECTION
24"
12"
6"
24"
4"
6"
6' MIN.

1.0%
B
A

INSIDE DIMENSIONS OF THE ENCLOSURE
A B
TYPE I 10'-8" 10'-4"
TYPE II 14'-8" 10'-4"
TYPE III 18'-8" 10'-4"
TYPE IV 14'-8" 15'-4"
TYPE V 18'-8" 15'-4"
NOTES:

1. THE GROUND SHALL BE SLOPED AWAY FROM THE WALLS AT A
MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 1%.

2. LOCATION OF THE BIN SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY.

3. BUILDING PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY AND
ONCE COMPLETED INSPECTED BY THE CITY.

4. ALL ENCLOSURE TO BE CONSTRUCTED 6"X"8X16" 2000 PSI
CONCRETE BLOCK TO MATCH BUILDING FEATURES.

5. GREASE BARREL ENCLOSURES ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL
RESTAURANTS AND FOOD SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT.

6. FOOTINGS AND FLOORS SHALL BE CONCRETE 2500 PSI @28
DAYS, INCLUDING GATE POST FOOTINGS.

7. THE ROOF SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM SLOPE OF 2% SLOPING
TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE ENCLOSURE.

8. FINISH PAD ELEVATION SHALL MATCH EXISTING ELEVATION. 6" X 10"

WOOD BEAM
SPACE 2'-6" ON
CENTER
PLAN

SECTION A-A

ROOF DETAIL
4'

WALK THROUGH

ENTRANCE
HORIZONTAL #4 REBAR,
4" O.C. IN CONTINUOUS

FOOTING

CONCRETE FOOTING
#4 REBAR AS

SHOWN IN PLAN
VIEW
# 4 REBAR AS

SHOWN IN

PLAN VIEW
(32" O.C.)
2" CAP BLOCK
#4 REBAR CONT.

A
A

STEEL POST HOLES POST
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-3

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TRASH BIN BLOCK ENCLOSURE

NOTES:

1. CUT CORNER BLOCK ENDS AND CENTER WEB TO FORM A CONT. BOND BEAM.

2. LOCATION OF THE BIN ENCLOSURE TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY.

3. DOOR COLOR 1C1 ANTIQUE BISQUE #6-8534.

4. SECONDARY CANE BOLT RETAINER TO BE PLACED FOR EACH GATE SUCH THAT IS HELD IN A POSITION 90 DEGREES TO THE CLOSED POSITION. 4" X 4"

TUBULAR STEEL

W/ WELDED CAP

CANE BOLT DETAIL
2" ANGLE IRON OR

TUBULAR STEEL FRAME
1" MIN.
5/8" STEEL PIPE

SET FLUSH WITH

PAVEMENT
3/4" DIA. PIN
10"
5"
19"
1/2" STOCK
3/16" METAL PLATE W/2"

OVERHANG (OVERHANG ON

LOCKING GATE ONLY)
6"
5"
1/2" STOCK SLIDE

BARREL BOLT
(LOCKABLE)
1/2" DIA. STEEL
HANDLE
4"
4"
4"
5/8" STEEL PIPE
10"

BLOCK WALL
1/2" STOCK
CONC. FASTENER
(2 PER POST)

GATE POST DETAIL
3 HINGE REQUIRED
PER POST (TYP.)
3"x1/4" FLAT METAL

STOCK WELDED

DIAGONALLY TO FRAME
12" DIA. CONCRETE
FOOTING (TYP.)

SEE CANE

BOLT DETAIL
AND NOTE 4

APPROVED CONCRETE

FASTENERS (SEE

GATE POST DETAIL)
5"
70"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-4

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TRASH ENCLOSURE GATE DETAIL

1. GATE FRAME SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF NOT LESS THAN 1-1/2" GALVANIZED PIPE AND SHALL BE CROSS TRUSSED WITH 3/8" ADJUSTABLE TRUSS RODS. THE CORNER OF GATE FRAMES SHALL BE FASTENED TOGETHER WITH A MALLEABLE IRON FITTING.

2. THE GATE SHALL BE HUNG BY AT LEAST 2 STEEL OR MALLEABLE IRON HINGES NOT LESS THAN 3" IN WIDTH, AND A MALLEABLE CATCH AND LOCKING ATTACHMENT.

3. ALL POSTS SHALL BE MINIMUM OF 9' LONG.

4. ALL FENCES SHALL HAVE REQUIRED SAFETY SIGNS INSTALLED TO CITY STANDARDS (EVERY 100').

5. END, CORNER, AND GATE POSTS SHALL BE BRACED TO THE NEAREST LINE POST WITH GALVANIZED DIAGONAL OR HORIZONTAL BRACES USED AS COMPRESSION MEMBERS AND GALVANIZED 3/8" STEEL TRUSS RODS WITH TURNBUCKLES USED AS TENSION MEMBERS.

6. LINE POSTS SHALL BE SPACED AT NOT MORE THAN 10-FEET INTERVALS, MEASURED FROM CENTER TO CENTER OF POSTS.

7. POST TOPS, EXTENSION ARMS, STRETCHER BARS AND OTHER REQUIRED FITTING AND HARDWARE SHALL BE STEEL OR MALLEABLE IRON OR WROUGHT IRON AND SHALL BE GALVANIZED.

8. WIRE USED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF THE FABRIC SHALL BE 11-GAGE FOR ALL FENCE 84" OR LESS IN HEIGHT, AND SHALL BE WOVEN INTO APPROXIMATE 2" MESH, PVC COATED, AND COLOR SPECIFIED.

TENSION WIRE -
7 GAGE GALV.

COL SPRING WIRE
CLASS "B" CONCRETE
(5 SACK MIN.)
10'
10'
10' BRACES

AT ALL CORNERS
AND MID-SPANS 3/8" TRUSS RODS
BRACE
CLASS "B" CONCRETE
(5 SACK MIN.) 10' 12' 10'

TURNBUCKLES
8"

POST & BRACE REQUIREMENTS
2" MAX.

NOTES:

POST & BRACE REQUIREMENTS
LOCATION TYPE MIN. SIZE MIN. WT. (LB/LF)
END & CORNER POST PIPE 2.351 O.D. 3.10
LINE POSTS PIPE 1.869 O.D. 2.31
BRACES PIPE 1.630 O.D. 1.93
GATE POSTS PIPE 3.960 O.D. 8.65
3'
6'
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-5

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAIL

BENCHMARK LOCATION

SURVEY MONUMENT STANDARD CURB & GUTTER
NOTES:

1. LOCATE BENCHMARKS AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF INTERSECTIONS APPROVED BY THE CITY.

2. COMPLETE NOTES SHOWING LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS, AND CLOSURES SHALL BE FILED WITH THE CITY.

3. ELEVATIONS SHALL BE BASED ON DATUM USED ON U.S.C., G.S., AND CITY RECORD BENCHMARK NUMBERS SHALL BE STAMPED WITH DIES ON TOP.

CIT Y OF DINUBA
B.M. #
TOP

LOCATE MONUMENT AT THE

END OF RADIUS AS SHOWN
2"
1/8"
2-1/2"

BRONZE SURVEY

MONUMENT
SET 1/8" INTO CONCRETE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-6

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

ELEVATION BENCHMARK DETAILS

1. STATE LAW REQUIRES ALL CORNERS TO BE TAGGED WITH SURVEYOR'S NUMBER.

2. ALL SUBDIVISION LOT CORNERS SHALL REQUIRE TYPE A MONUMENTS.

3. REGULAR SHAPED SUBDIVISIONS SHALL REQUIRE TYPE B MONUMENTS AT ALL CORNERS.

IRREGULAR SHAPED SUBDIVISION SHALL HAVE ALL ANGLE AND CURVE POINTS MARKED WITH TYPE B MONUMENTS.

FINISHED GROUND SURFACE
3" MIN.

SURVEYOR'S CAP
3/4"Ø PIPE
18" LONG, MIN.

FINISHED GROUND SURFACE
3/4" Ø PIPE
18" LONG, MIN.

CLASS "B" CONCRETE
(5 SACK MINIMUM)
6"

SURVEYOR'S CAP
TYPE A

LOT CORNERS
TYPE B

SUBDIVISION CORNERS
NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-7

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

PROPERTY MONUMENT DETAILS

6" CONCRETE
CURB
6" CONCRETE CURB
20'
18"
10'
31'

4.5' 18' 18'

1.3'
18' 17.3'

6.4'

1.7'

12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 12.7' 14'-1"

14.1' 20.5'

35.5'
(22')15'
20'

7.6'

2.2'

10.4' 10.4' 10.4' 10.4' 10.4' 10'

17.3' 22'
41'
(24')19'
18' 8' 18' 18' 8'
20'
8'
9'

2.5'
20'
47'
(30')27'

1. LANDSCAPE PARKING AREA - SEE STANDARDS HEREIN.

2. PROVIDE THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS AS

REQUIRED BY THE CITY OF DINUBA BASED ON ZONING AND
LAND USE.

3. INSTALL WHEEL OR BUMPER STOPS TO PREVENT PARKED CARS

FROM ENCROACHING OVER SIDEWALKS, ADJOINING PROPERTY,
OR CITY RIGHT OF WAY.

4. PROVIDE DRAINAGE PLAN DETAILS PRIOR TO APPROVAL.

5. AISLE WAY WHICH PROVIDES DIRECT ACCESS TO PARKING

STALLS SHALL BE ONE-WAY EXCEPT FOR PARKING WHICH IS
PARALLEL OR PERPENDICULAR TO IT.

6. PAVING OF LOTS SHALL STOP AT PROPERTY LINE AND NOT
ENCROACH ON CITY RIGHT OF WAY.

7. SINGLE SPACE SHALL BE 14' WIDE (9' PARKING - 5' LOADING)

8. ALL STALLS SHALL INCLUDE SIGNAGE AS REQUIRE BY CITY, STATE, AND FEDERAL REGULATIONS.

9. PARKING LOTS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST EDITION OF THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE.

NOTES:

TYPICAL PARKING LOT

DESIGN AND LANDSCAPE
30°PARKING
NOTE: ( )2 LANE WIDTH
45°PARKING
NOTE: ( )2 LANE WIDTH
60°PARKING
NOTE: ( )2 LANE WIDTH

PARALLEL PARKING
NOTE: ( )2 LANE WIDTH
90°PARKING
NOTE: ( )2 LANE WIDTH
(20')13'
(20')12'
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-8

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPICAL PARKING LOT

DESIGN & LANDSCAPE

NO

PARKING
ISA PARKING SIGN R99(CA) AND R99B(CA).

VAN ACCESSIBLE STALL SHALL REQUIRE SIGN
R7-8B(CA) IN ADDITION, MOUNTED BELOW

WHEEL STOP
18' MIN.

STRIPES AT
36" O.C. MAX

ISA MARKING AT REAR
LIMIT OF STALL (TYP.)
18' MIN. STALL DEPTH
NOTES:

1. ACCESS AISLE SHALL SERVE THE FULL DEPTH OF EACH
ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE.

2. HATCHED LINES SHALL BE A COLOR CONTRASTING WITH

THAT OF THE AISLE SURFACE, PREFERABLY BLUE OR
WHITE.

3. ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE ON THE PASSENGER SIDE OF
VAN PARKING SPACES. ACCESS AISLES ARE PERMITTED
ON EITHER SIDE OF CAR PARKING SPACES. ACCESS

AISLES SHALL EXTEND THE FULL REQUIRED LENGTH OF
THE PARKING SPACES THEY SERVE. ACCESS AISLES
SHALL ADJOIN AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE.

4. PARKING SPACES AND ACCESS AISLES SHALL BE

DESIGNED SO THAT CARS AND VANS, WHEN PARKING,

CANNOT OBSTRUCT THE REQUIRED CLEAR WIDTH OF
ADJACENT ACCESSIBLE ROUTES.

5. SIGNS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY POSTED EITHER

IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE PARKING SPACE OR

WITHIN THE PROJECTED PARKING SPACE WIDTH AT THE
HEAD END OF THE PARKING SPACE. SIGNS MAY ALSO BE

PERMANENTLY POSTED ON A WALL AT THE INTERIOR
END OF THE PARKING SPACE.

6. ACCESS AISLES OUTLINED IN BLUE WITH DIAGONAL
HATCH MARKINGS AT 36" MAX. O.C. IN EITHER BLUE OR
WHITE.

7. PARKING SPACES AND ACCESS AISLES SERVING THEM
SHALL HAVE A 1:48 MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ALL DIRECTIONS.

8. FOR ANGLED PARKING THE ACCESS AISLE SHALL SERVE

THE FILL DEPTH FOR EACH PARKING SPACE THAT IT
SERVES. RELOCATE THE CURB RAMP OUTSIDE OF THE
ACCESS AISLE, AND REVIDE DETAIL.

DIAGONAL PARKING STALLS

SINGLE PARKING STALLS DOUBLE PARKING STALLS
5'
MIN.
12'
VAN
NO

PARKING

WHEEL STOP
18' MIN.

ISA MARKING

AT REAR LIMIT
OF STALL (TYP.)

STRIPES AT
36" O.C. MAX
5'
MIN.
12'
VAN
9'
CAR
"NO PARKING"

SHALL BE PAINTED

IN WHITE LETTERS
12" TALL
4" BLUE BORDER
WITH 4" BLUE OR

WHITE DIAGONALS

ISA PARKING SIGN
R99(CA) AND R99B(CA)

DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE

ACCESSIBLE RAMP SHALL

BE IN SIDEWALK AREA
NO

PARKING

ACCESSIBLE RAMP SHALL

BE IN SIDEWALK AREA
18' MIN. STALL DEPTH
12' MIN. VAN
5'
4" BLUE BORDER
WITH 4" BLUE OR

WHITE DIAGONALS
ISA PARKING SIGN R99(CA) AND
R99B(CA). VAN ACCESSIBLE STALL
SHALL REQUIRE SIGN R7-8B(CA) IN

ADDITION, MOUNTED BELOW
"NO PARKING"

SHALL BE PAINTED

IN WHITE LETTERS
12" TALL

STRIPES
AT 36" O.C. MAX

ACCESS AISLE MARKING

MAY EXTEND BEYOND

THE MINIMUM REQUIRED
LENGTH
9' MIN.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-9

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

ACCESSIBLE PARKING

NOTES:

ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN LOCATION

ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE SIGNS

MINIMUM
FINE $250
VAN

ACCESSIBLE

PARKING SIGN SHALL

HAVE AN ISA WITH

WHITE FIGURE/TEXT ON

A BLUE BACKGROUND

PARKING SIGN

SHALL BE

REFLECTORIZED
WITH A MIN. AREA
OF 70 SQ. IN.

ADDITIONAL

LANGUAGE SUCH AS
"PARKING ONLY" OR
"ACCESSIBLE" IS NOT

ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE OR REQUIRED

AN ADDITIONAL SIGN

BELOW THE ISA SHALL
STATE "MINIMUM FINE $250" ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE OR AN
ADDITIONAL SIGN WITH "VAN
ACCESSIBLE" AT VAN SPACES

MINIMUM
FINE $250 VAN

ACCESSIBLE

MINIMUM
FINE $250
80" MIN. WITHIN

CIRCULATION
PATH
60" MIN. NOT
WITHIN

CIRCULATION
PATH
Unauthorized vehicles
parked in designated
accessible spaces not
displaying distinguishing
placards or special
licence plates issued for
persons with disabilities
will be towed away at
the owner's expense.

Towed vehicles may be
reclaimed at:
or by telephoning:
1" MIN.

LETTERING
17" MIN.
22" MIN.

APPROPRIATE INFORMATION

SHALL BE A PERMANENT

PART OF THE SIGN

1. THE NO PARKING SIGN (OPTIONAL) SHALL BE POSTED EITHER: IN A CONSPICUOUS PLACE AT EACH

ENTRANCE TO AN OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITY OR IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO ON-SITE ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND VISIBLE FROM EACH PARKING SPACE.

2. THE COLOR BLUE SHALL APPROXIMATE COLOR NO. 15090 IN FEDERAL STANDARD 595C.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-10

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN

ISA MARKING FOR ACCESSIBLE

PARKING SPACE OR STALL
4'-5"
3' 4'-5"
2'-8 1/2"
4" WHITE BORDER

BLUE BACKGROUND

WHITE ISA
6" GRID

TOTAL NUMBER OF

PARKING SPACES OR
STALLS

MINIMUM NUMBER OF DISABLED ACCESSIBLE

PARKING SPACES OR STALLS
1-25 1
26-50 2
51-75 3
76-100 4
101-150 5
151-200 6
201-300 7
301-400 8
401-500 9
501-1000 2 PERCENT OF TOTAL
GREATER THAN 1001 20 PLUS 1 FOR EACH 100 OR FRACTION
THEREOF OVER 1000
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-11

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OF

ACCESSIBILITY (ISA) INSTALLATION

NOTES:

TYPICAL WALL ELEVATION DETAIL

1. SOLID GROUT ALL CELLS (2000 PSI).

2. 2500 PSI MORTAR.

3. 40,000 PSI STEEL.

4. COMPACT TO 90% UNDER FOOTING.

5. DO NOT MORTAR BETWEEN EVERY OTHER C.M.U TO ALLOW FOR MOISTURE TO DRAIN FROM RETAINED SOIL OPENING @ 32" O.C. OF BOTTOM COURSE.

6. 2500 PSI CONCRETE.

7. RETAINING BLOCK WALL WILL REQUIRE A SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE CITY.
6' MAX
1'-4" MAX 2"
1'-3"
2' -6" APPOX.
6' BLOCKWALL
5'-10" MIN.
(1/2" OF COVER OR AS

PER REQUIREMENTS)

HEIGHT TO BE
(1) ONE
COURSE

ABOVE WALL
HEIGHT
#4 BAR CONTINUOUS
#4 HORIZ. TOP COURSE
#4 VERTICAL @ 32" O.C.
#4 VERTICAL BAR TO RUN
CONT. TO BOTTOM OF

FOOTING

ON CENTER
6" CMU WALL
#4 HORIZ. @ 32" O.C.
#4 VERTICAL @ 16" O.C.

CONT. TO BOTTOM OF
FOOTING, TIE TO HORIZ.

EXTEND 24" MIN. ABOVE
FTG.
1"
#4 HORIZ.

BOTTOM
COURSE
3" MIN. 3"
2'-3"
PRECAST PILASTER CAP: CLOVIS STONE
MODEL PC 004 (32" X 3-3/4" X 32" - OR
EQUAL). COLOR TO BE MESS BUFF
4" X 8" X 16" SLUG WALL

CAP, COLOR TO MATCH
BOX
6" X 8" X 16" SPLIT FACE

BLOCK COLOR TO BE
BLOCKLITE S-193(R)
PILASTERS TO BE AT WALL ENDS, 24"
SQ. ROUGH PILASTER W/ FAUX STONE
VENEER. EL DORADO 'VENETO' W/

OVER-GROUTED JOINTS

INSTALL WATER-BASED

SILANE/SILOXANE GRAFFITI &

WATER REPELLENT ANTI-GRAFFITI

COATING ON ALL BLOCK WALL

SERVICES
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-12

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

MASONRY BLOCK WALL/FENCE

NOTES:

TYPICAL SECTION

SECTION A-A
8" TYP. EXISTING PIPE

CONCRETE SUPPORT WALL

NEW PIPE

UNDISTURBED SOIL

NEW PIPE

CONCRETE SUPPORT WALL
(5 SACK, SEE NOTE 5)
1'-6" TYP.

EXISTING PIPE

1. THIS STANDARD APPLIES WHEN THE PIPE SEPARATION IS LESS THEN A FOOT.

2. THE SUPPORTING WALL SHALL HAVE A FIRM BEARING ON THE SUBGRADE AND AGAINST THE SIDES OF THE EXCAVATION.

3. THE WALL SHALL BE AT LEAST 6" FREE AND CLEAR OF WATER MAINS OR OTHER CONDUITS OR DUCTS.

4. THE WALL THICKNESS SHALL BE EQUAL TO THE O.D. OF THE PIPE +8".

5. THE EXISTING PIPE SHALL BE ENCASED TO THE SPRINGLINE.

6. VERIFY WITH UTILITY COMPANIES FOR CLEARANCE.

TRENCH
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-13

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

PIPE SUPPORTS ACROSS TRENCHES

NOTES:

SHALLOW PIPE BACKFILL

1. CONCRETE BACKFILL SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR ALL PIPES WITHIN LESS THEN 24" OF COVER AS OR

AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER

2. CONCRETE BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED IN THE TRENCH AGAINST UNDISTURBED SOIL AND SHALL BE PLACED IN A MANNER THAT WILL PREVENT FLOATING OR SHIFTING OF THE PIPE. 24" MIN
6"
TYPE 2 CONCRETE
6"

SEE CITY STD FOR ASPHALT AND

AGGREGATE BASE DEPTH
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-14

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SHALLOW PIPE BACKFILL

1. LOTS SHALL BE GRADED TO DRAIN TO THE STREETS.

2. FINISH FLOOR ELEVATION SHALL BE A MIN. OF 18" FROM FLOWLINE OF CURB AT LOWEST POINT ALONG PROP. FRONTAGE.

3. MAINTAIN POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM DWELLING STRUCTURE, MINIMUM 5' AT 2%.

4. A RETAINING STRUCTURE SHALL BE REQUIRED ALONG ALL SIDE AND BACKYARD PROPERTY LINES WHERE GRADE DIFFERENTIAL EXCEEDS 6", UNLESS APPROVED OTHERWISE BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

5. LANDSCAPING SHALL NOT ALTER LOT DRAINAGE DESIGN.

6. LOT DRAINAGE SHALL FOLLOW THE LATEST EDITION OF THE CBC.

CL OF STREET

CONCRETE

DRIVEWAY

DWELLING
GARAGE
SWALE
SWALE
SWALE (TYP.)

1.0% MIN.

1.0% MIN.

CURB, GUTTER, PARK STRIP
& SIDEWALK

LOT LINE
(TYP.)

DISTANCES TO BE DETERMINED

BY THE CITY OF DINUBA

DIRECTION OF
FLOW (TYP.)

DIRECTION OF

DRAINAGE
(TYP.)

SETBACKS PER

ZONING ORDINANCE
NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-15

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPICAL LOT DRAINAGE WITH

PARK STRIPS SHOWN

NOTE:

1. FOR USE WITHIN ALL PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR PUBLICLY OWNED PROPERTY SA ASSEMBLY TO INCLUDE:

CONTROLLER MODEL AS SPECIFIED
SA ASSEMBLY TO INCLUDE: · OPTIONS AS SPECIFIED
· TERMINAL STRIPS
· TEMPLATE & BOLTS
· 8' COPPER GROUND ROD
· GROUND ROD CLAMP
· 10' OF GROUND WIRE

FRONT VIEW SIDE VIEW
2'
2'
16"
8"
2'
2'
10'
UNITED GREEN TECH 16" TOP ENTRY
SATELLITE ASSEMBLY (SA SERIES) NEMA 3R

RAINPROOF ENCLOSURE (UL LISTED)

SATELLITE
3/4" PVC CONDUIT FOR 120

VAC FROM METERED

POWER SUPPLY
1 1/2" SCH 40 PVC

ELECTRICAL CONDUIT

FOR ANTENNA

PVC CONDUI FOR

CONTROL WIRES, SIZE

AS REQUIRED

FILL VOIDS WITH

CONCRETE
1" PVC CONDUIT

POURED CONCRETE
BASE
1" PVC CONDUIT FOR

FLOW & MOISTURE

SENSING CABLE(S)
5/8" DIA X 8' GROUND
ROD W/ #8 BONDING

WIRE AND CLAMP
1" PHONE OR RADIO

CONDUIT

ANTENNA & CABLE

ASSEMBLY
10' 1 1/2" SCH. 40

GALVANIZED

STEEL POLE (TOP
& BOTTOM

THREADED)

SATELLITE &

ANTENNA CONCRETE

FOUNDATION (ONE

CONTIGUOUS POUR)
1 1/2" SCH.40

GALVANIZED

STEEL NIPPLE
(TOP & BOTTOM

THREADED)
1 1/2"

GALVANIZED

COUPLING
1 1/2" SCH.
40 PVC

ELECTRICAL

SWEEP &

CONDUIT
1 1/2"

GALVANIZED

COUPLING

PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE BY CITY,

INSTALLER MUST PRESENT

MANUFACTURER'S CERTIFICATION

TERMINAL

STRIP FOR
VALVES
POWER

SWITCH/GFI

RECEPTACLE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-16

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SATELLITE ASSEMBLY
(CONTROLLER)

NOTES:

EXTERIOR LOTS

1. ALL CONCRETE FOOTINGS SHALL BE 2500 PSI @
28 DAYS.

2. RETAINING WALL REQUIRE CITY BUILDING PERMIT,
& MEET REQUIREMENTS IF STD. DRAWING M-12

DRAINAGE
1' MIN.
2:1 MAX
SLOPE
90% MIN. COMPACTION

DRAINAGE

DRAINAGE
90% MIN. COMPACTION
L
H
SLOPE
FOR ADDITIONAL BENCHING L=1" MIN.

FOR SLOPE 2:1 OR GREATER, l SHALL

EQUAL OR EXCEED H

RETAINING WALL SHALL BE MASONRY,

DESIGNED BY AN REGISTER CIVIL

ENGINEER FOR SPECIFIC CONDITIONS

PROPERTY LINE
CONCRETE FOOTING (SEE NOTE 1)

RETAINING WALL SHALL BE MASONRY

DESIGNED BY A REGISTERED CIVIL

ENGINEER FOR SPECIFIC CONDITIONS

PROPERTY LINE

ALTERNATE METHOD - ELIMINATE RETAINING WALL
AND GRADE AS SHOWN. WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM

ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER MUST BE SUBMITTED

TO THE THE CITY ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL
2:1 MAX
SLOPE

FOR ADDITIONAL

BENCHING TREAT SAME

AS INTERIOR LOT (B)
90% MIN. COMPACTION
1' MIN.

CONCRETE FOOTING (SEE NOTE 1)

INTERIOR LOTS

INTERIOR LOTS

WITH GRADE DIFFERENCE
LESS THEN 2'

WITH GRADE DIFFERENCE
2' OR GREATER.

WITH GRADE DIFFERENCE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-17

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

LOT LINE GRADING STANDARD

NOTES:

1. INSTALL JENSEN PRE-CAST STANDARD PARKING CURB
OR APPROVED EQUAL.

2. WHEEL STOP SHALL BE INSTALLED AT LOCATION

WHERE WHEELED VEHICLES MAY ROLL INTO
PEDESTRIAN, STRUCTURES, OR HAZARDOUS AREA.

WHEEL STOP LOCATION SHALL NOT CREATE A
BARRIER FOR PEDESTRIANS.

3. WHEEL STOP SHALL BE SECURELY ATTACHED ONTO

AT-GRADE CONCRETE AND AT-GRADE ASPHALT
PAVEMENT WITH #4 BAR ANCHOR PINS EMBEDDED IN
HOLES CAST INTO WHEEL STOPS.
3/4" DIA. HOLE THROUGH EACH END
USE #4 BAR ANCHOR PINS, 14" LONG
4'
8"
TYP.
6' 8"
TYP.

CL
3"
5"
#3 REINFORCING
BAR, TYP.
7"

SECTION A-A
A
A
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL: 01/24/2023

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
M-18

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WHEEL STOP

PARKING LOT

PLAN VIEW

PARKING LOT CROSS-SECTION

INDUSTRIAL PARKING LOT AND

LOADING ZONE CROSS-SECTION

1. A COMPLETE DRAINAGE PLAN AND PARKING STALL LAYOUT SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION.

2. MINIMUM SLOPE SHALL BE 1.5% FOR ASPHALT SURFACE AND 0.25% FOR FLOWLINES.

3. PROVIDE ADEQUATE DRAINAGE THROUGH APPROVED CATCH BASINS AND PIPES TO THE NEAREST STORM DRAIN SYSTEM SURFAC FLOW OVER SIDEWALKS OR LANDSCAPE AREA IS NOT PERMITTED.

4. SURFACE DRAINAGE TO ALLEY MAY BE ALLOWED ONLY BY WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF DINUBA.

5. WEED KILLER SHALL BE APPLIED IN ACCORDANCE WITH MFGRS. RECOMMENDATIONS, TO BASE ROCK PRIOR TO PAVING.

6. THE DESIGN SHALL MAXIMIZE ON-SITE DRAINAGE RETENTION.

7. SURFACE DRAINAGE SHALL BE TO APPROVED LOCATIONS.

8. PAVEMENT STRUCTURAL SECTION SHALL BE DESIGNED BY A REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER BASED UPON THE R-VALUE CALCULATIONS. DETAIL ABOVE ONLY PROVIDE MINIMUM PAVEMENT SECTIONS.

9. PARKING BUMPERS TO BE PLACED SO THAT PARKED CARS WILL NOT ENCROACH ON SIDEWALKS OR PARKWAYS.

NOTES:

PARK STRIP

PARK STRIP

SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER,

AND DRIVEWAYS EXISTING OR
TO BE CONSTRUCTED. SEE
APPLICABLE CITY STD.

FLOW
FLOW

PARK STRIP

PARK STRIP
MIN. 2.5" A.C. MIN. 5" CLASS II AGG. BASE
MIN. 6" COMPACTED NATIVE SOIL
@ 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION
MIN. 3" A.C. MIN. 6" CLASS II AGG. BASE
MIN. 6" COMPACTED NATIVE SOIL
@ 95% RELATIVE COMPACTION
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-1

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

PARKING LOT PAVEMENT

STANDARDS
01/24/2023

1. ASPHALT AND AGGREGATE BASE ARE SHOWN AT MIN. REQUIRED DEPTHS, SUBJECT TO R-VALUE AND TRAFFIC INDEX BASED CALCULATIONS BY A REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER.

2. RECYCLED AGGREGATE BASE IS ALLOWED IF CERTIFIED PER CALTRANS STDS. & APPROVED BY CITY STAFF.

3. PROVIDE A CALTRANS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FROM SUPPLIER FOR ALL MATERIALS.

4. R-VALUE AND PAVEMENT CALCULATIONS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF DINUBA BY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER.

NOTES:

2.0% MIN.

A B

STREET SECTION TABLE

TYPE OF STREET ROW A B
ARTERIAL STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 90' 15' 30'
ARTERIAL STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 108' 15' 39'
MAJOR COLLECTOR STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 90' 15' 30'
MINOR COLLECTOR STREET 72' 10' 26'
LOCAL COLLECTOR STREET 60' 10' 20'
LOCAL STREET 56' 10' 18'

2.0% MIN.

STREET SECTION TABLE

TYPE OF STREET ROW A B
ARTERIAL STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 90' 15' 30'
ARTERIAL STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 108' 15' 39'
MAJOR COLLECTOR STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 90' 15' 30'
MINOR COLLECTOR STREET 72' 10' 26'
LOCAL COLLECTOR STREET 60' 10' 20'
LOCAL STREET 56' 10' 18'
ROW
8" MIN. AGG. BASE (CLASS II)
95% RELATIVE COMPACTION
6" COMPACTED NATIVE SOIL @ 95%
MIN. RELATIVE COMPACTION
A.C. 1/4" MAX. ABOVE
GUTTER LIP 3" MIN. A.C.

PL
ROW
A.C. 1/4" MAX. ABOVE

GUTTER LIP
B A
3" MIN. A.C.
8" MIN. AGG. BASE (CLASS II) 95%

RELATIVE COMPACTION
6" COMPACTED NATIVE SOIL @ 95%
MIN. RELATIVE COMPACTION
PL PL
PL

STREET CROSS-SECTION WITHOUT PLANTER

STREET CROSS-SECTION WITH PLANTER

2.0% MIN.

2.0% MIN.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-2

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

STREET CROSS-SECTION
01/24/2023

1. ASPHALT AND AGGREGATE BASE ARE SHOWN AT MINIMUM REQUIRED DEPTHS, SUBJECT TO R-VALUE BASED CALCULATIONS BY A REGISTERED CIVIL ENGINEER.

2. RECYCLED AGGREGATE BASE IS ALLOWED IF CERTIFIED PER CALTRANS STDS, & APPROVED BY CITY STAFF.

3. PROVIDE A CALTRANS CERTIFIED OF COMPLIANCE FROM SUPPLIER FOR ALL MATERIALS.

4. REFER TO CITY STD. FOR SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER AND MEDIAN CURB.

NOTES:

STREETS WITH MEDIAN WITHOUT PARK STRIP

TYPE OF STREET ROW A B C
MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 126' 15' 39' 9'
MINOR COLLECTOR STREET (2 TRAVEL LANE) 96' 15' 26' 7'

STREETS WITH MEDIAN WITH PARK STRIP

TYPE OF STREET ROW A B C
MAJOR ARTERIAL STREET 126' 15' 39' 9'
MINOR COLLECTOR STREET 96' 15' 26' 7'
ROW
A B C
1/4" ABOVE
GUTTER LIP, MAX.

SLOPE = 1/4"
PER FT. MIN.
6" MIN. COMPACTED SUB-GRADE
@ 95% REL. COMP.
3" MIN. A.C.
8" MIN. AGG. BASE (CLASS II)
PL
ROW
A B C SEE CITY STD.

P-13

2.0% MIN. 2.0% MIN.
6" MIN. COMPACTED SUB-GRADE
@ 95% REL. COMP.
3" MIN. A.C.
8" MIN. AGG. BASE (CLASS II)

STREET CROSS-SECTION WITHOUT PLANTER

STREET CROSS-SECTION WITH PLANTER
PL

2.0% MIN. 2.0% MIN.

PL PL
SEE CITY STD.

P-13
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-3

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

STREET WITH MEDIAN

CROSS-SECTION
01/24/2023

NOTES:

RESIDENTIAL KNUCKLE CUL-DE-SAC

COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL CUL-DE-SAC
R50'
R60'
R50'
150' MINIMUM, 500' MAXIMUM LENGTH
80' MINIMUM, 500' MAXIMUM LENGTH

RESIDENTIAL CUL-DE-SAC
80' MINIMUM, 500' MAXIMUM LENGTH
56'
50'R
60'R
R20'
R20'
20'R
20'R
R20'
R20'
20'R
50'R
60'R
R60'
R50'
R60'
139.04'
148.43' 203°49'49"
CL
PL
PL
CL
20'
30'
10'
60'
28'
18'
10'

75.50'
R50'
R60'
28'
18'
10'
56' 97.98'
R20'
R20'
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
PL
CL
R20'
R50'

1. DESIGN TO PERMIT PARKING IN CUL-DE-SAC CENTERS ARE SUBJECT

TO APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-4

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPICAL COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL

AND RESIDENTIAL CUL-DE-SAC
01/24/2023

NOTES:

VARIES (60' MAX.)
PL PL
*R35' COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
R60'
R50'
VARIES
15'
R60'
R50'
R50'
R40'
R20'
R20'

1. TYPICAL STREET BULB CONNECTION WITH 10' DISTANCE CURB FACE TO RIGHT OF WAY.

PL
PL
*R35'
10' CL 10'
CL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-5

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

STREET KNUCKLE CONNECTIONS
01/24/2023

NON-HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK
NOTES:

1. SCHOOL CROSSWALKS TO BE YELLOW PER THE LATEST EDITION OF THE CA MUTCD (OTHER PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS SHALL BE WHITE).

2. ALL PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND STRIPING SHALL BE THERMOPLASTIC WITH REFLECTIVE GLASS BEADS AND CONFORM TO THE LATEST VERSION OF THE CA MUTCD.

CENTER OF RAMPS 10'
12"

HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK
12" 2'

STRIPES SHALL BY

THERMOPLASTIC
10'
2'

ROADWAY CENTERLINE
(FOR REFERENCE ONLY)
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-6

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

CROSSWALK MARKINGS
01/24/2023

1. STRIPING/MARKINGS SHALL BE THERMOPLASTIC WITH REFLECTIVE GLASS BEADS AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE LATEST EDITION OF THE CA MUTCD.

NOTES:

MEASURING LINE
12" WHITE STOP BAR 11'
8'
8'
2' CLR
4" YELLOW LINE, 50' LONG MIN.

PER THE LATEST VERSION OF

THE CA MUTCD

CL OF STOP SIGN POST
STOP SIGN LOCATION (SEE P-10)

STANDARD STOP BAR MARKING
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-7

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

STOP BAR MARKING AND STOP

SIGNS LOCATION
01/24/2023

1. ATTACH SIGNS, SLEEVE AND ANCHOR TO POST WITH MULTI-GRIP DRIVE RIVETS ("UNISTRUT" TL-3806, OR APPROVED EQUAL).

2. POST, ANCHOR, SLEEVE AND MOUNTING HARDWARE SHALL BE GALVANIZED "UNISTRUT" TELSPAR, OR APPROVED EQUAL, WITH 7/16" HOLE ON 1" CENTERS ON ALL FOUR (4) SIDES.

3. INSTALL SIGNS AND POST IN LOCATION APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

4. ALL SIGNS ARE TO COMPLY WITH STATE STANDARDS, CONSTRUCTED OF .080 GAUGE ALUMINUM, STREET NAME SIGNS SHALL BE COVERED WITH 4" TYPE C HIGH INTENSITY SILVER LETTERS.

5. STREET SIGN HARDWARE: REFER TO TABLE BELOW, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

6. SAWCUT REQUIRED IF SIGN INSTALLED AFTER SIDEWALK IS POURED.

7. STOP SIGNS SHALL HAVE HIGH INTENSITY PRIZMATIC SHEETING, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

8. ALL SIGNS LOCATED IN SIDEWALK BY CITY APPROVAL ONLY.

9. STREET NAME SIGN SHALL BE HIGH INTENSITY PRIZMATIC SIGNS, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

MANUFACTURER BLADE LENGTH

BLADE HARDWARE STYLE
ZUMAR

MANUFACTURING
24"
606F
30" OR 36"
808F
COURT.........CT
STREET........ST
AVENUE.......AVE
PLACE..........PL
BOULEVARD..BLVD
CIRCLE......CR
DRIVE........DR
ROAD........RD
LANE........LN
INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS AND MATERIALS:

APPROVED ABBREVIATIONS
48" MIN.

SEE CITY STD. P-9
24"

STREET SIGN HARDWARE TABLE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-8

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
STREET SIGN STANDARD (1 OF 2)
01/24/2023

PRIOR APPROVAL NEEDED FROM PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DETACH SIDEWALK INSTALLATION DETAIL4'-0" SIDEWALK INSTALLATION DETAIL POST INSTALLATION DETAIL 5' - 0' SIDEWALK INSTALLATION DETAIL 2" MIN.
3" MAX.
2'-6"
2" 8" DIA.
2-1/4" STIFFENER

SLEEVE,

WRAPPED

INSTALL ACCORDING
TO CITY STD.
18" MIN.
7' MIN. BOTTOM

OF SIGN

INSTALL ACCORDING
TO CITY STD.
7' MIN. BOTTOM

OF SIGN
24"
7' MIN. BOTTOM

OF SIGN
5'
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-9

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
STREET SIGN INSTALLATION (2 OF 2)
01/24/2023

REQUIRED AT ALL STREET INTERSECTIONS,

STREET OFF-SETS, CUL-DE,SACS AND STREET
RADIUS POINTS.

NOTES:

S U R V E Y

M O N U M E N T
24"
12"
1/2" PATTERN LETTERS

CONCRETE COLLAR
(CLASS A, 6 SACK MIN.)

STREET SURFACE
2" BRONZE SURVEY

MARKER STAMPED W/
R.C.E. OR L.S. NO.

MANUFACTURER: "PHOENIX IRON WORKS",
CALIFORNIA PATTERN MODEL NO. P-2001, OR
APPROVED EQUAL, C.I. FRAME AND COVER

CUT EDGE

ROUND PRIOR

TO REPAVING

CONCRETE COLLAR
(CLASS A, 6 SACK MIN.)

CEMENT MORTAR
2" I.D. X 24" LONG GALV. PIPE
A A
PLAN

SECTION A-A
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-10

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPE-A STREET INTERSECTION AND

CURVE RADIUS SURVEY MONUMENT
01/24/2023

NOTES:
2"X12"
2"X12"

LEVEL LINE

1. BARRICADES SHALL BE 2 FEET LESS THAN FULL WIDTH OF PAVEMENT OR TRAVELED WAY, OR AS SHOWN ON PROJECT PLANS.

2. APPLY TWO COATS OF EXTERIOR FLAT WHITE PAINT TO ALL EXPOSED WOOD MEMBERS.

3. ANY DEVIATION FROM THE ABOVE FOR TEMPORARY INSTALLATIONS, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE CITY ENGINEER.

4. UPRIGHT POSTS SHALL BE REDWOOD OR PRESSURE-TREATED DOUGLAS FIR.

5. ALTERNATE HORIZONTAL LAPS WHERE POSSIBLE.

6. STATE OF CALIFORNIA OM4-1, RED REFLECTORIZED SIGN WITH 9 RED REFLECTORS AT DEAD END STREETS.

7. MUTCD SIGN OM1-1, YELLOW REFLECTORIZED SIGN WITH 9 YELLOW REFLECTORS AND W1-6 OR W1-7 AT "T" OR "L" INTERSECTIONS.

8. REFLECTORIZED SIGNS ARE TO BE INSTALLED AT A HEIGHT AND POSITION. 9' MAX. C.C. 9' MAX. C.C.

TYPE "OM"
MARKER (TYP.)
20 D NAILS
6"
6" 6'

CURB AND
GUTTER

1.5'
2'
6" X 6" REDWOOD OR
TREATED POSTS (TYP.)
3 1/4" DIAMETER REFLECTORS, RED TO
AGREE WITH TYPE "OM" MARKER. SPACE

APPROXIMATE AS SHOWN
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-11

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TIMBER BARRICADE
01/24/2023

NOTES:

1. SAWCUT REQUIRED IF SIGN INSTALLED AFTER SIDEWALK IS POURED.

2. WHEN INSTALLED IN SIDEWALK, POLES WILL BE SET PRIOR TO SIDEWALK POUR.

3. SAME PIPE FOR STOP SIGN AND STREET NAME SIGN MAY BE UTILIZED WHERE APPROVED.

SIDEWALK
LOCATION AT INTERSECTION LOCATION IN 4 FT. MONOLITHIC SIDEWALK

LOCATION IN FULL WIDTH SIDEWALK LOCATION IN PLANTING STRIP 84" OR 96"
WITH

STOP SIGN
4' SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK
18"

PLANTING AREA
24"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-12

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

STREET NAME SIGN LOCATION
01/24/2023

SECTION A-A
PLAN

3.5" THICK STAMPED CONCRETE

WITH HERRINGBONE BRICK
90% RELATIVE COMPACTION

OF NATIVE SOIL
NOTES:

1. CONCRETE STAMPED SHALL BE A HERRINGBONE BRICK PATTERN AND BE DAVIS IN COLOR BRICK RED.

2. LIQUID RELEASE AGENT SHALL BE USED.

3. CURE AND SEAL PRODUCT SHALL BE APPLIED IN ACCORDANCE TO THE MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

A A
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
P-13

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

DECORATIVE STAMPED

CONCRETE MEDIAN
01/24/2023

NOTES:

TOP

INLET/OUTLET
54"

SIDEWALK
2' TO 4'

FLOWLINE
GUTTER
CURB

EXPANSION
JOINT
#4 BARS @ 6" O.C.

EACH WAY
36" 6" FOR
SIDE &
BOTTOM
12" MIN. 24"
3" R
24"
24"
(MIN.)
4"
SEE NOTE 8
6"
6" FOR

SIDE AND
BOTTOM
54"
42"
3/4" BAR WELDED
3"
2" X 3" CONST. JOINT FOR
NEW CONST. IS NOT REQ'D.

WHEN GUTTER EXISTS
3" X 3" ANGLE IRON

GALVANIZED THROAT

FORM AND FRAME

SECTION A-A
OUTLET SEE NOTE 2

SECTION B-B FRONT

INLET/OUTLET
(CUTTING PLANE IS AT FLOWLINE)

SECTION B-B
INLET

DEEP JOINT
#4 BAR
9"

1. AN OUTLET STRUCTURE THROAT SHALL BE FORMED WITH 6" FROM FLOWLINE TO TOP OF CURB.

2. WHEN EMPLOYED AS OUTLET, ELIMINATE THE 1/2" DIA. ROD AND PLACE GALV. FRAME AND GRATE 6" BELOW TOP OF CURB.

3. THE INLET OR OUTLET MAY BE MODIFIED SLIGHTLY TO MATCH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY.

4. STRUCTURE SHALL BE CLASS "A" CONCRETE (6 SACK MINIMUM). CURB, GUTTER AND LOCAL DEPRESSIONS SHALL BE CLASS "A" CONCRETE (5 SACK MINIMUM).

5. CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE RECONSTRUCTED ON EACH SIDE OF BOX AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS.

6. THE FLOOR OF THE INLET SHALL SLOPE FROM ALL WALLS TO THE LAT. FLOWLINE AND BE GIVEN A STEEL TROWELED FINISH.

7. AT THE CONTACT POINT OF THE STRUCTURE WALL AND THE LATERAL, A SMOOTH 3" RADIUS CURVE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED.

8. IF THE STRUCTURE IS CONSTRUCTED IN A TWO-STAGE POUR, PROVIDE A ROUGHENED CONSTRUCTION JOINT AND PLACE ON #4 REBAR, 12" LONG, IN EACH OF THE FOUR WALLS, AS SHOWN.

9. APPROVAL EQUAL: "CHRISTY" U36 PRE-CAST CONCRETE CATCH BASIN WITH U37 (2 X 4) PRE-CAST CONCRETE CURB INLET.

10. MAXIMUM GUTTER SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,300'.

B B
A
A
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-1

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPE 'A' CATCH BASIN
42" CURB INLET AND 42" BASIN
01/24/2023

A
A

1. AN OUTLET STRUCTURE THROAT SHALL BE
FORMED 6" FROM FLOWLINE TO TOP OF CURB.

2. THE INLET/OUTLET MAY BE MODIFIED SLIGHTLY TO

MATCH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, AS DIRECTED
BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

3. STRUCTURE SHALL BE CLASS "A" CONCRETE (6
SACK MINIMUM). CURB, GUTTER AND LOCAL
DEPRESSIONS SHALL BE CLASS "A" CONCRETE.

4. REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE #4 DEFORMED
BARS. INSTALL (2) #4 @ 24" O.C. 2" FROM AND
ADJACENT TO COVER FOR ADDITIONAL STRENGTH.

5. SPECIAL DESIGN MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE CITY

ENGINEER WHEN DEPTH OF CATCH BASIN
EXCEEDS 6 FEET.

6. APPROVED EQUAL: "CHRISTY" U52 PRE-CAST

CONCRETE CATCH BASIN MANHOLE LID AND
FRAME. (SEE CITY STD. SS-9)

7. MAXIMUM GUTTER RUN SHALL NOT EXCEED 1,300'.

NOTES:

TOP

INLET/OUTLET
60"
#4 BAR
DEEP
JOINT
GUTTER
2' TO 4'
CURB

EXPANSION
JOINT
#4 BARS @ 6" O.C.

EACH WAY
3/4"

BAR WELDED
3" X 3" ANGLE IRON

GALVANIZED THROAT

FORM AND FRAME

FLOWLINE
B B
48"
3"
60"

MANHOLE FRAME AND

COVER, NON-SKID
4-1/2"
6"
SEE NOTE 8
6" FOR SIDE

AND BOTTOM
48"
3" R
36"
12" MIN.

VARIES
42"
MIN.

SECTION B-B FRONT

INLET/OUTLET
(CUTTING PLANE IS AT FLOWLINE

SECTION A-A

INLET/OUTLET

SIDEWALK
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-2

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
TYPE 'B' CATCH BASIN 48" CURB
INLET AND 48X36" BASIN
01/24/2023

A A
GUTTER
CLASS "A"

CONCRETE
(6 SACK MIN.)
#4 BARS @ 6" O.C.

EACH WAY
42"
36" MIN. 30"
WELD #4

REBAR TO
FRAME

FACE OF
CURB

EXPANSION
JOINT
60"

EXPANSION JOINT
42"-84"
1/4" SLOPE

MANHOLE FRAME

AND COVER,

NON-SKID

GALVANIZED THROAT

FORM AND FRAME
CLASS "A" CONCRETE
(6 SACK MIN.)
FLOW
24"
MIN.
4"
TOP

SECTION A-A

1. BY CITY STAFF APPROVAL ONLY.

2. MAXIMUM GUTTER RUN NOT TO EXCEED 1,300'.

NOTES:
6" MIN.
24" DIA. I.D. PIPE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-3

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
TYPE 'C' CATCH BASIN 24"

DIAMETER INLET DRAIN PIPE
01/24/2023

A A 24" DIA. I.D. PIPE
TOP
42" DIA.
27" DIA. 7-1/2"
6" FOR SIDE
AND BOTTOM 24"
MIN.
9"
12" MIN.
60" TO 84"

1. BY CITY STAFF APPROVAL ONLY.

NOTES:
25-3/8" DIA. 3/4"
3/4"
3/4"
3" 24" DIA.
3/4"
4"
3/4"

SECTION A-A

FRAME AND COVER

SIDE-VIEW SECTION
1-1/2"
7-1/2" MIN. CONC. COLLAR,
CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIN.)
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-4

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPE 'D' CATCH BASIN

STANDARD FLAT GRATE
01/24/2023

B B

SECTION B-B

1. THE INLET MAY BE MODIFIED SLIGHTLY TO MATCH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER.

2. STRUCTURE SHALL BE CLASS "A" CONCRETE (6 SACK MIN.). EXPOSED SURFACES SHALL BE FINISHED AS PER CURB SPECIFICATIONS.

3. COST OF FRAME, THROAT FORM, AND CURB AND GUTTER WINGS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN PRICE OF INLET.

4. ADDITIONAL CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OR

RECONSTRUCTED ON EACH SIDE OF BOX AS INDICATED ON THE PLANS AND COST THEREOF SHALL BE INCLUDED IN PRICE OF INLET.

5. FLOOR OF THE INLET SHALL SLOPE FROM ALL WALLS TO THE LATERAL LINE AND SHALL BE GIVEN A STEEL TROWELED FINISH.

6. AT THE CONTACT POINT BETWEEN THE LATERAL LINE AND THE INLET WALL A SMOOTH 3" RADIUS CURVE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED.

7. IN INLET IS CONSTRUCTED IN A TWO STAGE POUR, PROVIDE A ROUGHENED CONSTRUCTION JOINT AND PLACE ONE #4 BAR 12" LONG IN EACH OF THE FOUR WALLS, AS SHOWN.

8. PIPE MINIMUM DEPTH MAY BE ADJUSTED BY THE DESIGNER OR ENGINEER.

MAY REQUIRE PIPE CLASS CHANGE OR SPECIAL BACKFILL.

NOTES:

PLAN VIEW
A
A

SECTION A-A
6"
6"
2" X 3" COST. JOINT FOR NEW

CONSTRUCTION, NOT REQUIRED

WHEN GUTTER EXISTS
CL
L
24" 24" 24" 24"

THROAT FORM
(SEE CITY STD. SD-6)
9"
DEPTH
VARIES
6"
4"
8'
9'
6" 6"
10"
CL
4'-6" 4-6"
5-13
16" 3-1316" 3-1316" 5-1316"
5-13
16"
6"
2' GUTTER
4' TYP.

UNLESS OTHERWISE

SPECIFIED
4' TYP.

UNLESS OTHERWISE

SPECIFIED
6"
3/4" DIA. HOLE
3/8" DIAMOND PLATE
4" 4"
2' 3'-6"
3" 3"
9"
3' MIN.
(SEE NOTE 8)
SEE
NOTE 7
12"
6"
6"

LATERAL
LINE
FLOW
R3"
4'
6" 2' 6"

SLOPE TO

LATERAL LINE
28" X 46" X 3/8" DIAMOND
PLATE COVER (2)
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-5

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

DOUBLE TYPE 'D' INLET
(SHEET 1 OF 2)
01/24/2023

2-3/4"
B B

SECTION A-A

1. ALL EXPOSED METAL PARTS SHALL

BE PAINTED OR DIPPED WITH A

BLACK ASPHALTUM PAINT OR

OTHER COATING APPROVED BY
THE ENGINEER.

2. INSTALL 2 FRAMES AFTER INLET IS
CONSTRUCTED. TOP SURFACE TO
BE FLUSH WITH INLET FRAME.

WELD TO INLET FRAME ON
UNDERNEATH SIDE.

NOTES:
1 3
1 48 4"
6"
3/8" DIAMOND PLATE
28" X 46" DIAMOND PLATE COVER
1/4" (TYP.)
3/16" ALL AROUND
3/8" X 1" STEEL BAR
TYP.
1/4" 2"-12"
3/16"
9"
24"
1/4" HOLE 3

EACH SIDE
2 - ANCHORS 6" X 1/2"

ON SIDES & BACK
1/8" PLATE THROAT

SIDEPLATE (SEE DETAIL)
1/4" 2"-12"
R1/2"
9"
3-1/8"
6-3/8"

TACKWELD SIDEPLATE ALL AROUND
1/4"
1/4" (TYP.)
TANGENT LINE FOR 4"

RADIUS BEND OF

SIDEPLATE
3/4" DIA. SUPPORT
BAR SMOOTH (TYP.)
5-1/2"
1"
1"
1 3
1"
(TYP.)
1/8" STEEL PLATE
1/4" 2"-12"
3" X 3" X 1/4"
3/8" DIAMOND PLATE
9'
2"
4" 24" 24" 24" 24" 4"
2"
SUPPORT BAR 3/4" DIA. SMOOTH (TYP.)
CONSTRUCT 4" RADIUS

BEND IN PLATE
5"
3-1/8"
1-7/8"
3-3/4"
8-3/16"
1/8" STEEL
PLATE
9-1/8"
11-1/2"
5-1/2"
A
A
ANCHOR
6" X 1/2"
ANCHOR
24"
42"
14"
3" X 3" X 1/4" 3/8" DIAMOND PLATE
3-13/16" 3-13/16"
2" X 2" X 1/4" FRAME
INSTALL SECURITY CHAIN (SEE NOTE 2)

PER TYPE 'D' INLET
2-3/16" 2-3/16"
42"
14"
20"
19"
9-1/2"
(TYP.)

SECTION B-B
PLAN

THROAT SIDEPLATE
FRONT
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-6

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

DOUBLE TYPE 'D' INLET
(SHEET 2 OF 2)
01/24/2023

1. 24" CONCRETE RISER PIPE SHALL
BE ASTM C-118 OR BETTER.

2. BREAK OUT OPENING IN RISER PIPE
TO FIT LATERAL. CUT LATERAL TO
FIT CURVATURE OF RISER. FILL
JOINT SPACE WITH MORTAR.

3. FLOOR OF INLET SHALL SLOPE AS

SHOWN, WITH STEEL TROWEL
FINISH.

4. COST OF A.C. GUTTER PAN, DIKES,

OBJECT MARKER, AND GRADING

AROUND INLET TO BE INCLUDED IN
THE INLET PRICE.

5. PIPE MIN. DEPTH MAY BE

ADJUSTED BY THE DESIGNER OR
ENGINEER. MAY REQUIRE PIPE

CLASS CHANGE OR SPECIAL
BACKFILL.

6. CURB SHALL BE OF SUFFICIENT

LENGTH TO TRANSITION TO MATIVE
GRADE. 2 FT. MIN.

NOTES:

PLAN

GRADE TO DRAIN
SLOPE 5:1 MAX.

GRADE TO DRAIN
SLOPE 5:1 MAX.
2" A.C. GUTTER PAN IN FRONT

OF INLET TO DIRECT FLOW,

AS DIRECTED BY ENGINEER

CONCRETE CURB OR
CALTRANS A87B TYPE 'F'
A.C. DIKE, MODIFY AS

NECESSARY
6" X 12" CLASS "A"

CONCRETE COLLAR
A A
B
B
4'
CALTRANS A73A TYPE
L-1 OBJECT MARKER.

FACE TRAFFIC DIRECTION

LATERAL
LINE

GRADE AS NECESSARY
TO FLOW (TYP.)

CATCH BASIN FRAME

AND LID (SEE DETAIL)
4'
(SEE NOTE 6)
2"
23-1/2"
10" 8"
6" 3' MIN.
(SEE NOTE7)
12"
2' TYPE L-1 OBJECT
MARKER
CLASS "A"

CONCRETE BASE
1-1/8"
18-1/2"
10"
19-1/2"
28-3/4"
10"
19-1/2"
29"

GRADE AS NECESSARY
TO FLOW (TYP.)
3' MIN.
(SEE NOTE 5)
2"
GROUT 6" ALL
AROUND
24" DIA. PIPE
R3"
4"
6" (TYP.)
6" (TYP.)

SECTION A-A

SECTION B-B LID DETAIL
FRONT
SIDE
PLAN
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-7

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPE 'E' INLET - TEMPORARY WITH

CURB FACE OPENING
01/24/2023

NOTES:

SECTION B-B

1. DIMENSIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.

V = SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

T = 6" IF V IS 4' OR LESS
T = 8" IF V IS LESS THAN 8' AND MORE THAN 4'
T = 10" IF V IS 8' OR MORE.

D = 24" UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.

2. STRUCTURAL CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS "A" P.C.C. (6 SACK).

3. THE REINFORCING STEEL SHALL BE NUMBER 4 DEFORMED BARS.

CLEARANCE SHALL BE 1-1/2" FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE SLAB.

4. THE SURFACE OF ALL EXPOSED CONCRETE SHALL CONFORM TO

SLOPE, GRADE, COLOR, FINISH, AND SCORING IN THE EXISTING OR PROPOSED CURB AND WALK ADJACENT TO THE INLET. THE
INLET FLOOR SHALL BE GIVEN A TIGHT WOOD FLOAT FINISH.

CURVATURE OF THE LIP AND SIDEWALLS AT THE GUTTER
OPENING SHALL NOT BE MADE BY PLASTERING. THE OUTLET PIPE

SHALL BE TRIMMED TO FINAL SHAPE AND LENGTH BEFORE THE
CONCRETE IS POURED.

STEPS:

1. 3/4" PLAIN ROUND GALVANIZED STEEL STEPS SHALL BE
INSTALLED 16" APART WHEN V EXCEEDS 4'-6". THE TOP STEP
SHALL BE 6" BELOW THE TOP SURFACE AND SHALL BE 2-1/2"
CLEAR FROM THE WALL. ALL OTHER STEPS SHALL BE 4"
CLEAR FROM THE WALL. ONLY ONE STEP 12" FROM BOTTOM
SHALL BE INSTALLED IF V IS 4'-6" OR LESS. ALL STEPS SHALL BE ANCHORED NOT LESS THAN 4" INTO THE WALL OF THE
INLET.

2. CURB, GUTTER, AND LOCAL DEPRESSIONS SHALL BE CLASS
"A" OR CLASS "B" CONCRETE.

3. CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OR

RECONSTRUCTED ON EACH SIDE OF THE BOX AS INDICATED

ON THE PLANS, AND COST THEREOF SHALL BE INCLUDED IN
PRICE OF INLET.

4. IF INLET IS CONSTRUCTED IN A TWO STAGE POUR, PROVIDE A ROUGHENED CONSTRUCTION JOINT AND PLACE 1 - #4 BAR
12" LONG IN EACH OF THE FOUR WALLS. AS SHOWN.

B B
A
A
FLOW 6"
6"
2 - #4 BARS
AT 2" O.C.

T 7' T

INLET OPENING DETAIL
(SEE CITY STD. SD-9) 10"
6"
6"
T 7' T
6"
D
#4 BARS @
6" O.C. EACH
WAY
2 - #4 BARS
@ 2" O.C.

MANHOLE FRAME

AND COVER (SEE
CITY STD. SD-10)

FLOW FLOW
6' UNLESS

OTHERWISE SPECIFIED
6" 6"
3' UNLESS

OTHERWISE

SPECIFIED
24"
GUTTER
6" CURB
PLAN
16"
16"
16"
6"

LATERAL
LINE

SECTION A-A
R1/4" 1-1/2" CLR. 4-1/2" R1/4"
10"
ANCHOR
V
2'
MIN.
6"
6"
R3"
SLOPE TO LAT. LINE
T 38" T
6"
6"
4" CL
2-1/2" CL
SEE NOTE 5
SEE NOTE 8
4" CL
2" X 3" CONSTRUCTION JOINT FOR NEW
CONSTRUCTION. NOT REQUIRED WHEN
GUTTER EXISTS.

CL
CL
CL
CL
FLOW
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-8

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
TYPE 'E' & 'G' 7' CURB INLET
01/24/2023

NOTE:

FACE PLATE 5/16" X 10" ROLLED PLATE (ASTM A36) FORMED AS SHOWN.

FACE PLATE ANCHORAGE 1/2" Ø STEEL ANCHOR 42" O.C. MAX.

PLACED AS SHOWN.

PROTECTION BAR PLAIN ROUND STEEL BAR 1" DIA. SHALL BE
INSTALLED, BAR SHALL BE EMBEDDED 5 INCHES AT EACH END.

SUPPORT BAR 1" INCH DIA. X 20" LONG WITH SQ. HEAD AND
HEX. NUTS, BEND AS SHOWN AND PLACE AT CENTER OF INLET
OPENING.
1 2
3 4
2-1/2"
1"
1"
1-1/4"
8"
24°"
1/2" Ø STIRRUP WELD AS SHOWN
R1/4"
R3"
T
24°'
3 2
2-3/4"
3-3/8"
3-3/4"
CL BAR

GUTTER FLOWLINE

BATTER TO CONFORM WITH ADJOINING CURB
66°"
5/8"
R1/4"
R1/4"
R11/16"
7-1/8"
5-3/8"
3"
4-1/2" 5/16"
CL R=1 1/2" MIN.

R1/4"
10"
2 1
3 4

ADJUSTING NUTS TO BE TIGHTENED AND

SECURED IN PLACE WHEN STEEL PLATE
ANGLE IS PROPERLY POSITIONED.
1-1/8" HOLE IN PLATE

CUT REINFORCING STEEL

TO CLEAR FACE PLATE

1. ALL EXPOSED METAL PARTS SHALL BE GALVANIZED.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-9

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TYPE 'E' & 'G' INLET

OPENING DETAIL
01/24/2023

TOP OF MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER
TOTAL WT. = 130 LBS.
11-13/16" RAD. OF COVER
1/2"
1/8"
1/2"
1-1/2"
1/2" 1/4"
2"
1/2" 3/4"
1/8"
1/8"
5/8"
7/8"
3/16"
1/8" 1/16"
3/4"
1/4"
22" DIA.

CLEAR

OPENING

1. FRAME AND COVER SHALL BE GRAY CAST
IRON CONFORMING TO THE LATEST A.S.T.M.

STANDARD A 48, CLASS 30 OR BETTER
GALVANIZE PER A.S.T.M. A385.

NOTE:

BOTTOM OF MANHOLE COVER

CROSS SECTION THRU FRAME AND COVERCROSS SECTION THRU RIM AT MID RADIUS

CROSS SECTION THRU RIM
R1/8"
R1/16"
R1/8"
2"
22" DIA. CLEAR OPENING
3/4"
23-5/8" OUTSIDE DIA. OF COVER
7/8"
2" X 1"

DIAMOND
MAT, 1/8"
DEEP
3/4" DIA.

PICK HOLE
3"
1"

OUTLINE WHERE

RIBS JOINS RIM

SAME ANGLE

THROUGHOUT
3/8"
2"
3/8" 3/4"

MACHINED

SURFACES
(SEE NOTE 1)
1/2"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-10

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER FOR

TYPE 'E' & 'G' INLET
01/24/2023

1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIN.).

2. CONCRETE CONE AND GRADE RINGS SHALL BE PRECAST REINFORCED AS PER ASTM C-478.

3. GROUT AND BAND ALL PIPE JOINTS. "KENT" SEAL NO. 2 OR APPROVED EQUAL SHALL BE APPLIED BETWEEN EACH JOINT.

4. GROUT MIXTURE SHALL BE 1:2 CEMENT TO SAND.

5. WHERE MANHOLES ARE NOT IN STREETS OR TRAVEL WAYS, PLACE TOP 12" ABOVE EXISTING GROUND WITH A 24" CONCRETE RING UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

6. IF LARGEST PIPE SIZE IS 24" OR LARGER, A 72" DIAMETER MANHOLE IS REQUIRED.

7. WHEN ADJUSTING A MANHOLE, REFER TO CITY STD. SS-9.

8. NO FLOODING OR JETTING COMPACTION.

9. MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN MANHOLES SHALL BE 400'.

10. STORM DRAIN LATERALS 6" AND LARGER CONNECTED TO A MAIN REQUIRE A STORM DRAIN MANHOLE.

NOTES:

SD

LATERAL
2" A.C. CAP
CLASS "A"
CONCRETE (6
SACK MIN.)
10"
24" TO 48" PRECAST
CONE
POURED-IN-PLACE CLASS "A"

CONCRETE BASE OR STANDARD
C-478 CONCRETE PIPE SECTION

PROVIDE KEYED BASE FOR

PRECAST RISER SECTION
VARIES
36"
9" MIN.
12" MAX. 24"

MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER
INSTALLATION (SEE CITY STD. SS-9)
9" MIN.

SD

LATERAL
48" TO 72" 5" TO 7"

THICKNESS
6" MIN.
4"
6' MIN.
12" SUBGRADE
COMPACTED TO 95% OR
3/4" CRUSHED ROCK
48"

ROUND CONCRETE COLLAR
RUBBER GASKGET AROUND PVC;

KENT-SEAL ON ADS
8" MIN.

INVERT AT SD

MAIN SPRINGLINE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-11

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

STORM DRAIN MANHOLE
01/24/2023

CATCH
BASIN NO.

I.D.

CATCH
BASIN

FRAME AND
GRATE NO.

APPROX.

WEIGHT

PER SET
U21 2'X2' 71W422 165
U23 2'X2' 71W422 165
U32 2'X3' 71W432 195
U36 2'X4' 71C442 270
U43 3'X3' 71C452 295
U52 3'X4' 71C462 390 2PC
77% OPEN FLOW AREA
CATCH
BASIN NO.

I.D.

CATCH
BASIN

FRAME AND
GRATE NO.

APPROX.

WEIGHT

PER SET
U21 2'X2' 71C422 230
U23 2'X2' 71C422 230
U32 2'X3' 71C432 180
41% OPEN FLOW AREA
CATCH
BASIN NO.

I.D.

CATCH
BASIN

FRAME AND
GRATE NO.

APPROX.

WEIGHT

PER SET
U21 2'X2' 71C420 125
U23 2'X2' 71C420 125
U32 2'X3' 71C430 180
48% OPEN FLOW AREA

WELDED STEEL GRATES WITH CROSS BARS

HEAVY DUTY CAST IRON

LIGHT DUTY CAST IRON

1. ALL GRATES WITHIN AN ADA DEDICATED PATH OF

TRAVEL SHOULD BE AN ADA APPROVED GRATE PER THE
LATEST EDITION OF THE CBC.

NOTE:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-12

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

CATCH BASIN GRATE
01/24/2023

23"

1. STANDARD GRADE RINGS ARE
AVAILABLE IN 6" INCREMENTS
UP TO 4' HIGH.

2. CUSTOMER SPECIFIED TOP

EDGE CHOICES CAST INTO

CATCH BASIN OR GRADE RINGS
(SEE CITY STD. SD-14).

NOTES:

KNOCK
OUT
B

PER JOB SPECIFICATION
C
C
A
35-1/2"
30-1/2"
27-1/2"
23-1/2"
19-1/2"
15-1/2" KNOCK OUT

TO DESIRED

PIPE SIZE
KNOCK
OUT
22-1/2"
19"
15-1/2"
12"

PRODUCT
NUMBER

DIMENSIONS
A B C
U21 2' 2' 4'
U23 2' 2' 6'
U32 2' 3' 6'
U36 2' 4' 5'
U43 3' 3' 6'
U52 3' 4' 6'

WITH OR
WITHOUT 2"

WEEP HOLES
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-13

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
"CHRISTY" U SERIES CATCH BASINS
01/24/2023

END SIDE

CAST-IN GALVANIZED FRAME FOR
GRATES 1-1/2" X 1-1/2" ANGLE IRON WITH

ANCHOR BOLTS

GROOVED TO RECEIVED TONGUE OF
GRADE RINGS, CURB INLETS, ETC.

CAST-IN GALVANIZED FRAME FOR
STATE TYPE GRATES 4"X3"X1/4" ANGLE

IRON ENDS WITH ANCHOR BOLTS
3-1/2"X1/4" SIDE BARS

CAST-IN GALVANIZED FRAME FOR
1/4" STEEL LIDS WITH BOLT

DOWN PROVISIONS
6" EXPOSED REBAR TO ALLOW JOB

SITE POURING OF SPECIAL CURB
SHAPES AT GRADE LEVEL, ETC.

RECESSED FOR 1/4" STEEL LIDS

WITH BOLT DOWN PROVISIONS

1. OPENINGS, LOCATIONS AND SIZES TO JOB SPECIFICATIONS.

2. WITH OR WITHOUT BOTTOM.

3. PROGRESSIVE WEBBED KNOCK-OUTS PROVIDE MAXIMUM

FLEXIBILITY PERMITTING PIPE OF ANY SIZE TO BE NEATLY
AND QUICKLY GROUTED IN AT JOB SITE.

4. STANDARD TONGUE AND GROOVE GRADE RINGS ARE
AVAILABLE IN 6" INCREMENTS UP TO 4' HIGH.

5. ALL REINFORCING STEEL MEETS ASTM SPECIFICATIONS
AS REQUIRED.

6. CITY APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR APPLICATION.

NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-14

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TOP EDGE CHOICES FOR CATCH

BASIN AND/OR GRATE RING
01/24/2023

NOTES: PLAN

CAGE POST OVER PIPE
SHALL BE MOUNTED ON 6"
X 6" X 1/4" STEEL PLATE.

WELD POST TO PLATE.

BOLT PLATE TO CONCRETE.

A C

FENCE POST

LOCATIONS
4"
4"
A
#4 BARS
SECTION A-A 12"
MIN.
9"
MIN.

RUBBER 'O' RINGS

REQUIRED FOR

SMOOTH PIPES
9"
9" VARIES
30"
TO
42"
6" 12"
3" RADIUS
R.C.P.CLASS II
#4 BARS
3"
4"
A
B C
4"

FOR OUTFALL CAGE

STRUCTURE, SEE FENCE

CAGE FOR OUTFALL

STRUCTURE TYPE A
STANDARD DRAWING.

1. FOR DIMENSIONS SEE DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL
STRUCTURE TYPE A STANDARD DRAWING.

A A
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-15

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

OUTFALL STRUCTURE TYPE A
01/24/2023

NOTES: PLAN

1. LOCKING DEVICE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY
ENGINEER.

2. FOR DIMENSIONS, SEE DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL
STRUCTURE TYPE A STANDARD DRAWING.

LOCKING DEVICE
1/4" X 3/4"

STRETCHER BARS
FRAME 1.66" O.D.

AT 2.27 LBS./FT.
1/8" X 3/4" STRETCHER
BAR BANDS AT 12"

CENTERS
POSTS 2.875" O.D.

AT 5.79 LBS./FT.

FRAME 1.66"' O.D.

AT 2.27 LBS./FT.

INTERMEDIATE

SUPPORT SHALL BE

CENTERED BETWEEN

CORNER POST
POCKET 3" DIA. GROUT
2" MESH X 9 GAUGE

CHAIN LINK FABRIC
12"
30" MIN.
3'-6"
6"
6"
A MINUS 2'
A
A MINUS 2'

LOCKING
DEVICE
A
MINUS
2'
A
HINGE TYP.

TURNBUCKLE
TYP.
3/8" TRUSS RODS
TYP.
2" MESH X 9 GAUGE

CHAIN LINK FABRIC
FRAME 1.66" O.D.

AT 2.27 LBS./FT.
1/4" X 3/4"

STRETCHER BARS
1/8" X 3/4"

STRETCHER

BAR BANDS AT
12" CENTERS

PROFILE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-16

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

FENCE CAGE FOR OUTFALL

STRUCTURE TYPE A
01/24/2023

TYPE
MAX.

PIPE
SIZE
DESIGN
(C.F.S.) A B C
A 30" 12-16 8'-0" 42" 3 1/2"
A 36" 16-21 9'-0" 48" 4"
A 42" 21-29 10'-0" 54" 4 1/2"

DESIGN TABLE
TYPE A

1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3 CONCRETE.

2. REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE DEFORMED STEEL BARS AND SHALL BE GRADE 40 MINIMUM. REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE FREE OF RUST OR DIRT AND SHALL BE THOROUGHLY CLEANED BEFORE PLACEMENT.

3. REINFORCING BARS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 2" OF CLEAR COVERAGE.

NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-17

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL

STRUCTURE TYPE A
01/24/2023

NOTES: PLAN

SECTION A-A

1. FOR DIMENSIONS SEE DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL
STRUCTURE TYPE A STANDARD DRAWING.

D
W
A A
A
4" 4"

FENCE POST LOCATIONS

FOR PIT REINFORCEMENT,

SEE OUTFALL

STRUCTURES TYPE B

REINFORCEMENT DETAILS

STANDARD DRAWING
D
M - #4 BARS EQUALLY

SPACED, PAD

REINFORCEMENT
A
N - #4 BARS 16" 16" 16"
3" RADIUS
3" RADIUS
48" TO 84"
VARIES
8" 12"
4" W
D
A
4"
3"

FOR OUTFALL CAGE

STRUCTURES, SEE

FENCE CAGE FOR

OUTFALL STRUCTURE

TYPE B STANDARD

DRAWING
N - #4 BARS
M - #4 BARS

EQUALLY SPACED
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-18

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

OUTFALL STRUCTURE TYPE B
01/24/2023

PLAN
NOTES:

1. FOR DIMENSIONS AND REBAR SIZE AND SPACING, SEE DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL STRUCTURE TYPE B STANDARD DRAWING.

2. ALL REINFORCEMENT SHALL CONFORM WITH THE CITY OF VISALIA STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS.

A A

SECTION A-A
W D W
5"
1" COVER TYP.
1" COVER TYP.

HORIZONTAL
BARS "R"

VERTICAL
BARS "R"

OUTFALL

STRUCTURE

WALL BOX
W
2 - #4 BARS

STORM DRAINAGE PIPE
1 - 1/2" COVER TYP.

W D W
W
D
W

OUTFALL

STRUCTURE

WALL BOX

VERTICAL
BARS "R"

HORIZONTAL
BARS "R"
1" COVER TYP.
1" COVER TYP.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-19

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

OUTFALL STRUCTURE TYPE B

REINFORCEMENT DETAILS
01/24/2023

LOCKING
DEVICE

LOCKING DEVICE
1/4" X 3/4"

STRETCHER BARS
HINGES TYP.

FRAME 1.66" O.D.

AT 2.27 LBS./FT.
1/8" X 3/4" STRETCHER
BAR BANDS AT 12"

CENTERS
POSTS 2.875" O.D.

AT 5.79 LBS./FT.

1.66" O.D. AT

2.27 LBS./FT.
2" MESH X 9 GAUGE

CHAIN LINK FABRIC
9 GAUGE STEEL TIES
AT 14" CENTERS
A-2' LOCKING DEVICE
3'-6"
6"
6"
30" MIN.
12"
A
A-2'
A
A-2'
HINGES (TYP.)
3/8" TRUSS RODS
TYP.

FRAME 1.66" O.D.

AT 2.27 LBS./FT.
2" MESH X 9

GAUGE CHAIN

LINK FABRIC

LOCKING DEVICE

TURNBUCKLE
(TYP.)
1/8" X 3/4"

STRETCHER BAR
BANDS AT 14"

CENTERS
1/4" X 3/4"

STRETCHER BARS

PROFILE
PLAN NOTES:

1. LOCKING DEVICE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

2. FOR DIMENSIONS, SEE DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL STRUCTURE TYPE B STANDARD DRAWING.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-20

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

FENCE CAGE FOR OUTFALL

STRUCTURE TYPE B
01/24/2023

DESIGN TABLE
TYPE B

1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS 3 CONCRETE.

2. REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE DEFORMED STEEL BARS AND SHALL BE GRADE 40 MINIMUM. REINFORCING BARS SHALL BE FREE OF RUST OR DIRT AND SHALL BE THOROUGHLY CLEANED BEFORE PLACEMENT.

3. REINFORCING BARS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 2" OF CLEAR COVERAGE. * REINFORCEMENT SHALL CONSIST OF A DOUBLE CURTAIN BOTH DIRECTIONS OF THE SIZE AND SPACING NOTED. SEE OUTFALL STRUCTURE TYPE B REINFORCEMENT DETAILS STANDARD DRAWING.

NOTES:

TYPE
MAX.

PIPE
SIZE
DESIGN
(C.F.S.) A D F M N W R*
B 48" 38-50 10'-0" 5'-0" 2'-0" 2 3 8" #4 AT 12"
B 60" 50-65 12'-0" 6'-0" 3'-0" 3 4 8" #4 AT 12"
B 66" 65-85 14'-0" 7'-0" 3'-6" 3 5 8" #4 AT 12"
B 72" 85-110 16'-0" 8'-0" 4'-0" 3 6 10" #5 AT 10"
B 84" 110-140 18'-0" 9'-0" 4'-6" 4 8 10" #5 AT 10"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SD-21

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

DESIGN TABLE FOR OUTFALL

STRUCTURE TYPE B
01/24/2023

1. SEWER LATERAL TO BE LOCATED 5' FROM CENTER LOT LINE; WATER SERVICE TO BE LOCATED 5' FROM PROPERTY LINE.

MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN WATER SERVICES AND SEWER LATERALS SHALL BE 10' MIN. FROM O.D. TO O.D.

2. SEWER LATERAL ON PROPERTY WITH CLEANOUT ON BOTH STREET AND ALLEY SIDE. SEE CITY STD. SS-9.

3. ALL UTILITIES AND DRIVEWAYS SHALL BE LOCATED NEAR OPPOSING PROPERTY LINE FROM WATER METER LOCATION.

4. FOR WATER METER INSTALLATION, SEE CITY STD. W-8.

5. TWO WAY CLEANOUT AT BUILDING TO REPLACE CLEANOUT IN P.U.E.

ADJACENT

RESIDENTIAL LOT

SEWER LATERAL
(SEE NOTE 1)

WATER SERVICE
(SEE NOTE 1)

ADJACENT

RESIDENTIAL LOT
5'

SIDEWALK

PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE
5'

RESIDENTIAL LOT

WATER MAIN

SEWER MAIN

SEWER MAIN

WATER MAIN ALLEY
NOTES:

STREET

WATER SERVICE METER
(SEE CITY STD. W-8)

SEWER LATERAL
(SEE NOTE 1) C.O.
10' P.U.E.
2'-1"
CENTER

LOT LINE
10' P.U.E.

C.O.
10' MIN. O.D.

TO O.D.

WATER SERVICE METER
(SEE CITY STD. W-8)

CURB & GUTTER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-1

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SEWER AND WATER SERVICE

PROPERTY LOCATIONS
01/24/2023

6'
4' 4'
6'
10' 10'
4' 4' 6'
10' 10'
A. NEW CONSTRUCTION - WHEN NEITHER WATER MAINS NOR SEWER MAINS ARE EXISTING, THE FOLLOWING SHALL APPLY WHEREVER POSSIBLE:

1. PARALLEL MAINS - THE HORIZONTAL SEPARATION BETWEEN PRESSURE WATER MAINS AND SANITARY SEWER MAINS SHA BE AT LEAST 10 FEET FROM OUTSIDE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDE OF PIPE.

2. CROSSING MAINS - PRESSURE WATER MAINS SHALL HAVE A MIN. THREE FEET OF SEPARATION ABOVE THE SANITARY SEWER MAINS, WHERE THESE LINES MUST CROSS.

3. ALL WATER MAIN AND SEWER MAIN SEPARATIONS SHALL FOLLOW THE CALIFORNIA STATE WATER BOARDS' REQUIREMENT B. ALTERNATIVE CONDITIONS - WHEN EITHER WATER MAINS OR SEWER MAINS ARE EXISTING, OR THE CONDITIONS REQUIRED IN "A" ABOVE CANNOT BE MET, THE FOLLOWING SHALL APPLY:

1. NEW SEWER MAIN AND EXISTING WATER MAIN. - CASE 1 AND 2.

2. NEW WATER MAIN AND EXISTING SEWER MAIN. - CASE 3.

ALTERNATIVE CONDITIONS:

WHERE REQUIRED SEPARATION CANNOT BE MAINTAINED
WATER
MAIN
ZONE
B
ZONE
B
ZONE A
ZONE A
2 2
1 1
ZONE D
ZONE C
WATER
MAIN

PARALLEL CONSTRUCTION PERPENDICULAR CONSTRUCTION

WATER LINE AND SEWER LINE SEPARATION
DIMENSIONS ARE FROM OUTSIDE OF WATER MAIN TO OUTSIDE OF SANITARY SEWER MAIN. DESCRIPTIONS OF COMPRESSION JOINTS, MECHANICAL JOINTS, AND REQUIRED CONCRETE ENCASEMENT ARE ON SHEET 2. .33' .33'
6'
3'
NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-2

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER MAIN AND SANITARY SEWER
MAIN SEPARATION (SHEET 1 OF 2)
01/24/2023

A. SEWER MAINS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED IN THIS ZONE WITHOUT SPECIAL PERMISSION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.

B.

EXTRA-STRENGTH VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE WITH COMPRESSION JOINTS; OR CONCRETE PIPE WITH REINFORCED

CONCRETE COLLARS AROUND THE JOINTS, WHICH JOINTS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM THICKNESS OF SIX INCHES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE JOINT; OR RUBBER GASKET REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE; OR RUBBER GASKETED ASBESTOS-CEMENT PIPE; OR RUBBER GASKETED PLASTIC PIPE; OR CAST IRON PIPE WITH COMPRESSION JOINTS.

C. OR D.

CLASS 150 OR HEAVIER CAST-IRON PIPE WITH HOT DIP BITUMINOUS COATED AND APPROVED MECHANICAL JOINTS; OR ANY SEWER PIPE WITHIN A CONTINUOUS STEEL CASING, WHICH CASING SHALL HAVE A THICKNESS

OF NOT LESS THAN ONE-FOURTH INCH AND WITH ALL VOIDS BETWEEN SEWER PIPE AND CASING PRESSURE GROUTED WITH SAND-CEMENT GROUT.
6" 6"
6"
6"
3"
3"

IF AN EXISTING SEWER MAIN IS LOCATED WITHIN ZONE A, B, C, OR D OF A NEW WATER MAIN, THE FOLLOWING SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS APPLY:

1. COMPRESSION JOINTS ARE RUBBER RING OR GASKET JOINTS.

2. MECHANICAL JOINTS ARE BOLTED JOINTS.

3. ACCEPTABLE REINFORCED CONCRETE ENCASEMENT IS AS TO
THE RIGHT:

4. CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIN.), OR APPROVED EQUAL.

CASE 1 & 2: NEW SEWER MAIN AND EXISTING WATER MAIN
A. NO WATER MAINS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT SPECIAL PERMISSION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.

B. IF THE SEWER MAIN DOES NOT MEET THE ZONE B. REQUIREMENTS GIVEN ABOVE THE WATER MAIN SHALL BE OF CLASS 200 PIPE, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

C.

NO WATER MAINS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHOUT SPECIAL PERMISSION FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. IF PERMISSION IS GRANTED, THE SEWER MAIN SHALL BE ENCASED WITH REINFORCED CONCRETE AND THE WATER MAIN SHALL BE OF CLASS 200 PIPE, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

D. THE SEWER MAIN SHALL BE ENCASED WITH REINFORCED CONCRETE.

CASE 3: NEW WATER MAIN AND EXISTING SEWER MAIN

CONSTRUCTION LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS

ZONE CONSTRUCTION LIMITATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS
DESCRIPTIONS:

ZONE
"D"
NO. 4 BARS
NO. 4 BARS
NO. 4 BARS NO. 4 BARS
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-3

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER MAIN AND SANITARY SEWER
MAIN SEPARATION (SHEET 2 OF 2)
01/24/2023

1. PIPE (C-900 OR SDR-35) THROUGH MANHOLE REQUIRES AN APPROVED WATER STOP.

2. TERMINATING PIPES TO EXTEND INTO MANHOLE A MAX. 1".

3. THE TOP HALF OF ALL PIPE WITHIN THE MANHOLE IS TO BE CUT AWAY.

4. PREPARE A SMOOTH TROWELED CONCRETE CHANNEL HAVING UNIFORM GRADIENT BETWEEN PIPE INVERTS.

5. EXTEND THE CHANNEL WALLS UP TO SAME HEIGHT WITH TOP OF THE PIPE.

6. HAND TAMP 9" OF SAND, OR APPROVED BACKFILL MATERIAL, UNDER ALL PIPING COMING IN OR OUT OF THE MANHOLE UP TO TH FIRST JOINT.

7. THE BREADTH OF THE CHANNEL AT EACH JUNCTION MUST ALWAYS BE AS GREAT AS THE CHANNEL RADIUS OF THE CONNECTED

8. SLOPE THE BENCHING UP TOWARDS THE MANHOLE WALL AS INDICATED IN THE MANHOLE SECTION. TROWEL THE SURFACE SMO

9. ON A STANDARD MANHOLE, INCOMING NON-STRAIGHT LINES SHALL HAVE AN INVERT THAT IS AT LEAST 1" HIGHER THAN THE OUT-GOING LINE, UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED.

10. MAXIMUM OF 3 INLET PIPES INTO MANHOLE.

11. MAXIMUM OF 2 SANITARY SEWER LATERALS CAN BE CONNECTED TO A MANHOLE.

SIZE CHANGE

IN THE MAIN

MAIN TERMINATING

IN A MANHOLE

ALIGNMENT CHANGE

IN THE MAIN

PIPE CONTINUOUS

THROUGH MANHOLE
(SEE NOTE 3)
NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-4

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

INVERT PLANS OF

STANDARD MANHOLES
01/24/2023

10"

VARIES WITH
PIPE DIA.
12" SUBGRADE
COMPACTED TO 95% OR
3/4" GRAVEL
9" (MIN.)
3"-6"
6"
6"
VARIES
36"
9" MIN.
12" MAX.
6' (MIN.)
24"
5" TO 7"

THICKNESS

1. ALL CONCRETE SHALL BE CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIN.), TYPE II/V CEMENT.

2. CONCRETE CONE AND GRADE RINGS SHALL BE PRECAST REINFORCED AS PER ASTM C-478.

3. GROUT AND BAND ALL PIPE JOINTS OR INSTALL "KENT" SEAL NO. 2, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

4. GROUT MIXTURE SHALL BE 1:2 CEMENT TO SAND.

5. WHERE MANHOLES ARE NOT IN STREETS OR TRAVEL WAYS, PLACE TOP 12"-24" ABOVE EXISTING GROUND WITH A 24" CONCRETE COLLAR, UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

6. BASE SHALL BE CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIX WITH 3/4" AGGREGATE).

7. WHEN ADJUSTING A MANHOLE, REFER TO CITY STD. SS-8.

8. SEWER LATERALS SHALL ENTER MANHOLE 1" ABOVE MAIN. HOLE FOR LATERALS SHALL BE BORED OR OTHER APPROVED METHO CITY ENGINEER.

9. NO FLOODING OR JETTING COMPACTION.

10. MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN MANHOLES SHALL BE 400'.

11. SEWER LATERALS, 6" AND LARGER, REQUIRE A SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE WHEN CONNECTING TO THE SANITARY SEWER MAIN

12. A MANHOLE IS REQUIRED AT EACH CHANGE IN DIRECTION, EXCLUDING SMALLER THAN 6" SEWER LATERALS.

NOTES:

MANHOLE FRAME & COVER
INSTALLATION. (SEE CITY STD. SS-8)
CLASS "A" CONCRETE
(6 SACK MIN.)
24" TO 48" OR 72"

PRECAST CONE
"KENT" SEAL BETWEEN

BARRELS
STANDARD C-478

CONCRETE PIPE

SECTION
BASE SEE NOTE 6
TROWEL
SMOOTH

SLOPE FROM SIDE OF

MANHOLE TO

SPRINGLINE OF PIPE

MANHOLE SIZING

PIPE SIZE MANHOLE SIZE
0-36" 48"
>36" 72"
48" TO 72"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-5

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE
01/24/2023

DROP BOWL MODEL WILL FIT SIZES UP TO
A4 UP TO 6"
A6 UP TO 8"
B8 UP TO 10"
B10 UP TO 12"
24" 12" AND 15" INLET PIPES
30" 18" INLET

SILICON SEAL INSIDE OF

BOWL TO MANHOLE WALL

DROP BOWL MOUNTING POSITION

FORCE LINE HOOD
1/4 OF
PIPE DIA.

NOTES:

1. ALL INSIDE DROP CONNECTIONS FOR SERVICES AND COLLECTOR SEWERS SHALL USE THE DROP BOWL AS PRODUCED BY: RELINER-DURAN, INC. OR APPROVED EQUAL.

2. DROP BOWL MODEL "A4" SHALL BE USED FOR ALL INLET PIPES UP TO 6" INLETS, "A6" SHALL BE USED UP TO 8" INLETS, "B8" SHALL BE USED UP TO 10" INLETS, "B10" SHALL BE USED UP TO 12" INLETS, 24" DROP BOWL SHALL BE USED FOR 12" AND 15" INLETS, 30" DROP BOWL SHALL BE USED FOR 18" INLETS.

LINES LARGER THAN 10" SHALL BE AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK.

3. THE FORCE LINE HOOD SHALL BE ATTACHED ON MODELS "A4" AND "A6" WHEN THE INCOMING LINE IS FROM A FORCE MAIN OR THE SLOPE IS S=0.03 OR GREATER.

4. SECURE DROP PIPE TO MANHOLE WALL WITH RELINER-DURAN, INC. STAINLESS STEEL ADJUSTABLE CLAMPING BRACKETS OR EQUAL. SEE CITY STD. SS-7.

5. ATTACH THE DROP BOWL AND EACH CLAMPING BRACKET TO THE MANHOLE WALL WITH 3/8" X 3-3/4" RAMSET/RED HEAD BOLTS HELD IN PLACE WITH 2 STAGE EPOXY PASTE. EPOXY SHALL MEET THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS:

6. EPOXY PASTE SHALL BE A TWO COMPONENT, 100% SOLID SYSTEM. EPOXY SHALL BE SIKADUR 31 HI-MOD GEL BY SIKA CORPORATION OR APPROVED EQUAL.

7. THE EPOXY PASTE SHALL DEVELOP A MIN. COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH OF 5,000 PSI IN 28 DAYS WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D695 AT 73 DEGREES.

8. THE EPOXY PASTE SHALL DEVELOP A MIN. TENSILE STRENGTH OF 3,000 PSI IN 14 DAYS WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D638.

9. THE EPOXY PASTE SHALL DEVELOP A MIN. BOND STRENGTH OF 2,000 PSI IN 2 DAYS WHEN TESTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C882 (HARDENED CONCRETE TO HARDENED CONCRETE).

10. MANUFACTURER'S INSTRUCTIONS SHALL BE PRINTED ON EACH CONTAINER IN WHICH THE MATERIALS ARE PACKAGED.

NOTES:

1. ALL INSIDE DROP PIPING TO BE A.B.S. OR
PVC SDR-26.

2. CEMENT ALL JOINTS.

3. CLAMPS TO BE 1-1/2 X 12 GA. STAINLESS
STEEL, ANCHORED TO M.H. WALL WITH
2-1/2" CADMIUM PLATED BOLTS.

MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER
INSTALLATION (SEE CITY STD. SS-9)

RELINER INSIDE DROP BOWL
SECURED WITH 4 STAINLESS STEEL

BOLTS OR APPROVED EQUAL

INLET PIPE

COMPRESSION

COUPLING

MORTAR - NON SHRINK

PVC CAULDER

COUPLING OR EQUAL
PVC SDR-26

GLUE FITTING

RELINER STAINLESS STEEL STRAPS
OR EQUAL. SECURE TO STRUCTURE
WITH 2 STAINLESS STEEL BOLTS.

STRAP AT 4' INTERVALS (MIN. OF 2).

FOR INSIDE DROP CONNECTION
BRACKETS SEE CITY STD. SS-7

INSIDE DROP CONNECTION
30" OR

GREATER
48"
1/4 OF
PIPE DIA.
2'
6"

INSIDE DROP - PLAN

SLOPE SLOPE

INLET PIPE
ABOVE
45°
PIPE DIA. + .25'
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-6

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SANITARY SEWER DROP MANHOLE
01/24/2023

A A
NOTES:

1. STAINLESS STEEL ADJUSTABLE CLAMPING BRACKET AS MANUFACTURED BY RELINER-DURAN, INC. OR APPROVED EQUAL.

2. CLAMP AND BRACKETS SHALL BE TYPE 304 STAINLESS STEEL, 11 GAUGE (.1196").

3. 3/16"Ø PINCH BOLT AND NUTS SHALL BE TYPE 18-8 STAINLESS STEEL.

4. STANDARD SIZES TO FIT 4", 6", 8", & 10" PVC SEWER PIPE SDR-26.

5. FOR PIPE SIZES LARGER THAN 10", CITY ENGINEER SHALL APPROVE DESIGN PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK.

TOP VIEW

DIAMETER VARIES WITH

SIZE REQUIRED
2"
1'-3" 4" 2"
B
B

SECTION B-B

SECTION A-A
1'-6"
3/8" DIA. STAINLESS

STEEL PINCH BOLT
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-7

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SANITARY SEWER DROP MANHOLE -

CLAMPING BRACKET
01/24/2023

*SEWER MAINS:

UP THRU 12" PIPE = 42" MINIMUM COVER
OVER 12" PIPE = 48" MINIMUM COVER

STREET SURFACE
4" SEWER LATERAL WITH MIN. SLOPE OF 1/4" PER FOOT.

SEE BELOW
60"
MIN.*
P
NOTES:

1. FOR DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 3' OF COVER, USE DUCTILE IRON PIPE OR C-900 PVC PIPE WITH APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF DINUBA.

2. THE SLOPE OF SEWER LATERALS SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 2% OR AS APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

3. SEWER LATERALS SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE AS-BUILT PLANS.

4. FOR CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING MAINS, USE PLASTIC SADDLE W/STAINLESS STEEL 2" CLAMPS, CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY CONNECTION IS WATER TIGHT.

5. LOCATION OF SEWER LATERAL SHALL BE 5' FROM CENTER LOT LINE.

6. REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING SEWER LATERAL WILL REQUIRED A 2-WAY SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT LOCATED 24" FROM TH EXTERIOR WALL. CLEANOUT CAP SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 2" ABOVE GRADE.

7. 5 FOOT MINIMUM BETWEEN THE TOP OF PIPE AND FINISH GRADE, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 22° TO 45°

SEWER MAIN CONNECTION
L DRIVE STAKE 6" ABOVE EXIST. GROUND
UNTIL SIDEWALK IS INSTALLED AND AN "S"

IS STAMPED OVER SERVICE
STAMP "S" ON FACE OF CURB
CL

CAP END OF LINE IF

SERVICE CONNECTION IS

NOT MADE IMMEDIATELY
IF THERE IS NO C.O. AT THE RESIDENCE,
INSTALL 4" 2-WAY C.O. BETWEEN

PROPERTY LINE AND RESIDENCE
12"
5' MIN.
1/8 BENDS & 1/16

BENDS AS NEEDED

SEWER MAIN
8" MIN. DIA.

NEWLY LAID PIPE SHALL

HAVE MANUFACTURED
WYES (SEE NOTE 4)
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-8

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SEWER LATERALS
01/24/2023

COVER SIDE VIEW

TOP VIEW

TOP VIEW
25-1/4" DIA.
26-1/4" DIA.
4-1/2"
24" DIA.
31-1/2" DIA.
1-1/8"
5/8"
52" DIA. (MIN.)
27" DIA.
9" MIN.
12" MAX.
3"

JACKHAMMER
ROUND

MANHOLE ADJUSTMENT
"PHOENIX IRON WORKS"
24" FULL TRAFFIC TYPE NON-ROCKING MANHOLE
FRAME AND COVER MODEL NO. P-1090, OR
APPROVED EQUAL.

MANUFACTURER:

MARKED "SANITARY SEWER"
OR "STORM DRAIN"

PICK HOLE
EDGE

PRY-HOLE

ASTM GRID

PATTERN

GROUT HOLES
REPLACE & COMPACT 2" MIN. A.C.

AND LEVEL WITH EXIST. SURFACE.

FINISH A.C. GRADE 1/8" ABOVE

COVER IF SURFACE IS CONCRETE

GROUT JOINTS OR
"KENT" SEAL NO. 2 OR

APPROVED EQUAL,

AND BROOM FINISH

CONCRETE COLLAR
CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIN.)
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-9

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER
01/24/2023

12" 12"
24"
1/4"
8"
13"
4"
10-1/2"
9"
1-1/2"
12" MIN.

TO
18" MAX.
2" A.C.
8"
12" 12"
8" PIPE (MIN.)
45°

SECTION A-A FRAME & COVER PLAN VIEW
S
"PHOENIX IRON WORKS" FRAME AND COVER MODEL
NO. P-2502, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

1. PIPE AND FITTINGS, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE SHOWN HEREIN, SHALL BE OF THE SAME MATERIAL AS THE SEWER, UNLESS APPRO ADAPTORS ARE UTILIZED.

2. PIPES AND FITTINGS SHALL BE PROPERLY ALIGNED AND MAINTAINED WHILE CONCRETE IS BEING PLACED AND ALLOWED TO HAR JOINTS FOR PIPES AND FITTINGS SHALL BE MADE PRIOR TO PLACING CONCRETE. CONCRETE FOR BEDDING, ENCASEMENT, AND SUPPORT FOR PIPES AND FITTINGS SHALL BE PLACED UNIFORMLY AROUND THE PIPE AND FITTINGS, AND SHALL BE CLASS "A".

3. THE ACCESS FRAME, COVER AND CAP SHALL BE CAST IRON.

4. CLEANOUT INSTALLED BEHIND AN END STREET BARRICADE SHALL HAVE A 2'X2'X8" CONCRETE PAD PLACED AROUND IT.

5. JACK-HAMMER PAVEMENT AROUND THE EDGE PRIOR TO REPAVING

6. REPLACE AND COMPACT 2" AND 3" OF A.C. AND LEVEL WITH EXISTING STREET SURFACE. FINISH NEW A.C. GRADE 1/8" ABOVE CO NOTES:

A A

MANUFACTURER
COVER

FRAME AND COVER
CLASS "A" (6 SACK MIN.)
CONCRETE PAD, 8" DEEP
1/8 BEND LONG SWEEP

END CAP
8" WYE
SDR-35 OR

APPROVED EQUAL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-10

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SEWER CLEANOUT
01/24/2023

FLOW
LINE
48"
24"

ECCENTRIC MANHOLE

1. CONSTRUCTION OF MANHOLE SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SEWER MANHOLE STANDARD SS-5, EXCEPT AS MODIFIED HEREON.

NOTES:
18"
MAX.
4" MIN.

ECCENTRIC CONE
PER ASTM C-476
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-11

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

ECCENTRIC MANHOLE
01/24/2023

6" 24" 8" 24" 6"
6"
5'-3" VARIES
INLET
24"
6" 5'-0"
6" 24" 8" 24" 6"
6" 6"
12"
6"
24"
6"

SECTIONAL PLAN

SECTION A-A
PREFAB ALT.

JENSEN PRECAST MODELS
CL750 OR CL1000
TO BE USED FOR:

1. INDUSTRIAL CLEANING PLANTS

2. STEAM CLEANING PLANTS

3. SERVICE STATION CAR WASH RACKS

4. RESTAURANTS
A A

1. SIZING IS A MINIMUM AND A LICENSED ENGINEER SHALL PROVIDE A DESIGN 1/4" CHECKED STEEL PLATE H2O

PLATES IN TRAFFIC AREAS
4" C.I. 1/4
BEND

FLOW LINE

OF OUTFALL

CLEAN-OUT

TO GRADE
OUTLET
NOTES:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-12

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL

GREASE TRAP
01/24/2023

4" SEWER SERVICE LATERAL
45 DEG. BEND OR AS REQUIRED
23° MIN.
45° MAX.

MIN. SLOPE 1/8" PER FT. MAX. SLOPE 1/4" PER FT.

LENGTH VARIES DEPENDING ON DEPTH OF
SERVICE & MAIN. 4" SEWER PIPE ASSUMED,

SIZE COULD VARY

INSTALL DFW BY NDS FLEXIBLE SADDLE

OR APPROVED EQUAL W/STAINLESS

STEEL CLAMPS, TEE OR WYE, SET
BETWEEN 23° & 45°

STAINLESS STEEL
STRAPS

FLOWLINE
EX. SEWER MAIN

SIZE VARIES
EX. SERVICE LATERALS TO BE CUT

BACK & NEW PIPE INSTALLED
& EXTENDED TO NEW MAIN
FLOW
4" SEWER SERVICE LATERAL

DFW BY NDS FLEXIBLE

COUPLING OR APPROVED

EQUAL W/STAINLESS STEEL
STEEL STRAPS.

PLAN VIEW

ELEVATION

1. FOR PIPES 6" TO 12" IN DIAMETER, A LICENSED CONTRACTOR (C36) WHO HAS THE PROPER EQUIPMENT AND PERMITS

IS CONSIDERED AN APPROVED AGENT AND MAY CORE INTO THE CITY'S SEWER MAINS OR REMOVE A SECTION AND INSTALL A WYE OR TEE.

2. FOR SEWER MAINS 18" OR LARGER, A MANHOLE MUST BE CONSTRUCTED WHERE CORINGS ARE MADE.

3. THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR MUST OBSERVE ALL SADDLE & CORE CONNECTIONS TO EXISTING CITY SEWER MAINS.

4. VITRIFIED CLAY PIPE SADDLES SHALL BE EXTRA STRENGTH CLAY PIPE AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE "WEST COAST STANDARDS OF THE CLAY PIPE INSTITUTE".

5. OPENINGS INTO EXISTING SEWER MAINS SHALL BE MADE ONLY LARGE ENOUGH TO ADMIT ALL OF SADDLE FITTINGS.

6. THIS STANDARD DETAIL IS ONLY TO BE USED WHEN CONNECTING TO EXISTING SEWER MAIN LINES. NEW LINES SHALL HAVE WYES AS PER CITY STD. SS-8.

7. APPLY SILICON SEALANT TO COMPRESSION SCREWS AND WRAP STAINLESS STEEL STRAP WITH THREE (3) LAYERS OF PVC TAPE.

NOTES:
45° BEND

USE PIPE CEMENT

SEALANT UNDER SADDLE

STAINLESS STEEL STRAPS
EXIST. SEWER

MAIN SIZE VARIES
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
SS-13

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

SEWER LATERAL SERVICE CONNECTION

INTO EXISTING SEWER MAIN
01/24/2023

EXCAVATED
SOIL

FINISH GRADE
6"
20' MIN. CLASS "A"
6 SACK CONCRETE

FILL TO BOTTOM OF
WELL (SEE NOTE 3)

BACKFILL
(SEE NOTES 3 & 4)
24" MUSHROOM CAP

OVER CASING

WELL CASING

EXISTING GROUT SEAL

EXISTING BOREHOLE

EXISTING GRAVEL
3/4" MIN. CRUSHED
GRAVEL
24" MUSHROOM CAP

OVER CASING

1. IMPERVIOUS MATERIALS INCLUDE NEAT CEMENT, SAND-CEMENT GROUT, CONCRETE AND HIGH-SOLIDS BENTONITE.

2. FILL INCLUDES CLASS "A" CONCRETE (6 SACK MIN.) OR SLURRY ONLY.

3. ORGANIC MATERIALS SHALL NOT BE USED.

4. A PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM CITY AND/OR COUNTY, AND A WELL LOG SHALL BE PROVIDED.

5. A CITY INSPECTOR SHALL BE ON SITE DURING WELL ABANDONMENT.

6. ALL WORK MUST COMPLY WITH TULARE COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH REQUIREMENTS.

7. DURING PERIODS WHEN NO WORK IS BEING DONE ON THE WELL, SUCH AS OVERNIGHT OR WHILE WAITING FOR SEALING MATERIAL TO SET, THE WELL AND ANY SURROUNDING EXCAVATION SHALL BE COVERED. THE COVER SHALL BE SUFFICIENTLY ANCHORED AND STRONG ENOUGH TO KEEP FOREIGN MATERIAL FROM ENTERING WELL.

NOTES:

CUT OFF WELL
CASING AT 6' BELOW

GROUND LEVEL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-1

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

EXISTING WELL ABANDONMENT
01/24/2023

17-1/2"
15-7/8" DIA.
1-1/2"
3" 15" DIA.
4" 3/4"
9" DEEP X 27"Ø CLASS "A"
CONCRETE (6 SACK MIN.)

JACK-HAMMER AROUND EDGE

PRIOR TO REPAVING
2" A.C.
9" MIN.
3" CAP LOOSE
3" CLOSE NIPPLE GALV.
15" VALVE CASING
3" GRAVEL (MIN.)
3" GALV. PIPE (TYP.)
3" X 90° GALV. ELBOW

THRUST BLOCK SHALL BE POURED

AGAINST UNDISTURBED SOIL
3D
18"
D+4" PIPE PLUG TAPPED FOR
3" PIPE FITTING
3" GALV. STEEL COUPLING
INSTALL 3" RISER TO ONE SIDE OF

CASING WITH CLEARANCE TO

OPERATE VALVE
3" "FEBCO" BRASS BALL VALVE WITH

LEVER, OR APPROVED EQUAL
6"

DETECTABLE MARKING
TAPE: "CHRISTY" MODEL,

OR APPROVED EQUAL

IF ASPHALT, REPLACE & COMPACT
MIN. 2" A.C. AND LEVEL WITH

EXISTING SURFACE
FINISH A.C. GRADE 1/8"

ABOVE COVER
COVER MARKED "WATER" LOCATE
WIRE
6"

WATER MAIN D

COVER-SIDE VIEW
MANUFACTURER:
"PHOENIX IRON WORKS" FRAME
AND COVER MODEL NO. P-7001, OR

APPROVED EQUAL

BLOW-OFF FRAME & COVER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-2

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER BLOW-OFF
01/24/2023

A
PIPE SIZE 90° BEND 45° BEND 11 1/4° OR 22 1/2°
BEND

TEE OR END

DEAD TEE W/PLUG CROSS
8" 39" 33" 30" 33" 33" 27"
10" 45" 36" 33" 36" 36" 39"
12" 54" 42" 36" 44" 44" 46"
18" 94" 60" 42" 76" 76" 88"

1. THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE USED FOR PIPES WITH 4" DIAMETER OR LARGER.

2. THRUST BLOCKS TO BE CONSTRUCTED OF CLASS "A" CONCRETE (6 SACK MIN.)

3. MINIMUM THICKNESS OF THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE 6 INCHES.

4. THRUST BLOCKS TO BE POURED AGAINST UNDISTURBED SOIL.

5. AREAS GIVEN ARE FOR CLASS 150 PIPE AT PRESSURE OF 150 P.S.I IN SOIL WITH 2,000 P.S.F.

CAPACITY. INSTALLATION USING DIFFERENT PIPE, TEST PRESSURE, AND/OR SOIL TYPES SHOULD ADJUST AREAS ACCORDINGLY, SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER.

6. THRUST BLOCKS SHALL BE POURED A MIN. OF 5 DAYS BEFORE PRESSURIZING THE SYSTEM.

7. MEG-A-LUG JOINTS ARE REQUIRED AND THRUST BLOCKS CANNOT BE USED IN LIEU OF MEG-A-LUG JOINTS.

NOTES:

B
A
A
B
A
B
B A
B
PIPE SIZE 90° BEND 45° BEND 11 1/4° OR 22 1/2°
BEND

TEE OR END

DEAD TEE W/PLUG CROSS
8" 24" 24" 18" 21" 24" 30"
10" 24" 24" 21" 21" 24" 30"
12" 24" 24" 21" 21" 24" 30"
18" 39" 39" 39" 39" 39" 42"
90° BEND 45° BEND 22.5° BEND

TEE TEE W/ PLUG
CROSS
A
B
A
B
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-3

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

THRUST BLOCK
01/24/2023

APPROVED BACKFLOW

ASSEMBLY REQUIRED
24" MIN.
60" MAX.

FLOW THRUST BLOCK, TYP.
(SEE CITY STD. W-3) FLOW

FINISHED GRADE
LEVEL
18"
PUMPER

CONNECTION
2-1/2" FIRE DEPT.

CONNECTION

TEE OR UPRIGHT

INSTALL OS&Y POTTER

SUPERVISORY SWITCH
(TAMPER RESISTANT)

ASSEMBLY OR

APPROVED EQUAL
FLOW
C

TEST COCKS

DETECTOR ASSEMBLY

DOUBLE CHECK

ASSEMBLY
C
FIRE DEPT.

CONNECTION A
B

MINIMUM CLEARANCE LINE

MINIMUM CLEARANCE

SIZE DC A B C
1" TO 3" 12" 24" 12"
4" & UP 24" 24" 12"

1. RESILIENT SEATED SHUT OFF VALVES AND TEST COCKS ARE REQUIRED.

2. NO TAPS, TEES OR CONNECTIONS OF ANY KIND ARE PERMITTED BETWEEN THE WATER METER AND THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY.

3. PROTECTION FROM FREEZE DAMAGE IS REQUIRED IN EXPOSED AREAS.

4. ASSEMBLY MUST BE ACCESSIBLE FOR TESTING AND MAINTENANCE BY THE CITY OF DINUBA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

5. ASSEMBLY TO BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE WATER SUPPLY LINE PER UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE.

6. PRESSURE LOSS THROUGH ASSEMBLY MUST BE INCLUDED IN PRESSURE LOSS CALCULATIONS FOR SIZING OF THE WATER SYSTEM P UNIFORM FIRE CODE.

7. MINIMUM CLEARANCE AROUND ASSEMBLY MUST BE MAINTAINED. REFER TO MINIMUM CLEARANCE CHART ON THIS PAGE.

8. ANY DEVIATION FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE WATER SYSTEM MANAGER OR CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL SPECIALIST PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

9. THE BACKFLOW PREVENTER DEVICES AND INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF DINUBA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMEN

10. BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE INSPECTED AND TESTED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OR PROVIDE A CERTIFICATE SHOWIN THE ASSEMBLY WAS TESTED AND PASSED.

11. IF VALVES ARE RESILIENT SEAT, TYPE 'A' POST INDICATOR IS REQUIRED.

12. A CITY STANDARD FIRE HYDRANT MUST BE WITHIN 25' OF FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION OR INSTALLED WITHIN 25' OF THE FIRE HYDRANT CONNECTION.

13. LOCATION OF THE ASSEMBLY MUST BE APPROVED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

14. OSY AND FBC WILL LABELED WITH BUILDING ADDRESS AND SUITE ADDRESS.

15. ALL FIRE DEPARTMENT INFRASTRUCTURE SHALL BE INSTALLED PER THE DIRECTION OF THE DINUBA FIRE DEPARTMENT.

16. CONCRETE BOLLARDS MAY REQUIRED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE DINUBA FIRE DEPARTMENT.

NOTES:

PIPE SLEEVE
6" CONCRETE SLAB
WATER SUPPLY LINE 1" MIN. (TYP.)
FLOW

ANTI TAMPER DEVICE OR CHAINS SHALL BE

APPROVED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT

CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE

ADJUSTABLE PIPE SUPPORT

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER
PL

CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE

ADJUSTABLE PIPE SUPPORT

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-4

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

BACKFLOW DEVICE AND FIRE

DEPARTMENT CONNECTION
01/24/2023

2-1/2"Ø OUTLET
4" THICK (MIN.)

CONCRETE PAD
CL 4-1/2"
OUTLET
CL 4-1/2"
OUTLET
1'-6"
3'
1'-6"
3'

PARK STRIP/

SIDEWALK
45°
45°
SEE NOTE 2

BREAKAWAY BOLTS

THRUST BLOCK
(SEE CITY STD. W-3)
"AWWA" RESILIENT SEATED GATE VALVE, MODEL NO.

C-509-80, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

THRUST BLOCK WATER MAIN
(SEE CITY STD. W-3)
8" MIN.

PIPE RISER
WATER VALVE: WELL AND
COVER (SEE CITY STD. W-8)

ROAD SURFACE

INSTALL HYDRANT GUARD
HG1 OR APPROVED EQUAL

SIDEWALK/PARK STRIP
CURB AND GUTTER FLANGED 90° ELBOW
6" WET BARREL
18" OFF FACE

OF CURB
6" WATER PIPE

SECTION A-A

CROSS-SECTION

1. TRADE NAMES ARE SPECIFIED AS STANDARD OF ACCEPTABLE QUALITY AND FEATURES. EQUIPMENT OF EQUAL

QUALITY WITH EQUAL FEATURES MAY BE SUBSTITUTED ONLY WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM THE DINUBA FIRE DEPARTMENT.

2. HYDRANTS SHALL BE "CLOW" MODEL 865, WET BARREL, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

3. HYDRANTS SHALL HAVE (2)-4 1/2" DIAMETER OUTLETS AND (1)-2 1/2" DIAMETER OUTLET.

4. NOZZLE CENTERLINES SHALL BE LOCATED NOT LESS THAN 18" ABOVE FINISH GRADE.

5. GATE VALVES SHALL BE "RESILIENT SEAT" TYPE FLANGED TO MAIN LINE.

6. HYDRANT SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A HYDRANT GUARD HG1 OR APPROVED EQUAL BETWEEN THE HYDRANT AND RISER.

7. A BLUE TWO-WAY REFLECTIVE MARKER SHALL BE INSTALLED ON THE CENTER LINE OF THE STREET ADJACENT TO THE HYDRANT PER CITY STD. W-6.

8. HYDRANTS SHALL HAVE A 4.5" STORZ HYDRANT ADAPTER (MODEL: HPHA50-45NH/CAP, OR APPROVED EQUAL) ATTACHED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE 4 1/2" DIAMETER OUTLET.

9. HYDRANT SHALL BE PAINTED OSHA SAFETY YELLOW.

10. A 3' DIAMETER OR 3' SQUARE CONCRETE PAD SHALL BE PROVIDED AROUND THE HYDRANT.

11. ALL CAPS AND THREADS SHALL BE LUBRICATED WITH A WATER PROOF GREASE FOLLOWING INSTALLATION.

METAL CAPS SHALL BE INSTALLED ON OUTLETS.

12. MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN FIRE HYDRANTS IS 400' (RESIDENTIAL) AND 300' (COMMERCIAL).

13. PAINT CURB RED FROM CENTERLINE OF FIRE HYDRANT 15' EACH WAY.

NOTES:

SIDEWALK (WHEN PARK

STRIP IS USED)

SIDEWALK (WHEN

PARK STRIP IS USED)
2" MIN.
4" MAX.

A A

3.5" MIN.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-5

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

FIRE HYDRANT INSTALLATION
01/24/2023

TWO LANE STREET

TWO LANE STREET

AT INTERSECTION

MULTI-LANE WITH TURN LANE

MULTI LANE STREET

FOUR LANE STREET WITH

TURN LANE AT INTERSECTION

FREEWAY AND EXPRESSWAYS

R/W FENCE
MEDIAN

LEFT EDGE LINE

RIGHT EDGE LINE

SHOULDER
6"
6"
6"
6"
6" 6"
6"

FIRE HYDRANT

BLUE RETROREFLECTIVE RAISED PAVEMENT MARKER
LEGEND:

1. FIRE DEPARTMENT WILL PROVIDE LOCATION(S) FOR ALL MARKERS IN COMMERCIAL LOTS AND OTHER AREAS OUTSIDE OF PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

2. MARKERS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT THE NEW AND RELOCATED HYDRANTS AND WITHIN ALL RESURFACING PROJECTS.

3. FOR STREETS WITHOUT LANE LINE OR STREETS WITH RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS AND NO PAINTED LANE LINE, INSTALL MARKERS 6" FROM CENTERLINE OR EXISTING MARKERS.

NOTES:

MARKERS - SHALL BE BLUE 2-WAY STIMSONITE LIFELITE 88AB OR EQUAL.

ADHESIVE - AN AMPLE AMOUNT OF 2 (A&B) EPOXY OR EQUAL.

SURFACES - CLEAN AND DRY TO INSTALLATION PER MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.

INSTALL MARKERS WITH REFLECTIVE SURFACES FACING
ONCOMING VEHICLES AND OFFSET 2" FROM LANE LINES
TOWARD FIRE HYDRANT.

FIRE HYDRANT MARKERS
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-6

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

FIRE HYDRANT PAVEMENT

MARKER LOCATION
01/24/2023

3'-0" MIN. FROM

EDGE OF PAVEMENT
3'-0" MIN. FROM

PROPERTY LINE OR

RIGHT OF WAY

FIRE HYDRANT

CONCRETE PAD
(TYP.)

NO CURB

WITH CURB

NO SIDEWALK

NON-CONTIGUOUS

SIDEWALK

CONTINGUOUS

SIDEWALK
SIDEWALK (TYP.)

ALTERNATE

LOCATION

COLD JOINT
STRIP
CURB (TYP.)
STREET (TYP.)

STEEL BOLLARDS
SEE M-1
60°
3'-0"
30° 30°

FIRE HYDRANT WITH
6" RUN (TYP.)
3-PORTS 2-PORTS 2-2 1/2"

PORTS ONLY

STEEL BOLLARDS PORT ORIENTATION
NOTES:

1. LOCATE FIRE HYDRANT AS SHOWN ABOVE OR AS DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

2. FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH THE LARGEST PORT PERPENDICULAR TO THE STREET.

3. IF THE CONCRETE SLAB IS TO BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO A CONCRETE CURB OR SIDEWALK, A COLD JOINT STRIP SHALL BE INSTALLED.

4. CONCRETE APRON SHALL BE REQUIRED WHERE THE FIRE HYDRANT IS INSTALLED IN AN UNPAVED LOCATION. THE APRON SHALL BE 4" THICK 520-C-2500 CONCRETE.

5. WHEN DISTANCE FROM THE FIRE HYDRANT TO THE TOP OR TOE OF THE SLOPE OR WALLS IS LESS THAN 2', SPECIAL HYDRANT INSTALLATION DETAIL SHALL BE SHOW ON THE PLANS.

6. THE DISTANCE FROM THE FACE OF THE CURB TO THE CENTERLINE OF THE FIRE HYDRANT SHALL BE 2 1/2' MINIMUM.

7. WHEN REQUIRED, NUMBER OF BOLLARDS AND LOCATION TO BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-7

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

FIRE HYDRANT LOCATION -

SIDEWALK
01/24/2023

WATER
MAIN
REPLACE & COMPACT MIN. 2"
A.C. AND LEVEL WITH

EXISTING SURFACE
13"
9-1/8"
FINISH A.C. GRADE 1/8"

ABOVE COVER

JACKHAMMER AROUND EDGE

PRIOR TO REPAVING
2" A.C.
10" MIN.

CLASS "A" CONCRETE
(6 SACK MIN.) COLLAR

TRAFFIC VALVE BOX
SINGLE PIECE OF 8" MIN. PIPE
RISER, C-900
#10 COPPER LOCATE WIRE
"AWWA" RESILIENT SEAT GATE
VALVE, MODEL NO. C-509-80, OR
APPROVED EQUAL.

THRUST BLOCK
(SEE CITY STD. W-3)

LOCATE WIRE

OUTSIDE OF RISER

MARKING TAPE
(SEE CITY STD. W-17)
1-3/8"
6"

1. CAST IRON COVER WITH STREET TREAD INSCRIBED "WATER".

2. ON FIRE SPRINKLER RUNS, COVER SHALL BE INSCRIBED "FIRE".

3. INSTALL "CHRISTY" G5 TRAFFIC VALVE BOX 13" DIA. X 12", OR APPROVED EQUAL.

4. MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN IN-LINE GATE VALVES IS 500 FT., OR INTERSECTION PER PLANS.

5. WRAP ALL VALVES AND FITTINGS IN 8 MIL. PLASTIC WITH 10 MIL.

TAPE.

NOTES:
"KENNEDY"
"M & H DRESSER"
"MUELLER"
"CLOW"
APPROVED GATE VALVES:
10"
SEE NOTE 1
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-8

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER VALVE, WELL, AND COVER
01/24/2023

1. WATER METERS WILL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY
THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. INSTALLATION FEES
SHALL BE PAID PRIOR TO SETTING THE METER.

2. ALL SERVICES WITH A METER SHALL BE SUPPLIED WITH
A BOX AND WITH A LID MARKED "WATER" (NO CONCRETE
BOXES OR LIDS).

3. METERS SHALL BE THE "COLD DISPLACEMENT" TYPE
WATER METER CONFORMING TO "AWWA" STD. C700, OR
APPROVED EQUAL.

4. WATER METER & BOXES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN
THE SIDEWALK, AND NOT WITHIN THE DRIVE APPROACH.

5. ALL GALVANIZED PIPE SHALL BE WRAPPED IN A 10 MIL
PIPE WRAP TAPE.

NOTES:
1" CTS POLYETHYLENE PIPE
AS SPECIFIED IN ASTM #10 COPPER LOCATE WIRE
"MUELLER B" OR "SMITH BLAIR"

BRONZE DOUBLE STRAP SADDLE,
OR APPROVED EQUAL.

WATER
MAIN

CORPORATION STOPS
SHALL BE "FORD" MODEL
NO. F1100-4 COPPER PIPE
SIZE, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

STREET SURFACE
"W" STAMPED ON FACE OF CURB
1" WATER METER: "NEPTUNE" MODEL NO. T-10, WITH
PRO READ (CUBIC FT) WITH "NEPTUNE" R-900 RADIO
MIU'S, OR APPROVED EQUAL. (SEE NOTE 1).

FIBRELTYE MODEL NO. FL36 WITH NO
READER HOLE ON LID, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

FLUSH
(TYP.)
6" TO 8" 3"
1'

SIDEWALK PARK STRIP
(IF USED)
24" TO 36" (MIN.)
45°

CURB AND GUTTER
6"

PEA GRAVEL
1" FIRE SERVICE SCHEDULE
80 PVC PIPE (TYP.)
1" WATER SERVICE SCHEDULE
80 PVC PIPE (TYP.)
1" TEE
1" INLINE VALVE

ADAPTER

FITTING JAMES
JONES J-134
1" WATER METER
1" CURB STOP

METER BOX
SOLID 14 GA. COPPER

WIRE HELD IN PLACE
AT 5' INTERVALS (TYP.)

CONNECT TO CITY WATER MAIN

LEGEND SEE LEGEND

FOR HATCHING

GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE

WATER METER PLAN VIEW

SEE LEGEND

FOR HATCHING
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-9

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
1" RESIDENTIAL WATER SERVICE
01/24/2023

1. WATER METERS WILL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY
THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. INSTALLATION FEES
SHALL BE PAID PRIOR TO SETTING THE METER.

2. ALL SERVICES WITH A METER SHALL BE SUPPLIED WITH
A BOX AND WITH A LID MARKED "WATER" (NO CONCRETE
BOXES OR LIDS).

3. METERS SHALL BE THE "COLD DISPLACEMENT" TYPE
WATER METER CONFORMING TO "AWWA" STD. C700, OR
APPROVED EQUAL.

4. WATER METER & BOXES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN
THE SIDEWALK, AND NOT WITHIN THE DRIVE APPROACH.

5. ALL GALVANIZED PIPE SHALL BE WRAPPED IN A 10MIL
PIPE WRAP TAPE.

NOTES:

1.5" OR 2" CTS POLYETHYLENE

PIPE AS SPECIFIED IN ASTM
#10 COPPER LOCATE WIRE
"MUELLER B" OR "SMITH BLAIR"

BRONZE SADDLE WITH STAINLESS

STEEL STRAP
WATER
MAIN

CORPORATION STOPS
SHALL BE "FORD" MODEL
NO. F1100-4 COPPER PIPE
SIZE, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

STREET SURFACE
"W" STAMPED ON FACE OF CURB

1.5" OR 2" WATER METER: "NEPTUNE" MODEL NO. T-10,
WITH PRO READ (CUBIC FT) WITH "NEPTUNE" R-900
RADIO MIU'S, OR APPROVED EQUAL. (SEE NOTE 1).

FIBRELTYE MODEL NO. FL36 WITH NO
READER HOLE ON LID, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

FLUSH
(TYP.)
6" TO 8" 3"
1'

SIDEWALK PARK STRIP
(IF USED)
24" TO 36" (MIN.)
45°

CURB AND GUTTER
6"

PEA GRAVEL

1.5" OR 2" FIRE SERVICE
SCHEDULE 80 PVC PIPE
(TYP.)

1.5" OR 2" WATER SERVICE
SCHEDULE 80 PVC PIPE (TYP.)

1.5" TEE

1.5" OR 2" INLINE VALVE

ADAPTER

FITTING JAMES
JONES J-134

1.5" OR 2" WATER METER

1.5" OR 2" CURB
STOP

METER BOX
SOLID 14 GA. COPPER

WIRE HELD IN PLACE
AT 5' INTERVALS (TYP.)

CONNECT TO CITY WATER MAIN

LEGEND SEE LEGEND

FOR HATCHING

GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE

WATER METER PLAN VIEW

SEE LEGEND

FOR HATCHING
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-10

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

1.5" & 2" RESIDENTIAL WATER

SERVICE
01/24/2023

A. FIBRELTYE MODEL NO. FL36
B. 2" ANGLE METER VALVE (J-4205) WITH 2" METER FLANGE
ADAPTER (J-129M)
C. 2" GALVANIZED IRON TEE WITH (2) 2"X1" MIPxFIP GALVANIZED

IRON HEX BUSHING CONNECTORS
D. 1" GALVANIZED IRON TEE (FIP x FIP x FIP)
E. 1" GALVANIZED IRON ELBOW (FIP x FIP)
F. 1" DIA., GALVANIZED IRON PIPE
G. 1" STRAIGHT METER VALVE, FIP x METER SWIVEL NUT (J-1903W) LEGEND
2" CTS POLYETHYLENE PIPE

AS SPECIFIED IN ASTM
"MUELLER B" OR "SMITH BLAIR"

BRONZE SADDLE WITH STAINLESS

STEEL STRAP
WATER
MAIN

CORPORATION STOPS
SHALL BE "FORD" MODEL
NO. F1100-4 COPPER PIPE
SIZE, OR APPROVED EQUAL.
"W" STAMPED ON

FACE OF CURB

SIDEWALK

STREET SURFACE
FIBRELTYE MODEL NO. FL36 4'-6" MIN.

CURB & GUTTER
2" ANGLE METER VALVE
(J-4205) WITH 2" METER
FLANGE ADAPTER (J-129M)
2" GALVANIZED IRON TEE
WITH (2) 2"X1" MIPxFIP

GALVANIZED IRON HEX

BUSHING CONNECTORS

PEA GRAVEL
1" STRAIGHT METER VALVE,
FIP x METER SWIVEL NUT (J-1903W)
10"
4"
6"
4" 4"

1. PARTS NUMBER PRECEDED WITH J ARE JAMES JONES CO..

2. 5/8" DISPLACEMENT TYPE MAGNETIC DRIVE STRAIGHT
READING GALLONS.

3. METER BOX NOT TO BE INSTALLED IN SIDEWALK/DRIVE
APPROACH.

4. BOXES IN ALLEYS SUBJECT TO TRAFFIC LOADS SHALL

HAVE TRAFFIC RATED LIDS & BOXES AS DIRECTED BY THE
ENGINEER.

5. ALL GALVANIZED PIPE SHALL BE WRAPPED IN A 10MIL PIPE WRAP TAPE.

NOTES:
6" MIN.

A
A
A
G
G
G
F
F
F
F
F
D
C
B
A
6" MIN.
6" MIN.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-11

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
COMMERCIAL 3-MANIFOLD

WATER SERVICE
01/24/2023

WATER
MAIN

SIDEWALK

1. WATER METERS WILL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. INSTALLATION FEES SHALL BE PAID PRIOR TO SETTING THE METER.

2. ALL SERVICES WITH A METER SHALL BE SUPPLIED WITH A BOX AND WITH A LID MARKED "WATER" (NO CONCRETE BOXES OR LIDS).

3. METERS SHALL BE THE "COLD DISPLACEMENT" TYPE WATER METER CONFORMING TO "AWWA" STD. C700, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

4. WATER METER & BOXES SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE SIDEWALK, AND NOT WITHIN THE DRIVE APPROACH.

6. ALL GALVANIZED PIPE SHALL BE WRAPPED IN A 10MIL PIPE WRAP TAPE.

NOTES:
"W" STAMPED ON FACE OF CURB

STREET SURFACE
2" METER VALVE BY PACK JOINT
FOR CTS: "FORD" FV43-777W, OR

APPROVED EQUAL
2" "FORD" ANGLE VALVE MODEL
NO. BF-777 WITH SHUT-OFF

VALVE, OR APPROVED EQUAL
#10 COPPER LOCATE
WIRE
45°
18"
3"
90° BRASS
COUP. OR PACK
JOINT COUP.

FOR CTS
2" TYPE "K" COPPER TUBING OR

CTS POLYETHELENE PIPE AS

SPECIFIED IN ASTM
"MUELLER B" OR "SMITH BLAIR"

BRONZE DOUBLE , OR

APPROVED EQUAL
2" CORPORATION STOPS
SHALL BE "FORD" MODEL
NO. F1100-7, OR

APPROVED EQUAL
24" TO
36" MIN.

PARKSTRIP
(IF USED)
1'

CURB & GUTTER
6" TO 8"
10"
6"

PEA GRAVEL

1.5" OR 2" WATER METER: "NEPTUNE" MODEL NO. T-10,
WITH PRO READ (CUBIC FT) WITH "NEPTUNE" R-900
RADIO MIU'S, OR APPROVED EQUAL (SEE NOTE 1)
FIBRELTYE MODEL NO. FL36 WITH NO

READER HOLE ON LID, OR APPROVED EQUAL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-12

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
2" COMMERCIAL WATER SERVICE
01/24/2023

1. VALVES TO BE MUELLER A-2360 OR EQUAL WITH 2" SQUARE NUTS, CCW TO OPEN.

2. 6" SEAL/BENCH WITH CONCRETE INSIDE OF VAULTS.

3. METER BOX IN SIDEWALK OR PLACE 3-1/2" THICK CL2 CONCRETE SLAB, 1' ON ALL SIDES OF BOX

4. 23-1/4" GALVANIZED SPACER SHALL BE INSTALLED.

5. TOP OF OPERATIVE SQUARE NUT TO BE 4" MIN. TO 12" MAX. BELOW BOTTOM OF LID.

6. TRACER WIRE TO BE #10 STRANDED COPPER WITH WHITE INSULATION.

NOTES:
35"
MIN.
64-1/2" MIN.

FLOW
4"
MIN. 12" MIN.
12" MIN.
4"
MIN.
4"
MIN.
4"
MIN.

SEE NOTE 5
18" MIN. TO

FACE OF CURB
4" FLANGED

GATE VALVE,

CCW TO OPEN
VALVE
(SEE CITY
STD. W-8)
18" MIN. TO

FACE OF CURB
6" NEPTUNE MACH

ULTRASONIC METER

PLAN VIEW

ELEVATION

FINISH GRADE
4" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGED ELBOW
4" NEPTUNE MACH 10

ULTRASONIC METER
(SEE NOTE 4)
4" FLANGED

GATE VALVE,

CCW TO OPEN
4" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGED ELBOW

STREET SURFACE

CURB & GUTTER
4" NEPTUNE MACH
10 ULTRASONIC
METER
4" PVC C900 OR

DUCTILE IRON PIPE
CLASS 150 OR HIGHER
4" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGE X MJ ELBOW

THRUST BLOCK
(SEE CITY STD. W-3)
4" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGED SPOOL,

LENGTH AS NEEDED

TRACER WIRE
(SEE NOTE 6)
FLOW

WATER MAIN
4" FLANGED GATE

VALVE, CCW TO
OPEN
4" PVC C900 OR

DUCTILE IRON PIPE
CLASS 150 OR HIGHER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-13

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
4" COMMERCIAL WATER SERVICE
01/24/2023

1. VALVES TO BE MUELLER A-2360 OR EQUAL WITH 2" SQUARE NUTS, CCW TO OPEN.

2. 6" SEAL/BENCH WITH CONCRETE INSIDE OF VAULTS.

3. METER BOX IN SIDEWALK OR PLACE 3-1/2" THICK CL2 CONCRETE SLAB, 1' ON ALL SIDES OF BOX

4. 27-1/4" GALVANIZED SPACER SHALL BE INSTALLED.

5. TOP OF OPERATIVE SQUARE NUT TO BE 4" MIN. TO 12" MAX. BELOW BOTTOM OF LID.

6. TRACER WIRE TO BE #10 STRANDED COPPER WITH WHITE INSULATION.

NOTES:
35"
MIN.
64-1/2" MIN.

FLOW
4"
MIN. 12" MIN.
12" MIN.
4"
MIN.
4"
MIN.
4"
MIN.

SEE NOTE 5
18" MIN. TO

FACE OF CURB
6" FLANGED

GATE VALVE,

CCW TO OPEN
VALVE
(SEE CITY
STD. W-8)
18" MIN. TO

FACE OF CURB
6" NEPTUNE MACH

ULTRASONIC METER

PLAN VIEW

ELEVATION

FINISH GRADE
6" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGED ELBOW
6" NEPTUNE MACH 10

ULTRASONIC METER
(SEE NOTE 4)
6" FLANGED

GATE VALVE,

CCW TO OPEN
6" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGED ELBOW

STREET SURFACE

CURB & GUTTER
6" NEPTUNE MACH
10 ULTRASONIC
METER
6" PVC C900 OR

DUCTILE IRON PIPE
CLASS 150 OR HIGHER
6" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGE X MJ ELBOW

THRUST BLOCK
(SEE CITY STD. W-3)
6" DUCTILE IRON

FLANGED SPOOL,

LENGTH AS NEEDED

TRACER WIRE
(SEE NOTE 6)
FLOW

WATER MAIN
6" FLANGED GATE

VALVE, CCW TO
OPEN
6" PVC C900 OR

DUCTILE IRON PIPE
CLASS 150 OR HIGHER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-14

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
6" COMMERCIAL WATER SERVICE
01/24/2023

"FEBCO" MODEL NO. 825Y,
OR APPROVED EQUAL.

EQUIPMENT COVER PER
CITY STD. W-24

RESILIENT SEAL

GATE/BALL
VALVES
ELL (TYP.)
UNION
(TYP.)
FLOW

FLANGE TO FLANGE OR
THREADED FITTINGS (TYP.)

FINISH GRADE
4" THK. CONCRETE SLAB

PIPE SLEEVE

GALVANIZED STEEL
PIPE (TYP.)
GALV. STEEL OR
PVC SCHEDULE 40 FLOW
18" MIN. TO 30" MAX.

ABOVE FINISH GRADE

OR FLOOR LINE

1. ALL PIPE FITTINGS SHALL BE PVC SCHEDULE 40, OR GALVANIZED STEEL, UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.

2. BACKFLOW PREVENTER DEVICE AND INSTALLATION SHALL BE APPROVED AND INSPECTED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

3. VALVE ASSEMBLIES MAY HAVE SCREWED FITTINGS OR FLANGED FITTINGS.

4. COAT ALL EXPOSED THREADS WITH AN APPROVED RUST INHIBITING SEALANT.

5. APPROVED PLASTIC TAPE, 1/2" WIDE, SHALL BE USED ON ALL THREADED CONNECTIONS.

6. DISSIMILAR METALS SHALL BE SEPARATED BY AN APPROVED DIELECTRIC COUPLING.

7. PLASTIC PIPE SHALL NOT BE USED ABOVE FINISH GRADE.

8. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ADJUSTABLE PIPE SUPPORT APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER . 9. PROVIDE 24" MIN. CLEAR SPACE AROUND BLACKFLOW PREVENTER OR AT THE PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR DISCRETION.

NOTES:

PIPE SLEEVE
1" MIN. (TYP.)
1/2"
GALV. STEEL OR
PVC SCHEDULE 40

THRUST BLOCK (SEE
CITY STD. W-3) NOTE:

THE BACKFLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY SHALL

BE TESTED AND APPROVED BY AN APPROVED

AWWA OR ABPA CERTIFIED TESTER WITHIN
FIVE (5) DAYS OF INSTALLATION WITH THE
RESULTS SENT TO THE CITY OF DINUBA.

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-15

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS
3/4" TO 2" REDUCED PRESSURE

PRINCIPAL BACKFLOW PREVENTERS
01/24/2023

WATER
10"
10"
8" MIN.

VARIES
TO BE PAVED WITH 2" A.C. (85-100 PENETRATION
ASPHALT). TACK-COAT CONCRETE AND METAL

SURFACES PRIOR TO PAVING
8" CASING & COVER
CHRISTY G-5
CHRISTY G-5 CAST IRON

TRAFFIC LID OR

APPROVED EQUAL
10" CONCRETE COLLAR

UNDER PAVING

POUR CONCRETE

COLLAR AROUND
CASING-LEAVE 2" LOW

FOR AC PAVING

VALVE-AWWA NON-RISING STEM

AND O-RING SEALS RESILIENT
WEDGE GATE VALVE #12 CU TRACER WIRE

VALVE TO BE FLANGE

COUPLED TO THE MAIN
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-16

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER VALVE
01/24/2023

SPRINGLINE

1. USE SPECIAL CARE IN BEDDING FLEXIBLE PIPE TO ENSURE SIDEWALL SUPPORT.

2. LESS COVER FOR 8" PIPE MAY BE ALLOWED AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CITY ENGINEER.

3. TRACER WIRE TO BE INSTALLED ON ALL WATER MAINS, WATER SERVICES, AND HYDRANT LATERALS.

4. WHEN UNSTABLE SOIL IS ENCOUNTERED CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM TRENCHING ACTIVITIES PER CALIFORNIA OSHA STANDARDS.

5. JETTING OF TRENCHES IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.

6. MINIMUM WATER MAIN SIZE SHALL BE 8". MINIMUM SEWER MAIN SIZE SHALL BE 8". MINIMUM STORM DRAIN MAIN SIZE SHALL BE 1

7. NEWLY CONSTRUCTED SEWER AND STORM DRAIN MANS SHALL BE WAYNE BALLED, MANDREL, AIR TESTED AND VIDEO INSPECTE ALL TESTING SHALL BE OVER SEEN BY A CITY REPRESENTATIVE.

8. PERMANENT RESURFACING OF PAVEMENT AREAS SHALL CONSIST OF 7" A.C. PAVING OR MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION I PAVEMENT CUT IS WIDER THAN 6' UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. EXISTING PAVEMENT CUT EDGES SHA BE SAWCUT AND TACK COAT SHALL BE APPLIED PRIOR TO FINAL PAVING.

9. UNLESS OTHERWISE DIRECTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER, ALL CUTS MADE IN PAVEMENT 5 YEARS AND YOUNGER SHALL BE TREAT WITH THE INFRARED PAVEMENT REPAIR PROCESS A MIN. OF 6" ON EACH SIDE OF SAWCUT. FOR PAVEMENT CUTS LESS THAN 2' I WIDTH, THE INFRARED PAVEMENT REPAIR SHALL BE APPLIED TO THE ENTIRE AREA. WHEN INFRARED PAVEMENT REPAIR IS NOT REQUIRED, A CRACK SEALANT SHALL BE APPLIED ALONG THE PAVEMENT CUTS.

NOTES:

RESURFACE WITH A 7" MIN. A.C. PAVEMENT

COMPACT LEVEL WITH EXISTING SURFACE
(SEE NOTES 8 & 9)

SAWCUT EDGE PRIOR

TO REPAVING
7"
24"
3" DETECTABLE MARKING TAPE: "CHRISTY"

MODEL, OR APPROVED EQUAL

BACKFILL MATERIAL SHALL BE
MECHANICALLY COMPACTED IN 12"
MAX. LIFTS

TRENCH SHALL

COMPLY WITH

CALIFORNIA OSHA

STANDARDS
#10 GAUGE COPPER TRACER WIRE

ON WATER MAINS ONLY

SAND BACKFILL

HAND TAMPED SAND TO
SPRINGLINE IN 3" LIFTS

STABILIZATION MATERIAL, SAND OR

APPROVED EQUAL
90% MIN.

REL. COMP. PIPE DIA.
4" MIN.
12"
90% MIN. REL.

COMP.
±24"
95% MIN.

REL. COMP.

FOR 8" PIPE = 22" TO 32"
FOR 10" PIPE = 24" TO 34"
FOR 12" PIPE = 26" TO 36"
FOR 14" PIPE = 28" TO 36"
FOR 16" PIPE = 48" TO 60"
FOR 48" PIPE = 96" TO 102"

TRENCH WIDTH
8" (MIN.) THRU 12" PIPE = 42" (MIN.) COVER
OVER 12" PIPE = 48" (MIN.) COVER

WATER, SANITARY SEWER, AND STORM DRAIN MAINS
6" MIN. OVERCUT
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-17

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

TRENCH DETAIL
01/24/2023

WM
3'
3' SAMPLING STATION
DOOR
3'-10"
1-3/4"
1/2" DIA. X 6" STEEL ANCHOR

BOLTS WITH ACORN NUTS
36" X 36" X 6" THK.

CONCRETE SLAB
1" PVC PIPE (SCH. 40)
4'-6" WIDE SIDEWALK
WM
3'
3'

SAMPLING STATION
1'
1'
6"

CURB AND GUTTER CURB AND GUTTER
A
A
7-10' PARK STRIP
1' CONCRETE PARK

STRIP (IF USED)

TOP VIEW WITH PARK STRIP TOP VIEW WITHOUT PARK STRIP

SECTION A-A
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-18

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER SAMPLE STATION
(SHEET 1 OF 2)
01/24/2023

SHELF

DOOR TO BE MOUNTED

OPPOSITE FROM

VEHICULAR TRAFFIC AREA

SAMPLER HOUSING
3/8" O.D. COPPER TUBING
TYPE "K" SOFT DRAWN

POSITION SAMPLE LINE OUTLET
DIRECTLY OVER 1 1/2" DRAIN HOLE
3/8" TUBE SIZE IMPERIAL #100
H.D. VALVE, BRASS MOUNT ON

VALVE HOLDER
6' MIN.
3/4" P.V.C. DRAIN LINE
WITH 90° ELL (TYP)

SAMPLE LINE

FROM METER
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-19

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER SAMPLE STATION
(SHEET 2 OF 2)
01/24/2023

FLOW

1. RESILIENT SEATED SHUT-OFF VALVES AND TEST COCKS ARE REQUIRED.

2. NO TAPS, TEES OR CONNECTIONS OF ANY KIND ARE PERMITTED BETWEEN THE WATER METER AND THE PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY.

3. PROTECTION FROM FREEZE DAMAGE IS REQUIRED IN EXPOSED AREAS.

4. ASSEMBLY MUST BE ACCESSIBLE FOR TESTING AND MAINTENANCE PER CITY OF DINUBA MUNICIPAL CODE.

5. ASSEMBLY TO BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE WATER SUPPLY LINE PER UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE.

6. PRESSURE LOSS THROUGH PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY MUST BE INCLUDED IN PRESSURE LOSS CALCULATIONS FOR SIZING OF THE WATER SYSTEM PER UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE.

7. DOWNSTREAM PIPING MAY HAVE VALVES IN SYSTEM.

8. INSTALL ONE UNION IN THE PIPING SYSTEM WITHIN 12 INCHES OF THE ASSEMBLY.

9. ASSEMBLY CAN NOT BE SUBJECT TO BACK PRESSURE FROM PUMPS, ELEVATION, OR OTHER SOURCES.

10. MAINTAIN A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES, MAXIMUM OF 18 INCHES CLEARANCE AROUND ASSEMBLY.

11. ANY DEVIATION FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

NOTES:

UNION JOINT
INSTALL "Y" STRAINER

WHERE DIRECTED

UNION JOINT

SPRINKLER
HEAD
VALVE
18" MIN.

FLOW
24" MIN.
60" MAX.
30" MAX.
18" MIN.

EQUIPMENT COVER PER
CITY STD. W-24
PIPE
SLEEVE
24" MIN. PIPE
SLEEVE

3.5" THICK

CONCRETE PAD
1/2"
PL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-20

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER

BLACKFLOW PREVENTER INSTALLATION
01/24/2023

1. INLET AND OUTLET VALVES TO BE INSTALLED AT EACH END OF ASSEMBLY.

2. ALL WATER METERS SHALL BE "NEPTUNE" REMOTE READ, OR APPROVED EQUAL.

3. ALL WATER METERS LARGER THAN 2" SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE OWNER, DEVELOPER, OR CONTRACTOR.

NOTES:

FLOW FLOW

STRAINER
METER

APPROVED REDUCED

PRESSURE DEVICE

FLOW FLOW

THRUST BLOCK, SEE
CITY STD. W-3 (TYP.)
90° BEND
12" SPACER SPOOL

GATE VALVE
12" CLR.

GATE VALVE
90° BEND

FINISHED GRADE
CLASS "A"

CONCRETE
(6 SACK MIN.)
12" SQ.
1"

CROSS SECTION

PLAN VIEW

CONTRACTOR

WILL PROVIDE

ADJUSTABLE

PIPE SUPPORT

APPROVED BY

CITY ENGINEER
LEVEL
WATER
SUPPLY
LINE
6"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-21

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

COMPOUND OR TURBINE METER SETTING

WITH REDUCED PRESSURE DEVICE
01/24/2023

APPROVED BACKFLOW

ASSEMBLY REQUIRED

1. RESILIENT SEATED SHUT OFF VALVES AND TEST COCKS ARE REQUIRED.

2. NO TAPS, TEES, CONNECTIONS OF ANY KIND ARE PERMITTED BETWEEN THE WATER METER AND THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY.

3. PROTECTION FROM FREEZE DAMAGE MAY BE REQUIRED IN EXPOSED AREAS.

4. ASSEMBLY MUST BE ACCESSIBLE FOR TESTING AND MAINTENANCE PER CITY OF DINUBA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

5. ASSEMBLY TO BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE WATER SUPPLY LINE PER UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE.

6. PRESSURE LOSS THROUGH ASSEMBLY MUST BE INCLUDED IN PRESSURE LOSS CALCULATIONS FOR SIZING OF THE WATER SYSTEM PER UNIFORM BUILDING CODE.

7. MINIMUM CLEARANCES AROUND ASSEMBLY MUST BE MAINTAINED. REFER TO MINIMUM CLEARANCE CHART ON THIS PAGE.

8. DRAINAGE TO EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING IS REQUIRED WHEN ASSEMBLY IS INSTALLED INSIDE.

9. ANY DEVIATION FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE WATER SYSTEM MANAGER OR CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL SPECIALIST PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.

10. THE BACKFLOW PREVENTER DEVICES AND INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF DINUBA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT.

11. BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE INSPECTED AND TESTED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OR PROVIDE A CERTIFICATE SHOWING THE ASSEMBLY WAS TESTED AND PASSED.

NOTES:

FLOW
LEVEL

FINISHED GRADE
12" TO 18"
24" MIN.
60" MAX.

WATER SUPPLY LINE FLOW

THRUST BLOCK, SEE
CITY STD. W-3 (TYP.)

MINIMUM CLEARANCE

SIZE DC A B C
1" TO 3" 12" 24" 12"
4" & UP 24" 24" 12"
B
C

DOUBLE CHECK

ASSEMBLY
C

MINIMUM CLEARANCE LINE

TEST COCKS

PIPE SLEEVE
1/2"

3.5" THICK PIPE SLEEVE

CONCRETE PAD CONTRACTOR WILL

PROVIDE ADJUSTABLE

PIPE SUPPORT

APPROVED BY CITY

ENGINEER

EQUIPMENT COVER,
SEE CITY STD. W-24
A
PL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-22

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

DOUBLE CHECK VALVE
01/24/2023

PERMANENTLY

ATTACHED PIPE

HOSE CONNECTION

FROM WATER SOURCE

APPROVED AIR GAP

AIR-GAP PROTECTION

MECHANICAL ASSEMBLY PROTECTION

APPROVED RP

FROM WATER
SOURCE

APPROVED RP

FROM WATER
SOURCE

1. AIR-GAP MUST BE AN APPROVED "AIR-GAP" SYSTEM.

2. MECHANICAL BACKFLOW PREVENTER MUST BE AN APPROVED REDUCED PRESSURE PRINCIPAL ASSEMBLY.

3. BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY MUST BE TESTED BY A CERTIFIED BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE TESTER, WHO IS REGISTERED WITH CITY. THE TESTS SHALL BE PERFORMED ONCE A YEAR. THE TEST RESULTS MUST BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY.

4. TYPICAL EQUIPMENT: WATER TRUCKS, PEST CONTROL TRUCKS, HYDROSEEDING EQUIPMENT, PORTABLE WASHING, AND STEAM CLEANING EQUIPMENT.

REQUIREMENTS:

CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-23

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

APPROVED PORTABLE WATER

TRANSPORT BACKFLOW PROTECTION
01/24/2023

· PLASTICOTE POWDER COAT FINISH
· ACCEPTS PADLOCK
· FOREST GREEN IN COLOR
· PLASTICOTE POWDER COAT FINISH
· ACCEPTS PADLOCK
· HINGED FOR EASY ACCESS
· FOREST GREEN IN COLOR

LIFT-OFF ENCLOSURES

TYPE LENGTH (L) HEIGHT (H) WIDTH (W)
GS-.5 12" 18" 10"
GS-1 22" 24" 10"
GS-2 30" 24" 10"
GS-3.3 30" 30" 16"
H
L
L
H
W
W

HINGED BODY ENCLOSURES

TYPE LENGTH (L) HEIGHT (H) WIDTH (W)
GS-3 40" 24" 10"
GS-4 46" 30" 16"
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-24

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

EQUIPMENT COVERS
01/24/2023

CROSS CONNECTION
NOTES:

LINE VALVE (RT X RT)

GATE VALVE (FL X RT)

SECONDARY LINE

CROSS (FL)

TRANSMISSION GRID LINE TRANSMISSION GRID LINE

SECONDARY LINE

TEE (FL)

GATE VALVE (FL X RT)

1. MAXIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN VALVES
IS 500'.

TEE CONNECTION
CL
CL
CL
CL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-25

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

WATER MAIN INTERSECTION

CONNECTIONS
01/24/2023

P.U.E.

UTILITY
TRENCH

CITY R/W
6' 6'
WATER
MAIN
10' MIN.
(O.D. TO O.D.) STORM

DRAIN MAIN

SANITARY

SEWER MAIN

UTILITY
TRENCH
P.U.E.

1. WATER MAINS AND STORM DRAIN MAINS SHALL BE PLACED NORTH OR WEST OF THE STREET CENTERLINE.

2. SANITARY SEWER MAINS SHALL BE PLACED TO THE SOUTH OR EAST OF THE STREET CENTERLINE.

3. FOR LOCATION OF WATER SERVICES AND SEWER LATERALS, SEE CITY STD. SS-1.

4. THERE SHALL BE A 10' MINIMUM OUTSIDE OF PIPE TO OUTSIDE OF PIPE DISTANCE BETWEEN WATER MAINS, SANITARY SEWER MAINS AND STORM DRAIN MAINS.

5. BACKFILL IN PARKWAY OR STREET INSTALLATIONS SHALL BE AS REQUIRED BY CITY STD. W-12.

6. LOCATION OF UTILITY TRENCHES SHALL BE WITHIN THE P.U.E. EXCEPT FOR CROSSINGS.

7. AT NO TIME WILL SANITARY SEWER LINES BE ALLOWED IN A TRENCH OCCUPIED BY PRIMARY OR SECONDARY ELECTRICAL POWER.

8. EACH UTILITY COMPANY MAY HAVE ONE OR MORE CONDUITS OR CONDUCTORS IN A JOINT UTILITY TRENCH.

9. DEPTHS TO VARY ACCORDING TO CONDUIT SIZES AND LATERAL INTERFERENCE AND UTILITY COMPANY SPECIFICATIONS.

10. ALL CONDUCTORS OR CONDUITS SHALL HAVE 3" MINIMUM CLEARANCE FROM TRENCH SIDEWALL.

NOTES:

MINIMUM PIPE DIAMETER FOR:

WATER MAIN:8"
SANITARY SEWER MAIN: 8"
STORM DRAIN MAIN: 18"
10' MIN.
(O.D. TO O.D.)
PL
CL
6'
42" (TYP.) UNLESS

OTHERWISE NOTED

AND APPROVED BY

THE CITY ENGINEER
PL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-26

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

LOCATIONS OF UTILITY MAINS
01/24/2023

STORM DRAIN

SANITARY SEWER

WATER MAIN

SANITARY SEWER

WATER MAIN

STORM DRAIN

1. THIS "STANDARD" IS A GUIDE ONLY AND DEVIATIONS WILL BE ACCEPTABLE WHERE CONDITIONS DICTATE.

2. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE DESIRABLE BUT DO NOT GOVERN.

3. THE INTENTION IS TO SHOW THE RELATIVE POSITION OF ALL UTILITIES.

4. ANY CHANGES OR DEVIATION MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

MH
MH 6' MIN.

NOTES:

CL
10' MIN.
10' MIN.
6' MIN.

CL CL
CL
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL:

APPROVED BY CITY ENGINEER

APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

REVISIONS

NAME BY DATE
W-27

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS

LOCATIONS FOR UNDERGROUND CONDUITS
& PIPES IN RESIDENTIAL AREA CITY STREETS
01/24/2023

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

CURB RAMP INFORMATION
Location Number County City Route
Route Name Cross Street
Latitude (y)
Longitude (x)
Postmile/Station
Street Grade (%)
Intersection Control
None
Stop/Yield
Signalized
Construction Type
New
Retrofit
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Southwest
Southeast
Mid-Block
Applicable Standard Plans
2018 Standard Plan A88A
Other
Applicable Standard Specifications
2018
2015
Other
Applicable Design Bulletin
DIB 82-06

ADA CURB RAMP COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION
Based on the field measurements shown on page 2 curb ramp complies with standard plan A88A? Yes No Based on the field measurements shown on page 3 curb ramp complies with standard plan A88A? Yes No Based on the field measurements shown on page 4 curb ramp complies with standard plan A88A? Yes No Curb ramp is American's with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant based on ADA curb ramp check list shown on page 5? Yes No
Curb ramp is ADA compliant based on ADA curb ramp check list shown on page 6? Yes No Curb ramp is ADA compliant based on ADA curb ramp check list shown on page 7? Yes No This section must be completed if no is marked for any question indicating that a curb ramp is non-compliant.

Project engineer compliance determination (must state ADA standard used for compliance determination):

Curb ramp is ADA compliant with ADA standards Yes No
Project Engineer (print name) Signature
{{Sig3_es_:signer3:signature }}
Date
{{Dte3_es_:signer3:date }}

RESIDENT ENGINEER ADA COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION
I have reviewed the curb ramp inspection report and find that the constructed curb ramp is in compliance with ADA standards.

Resident Engineer (print name) Signature
{{Sig4_es_:signer4:signature }}
Date
{{Dte4_es_:signer4:date }}
By providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME
Location Number Route Name
Cross Street

Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Mid-Block
Southwest
Southeast
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, or E) FIELD MEASUREMENTS
Measure and verify the dimensions and slopes:

Ramp Slope
(x.x%)
A1
A2
A3

7.7% or less?
Yes No
Ramp
Cross Slope
(x.x%)
B1
B2
B3

1.7% or less?
Yes No
Ramp
Width
(inches)
C1
C2
C3

49.75" or
greater?
Yes No
Left Flare
Slope at Back
of Curb
(x.x%)
D1

9.2% or less?
Yes No
Right Flare
Slope at Back
of Curb
(x.x%)
E1

9.2% or less?
Yes No
Gutter
Slope
(x.x%)
F1
F2

1.7% or less?
Yes No
Gutter
Cross Slope
(x.x%)
G1
G2
G3

5.2% or less?
Yes No
Road Surface
Cross Slope
within 2'
from Ramp
(x.x%)
H1
H2
H3

5.2% or less?
Gutter is 24" or
more wide.

Yes No
N/A
Remarks
Inspection by (print name) Signature
{{Sig1_es_:signer1:signature }}
Date
{{Dte1_es_:signer1:date }} Job Title
By providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME
Location Number Route Name
Cross Street

Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Mid-Block
Southwest
Southeast
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, or E) FIELD MEASUREMENTS
Measure and verify the dimensions and slopes:

Top Landing
Cross Slope
(x.x%)
I1
I2
I3

1.7% or less?
Yes No
Top Landing
Slope
(x.x%)
J1
J2
J3

1.7% or less?
Yes No
Top Landing
Width
(inches)
K1
K2
K3

49.75" or
greater?
Yes No
Top Landing
Depth
(inches)
L1
L2
L3

49.75" or
greater?
Yes No
Detectable
Warning
Surface Width
(inches)
M1
M2
Extends full width
and less than 1"
gap on either
side?
Yes No
Detectable
Warning
Surface Depth
(inches)
N1
N2
Minimum 36"?
Yes No
Remarks
Inspection by (print name) Signature
{{Sig1_es_:signer1:signature }}
Date
{{Dte1_es_:signer1:date }} Job Title
By providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME
Location Number Route Name
Cross Street

Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Mid-Block
Southwest
Southeast
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, or E) FIELD MEASUREMENTS
Measure and verify the dimensions and slopes:

Left Side
Conforming Sidewalk
Slope within 4'
of Top Landing
(x.x%)
O1
O2
O3

5.2% or less?
Yes No
If "No," is the sidewalk
adjacent to the roadway
and the sidewalk grade
does not exceed the
roadway grade?
Yes No N/A
Left Side
Conforming Sidewalk
Cross Slope within 4'
of Top Landing
(x.x%)
P1
P2

1.7% or less?
Yes No
If "No," is the conforming
sidewalk a transition to an
existing sidewalk?
. Yes No
If "Yes," the 1.7% or less
requirement does not apply.

Right Side
Conforming Sidewalk
Slope within 4'
of Top Landing
(x.x%)
Q1
Q2
Q3

5.2% or less?
Yes No
If "No," is the sidewalk
adjacent to the roadway
and the sidewalk grade
does not exceed the
roadway grade?
Yes No N/A
Right Side
Conforming Sidewalk
Cross Slope within 4'
of Top Landing
(x.x%)
R1
R2

1.7% or less?
Yes No
If "No," is the conforming
sidewalk a transition to an
existing sidewalk?
. Yes No
If "Yes," the 1.7% or less
requirement does not apply.

Remarks
Inspection by (print name) Signature
{{Sig1_es_:signer1:signature }}
Date
{{Dte1_es_:signer1:date }} Job Title
By providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME
Location Number Route Name
Cross Street

Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Mid-Block
Southwest
Southeast
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, or E) FIELD INSPECTION CHECKLIST No. Requirement Compliant Photo Remarks
1 Detectable warning surface was on the Authorized Material List? 2 Detectable warning surface is yellow in color?
3 Detectable warning surface is in compliance with standard plan A88A detail Raised Truncated Dome for dome diameter and height?
4 Detectable warning surface is in compliance with standard plan A88A detail Detectable Warning Surface for truncated dome spacing?
5 Detectable warning surface edge nearest the street is in contact with the back of curb projection? If answer is yes, then mark item 6 N/A.
6 Detectable warning surface edge nearest the street is installed as shown on the project plans?
Mark N/A if installed per standard plan.
7 Detectable warning surface 5-year manufacturer's warranty is on file?
8 Curb ramp surface has a broom finish, which provides slip resistant surface?
9 Are all changes in surface level less than ¼”?
10 For any utility pull boxes, manholes, or vaults within the boundary of curb ramp are they flush with the finished curb ramp surface?
Mark item N/A if there are no utility pull boxes, manholes, or vaults.
11 For openings or gratings located within the boundary of curb ramp, are spaces less than ½” in one direction and are
elongated openings oriented perpendicular to dominate
direction of travel?
Mark item N/A if there are no openings or gratings.

Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
Remarks
Field inspection checklist completed by (print name) Signature {{Sig2_es_:signer2:signature }}
Date
{{Dte2_es_:signer2:date }} Job Title
By providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME
Location Number Route Name
Cross Street

Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Mid-Block
Southwest
Southeast
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, or E) FIELD INSPECTION CHECKLIST No. Requirement Compliant Photo Remarks
12 For obstructions such as signposts, lighting standards, power/telephone poles, guy-wires, or mail boxes in the
construction area, complete items 13-16.

If no obstructions are located within the construction area mark items 13-16 N/A.

Item 13-16 N/A
13 Are objects with leading edges between 27” to 80” height, protected by guardrails or other barriers less than 27” above the finished surface?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
14 For objects with leading edges between 27” to 80” height, is horizontal protrusion less than 4” (4.5” for handrails) without reducing the 48” minimum clear width requirement?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
15 For objects mounted on single posts, that overhang the sidewalk or curb ramp, are the overhangs less than 12” when located between heights of 27” to 80”?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
16 For objects mounted between posts, where the clear
distance between posts is greater than 12”, is the lowest edge of such object less than 27” or greater than 80” above the finished surface?
Yes No
N/A Yes No Yes No
17 For curb ramp at a signalized intersection, complete items 18-22. If not at signalized intersection mark items 18-22 N/A. Item 18-22 N/A 18 Is the pedestrian push button height within 40-44 inches from the sidewalk surface or ground?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
19 Is the pedestrian push button wheelchair accessible from unobstructed forward reach?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
20 Is the pedestrian push button wheelchair accessible from unobstructed side reach?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
21 For unobstructed side reach, is the pedestrian push button within 10 inches of the edge of sidewalk?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
22 Is the sidewalk slope and cross slope less than 1.7 percent within the 48” x 48” area adjacent to pedestrian push button? Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
23 For a curb ramp located at an intersection with a crosswalk answer items 24-27. If no crosswalk mark items 24-27 N/A. Item 24-27 N/A Remarks
Field inspection checklist completed by (print name) Signature {{Sig2_es_:signer2:signature }}
Date
{{Dte2_es_:signer2:date }} Job Title
By providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

CONTRACTOR NAME AND ADDRESS CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER

PROJECT INFORMATION/NAME
Location Number Route Name
Cross Street

Ramp Case
Case A
Case D
Case E
Intersection Quadrant
Northwest
Northeast
Mid-Block
Southwest
Southeast
Ramp
Single
Dual Ramp 1
Dual Ramp 2
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, or E) FIELD INSPECTION CHECKLIST No. Requirement Compliant Photo Remarks
24 Does the crosswalk line up with the curb ramp? Yes No N/A
Yes No Yes No
25 For one-ramp corner (diagonal) installation, is the crosswalk a minimum of 4'-2” back from bottom of curb ramp as shown on standard plan A88A Detail B?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
26 For one-ramp corner (diagonal) installation with flared sides, there must be at least a 24-inch long segment of curb located on each side of curb ramp and within the crosswalk, if the crosswalk is marked as shown on standard plan A88A Detail B? Yes No
N/A Yes No Yes No
27 Is there a minimum area of 48” x 48” within the crosswalk in front of the curb ramp?
Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
28 Is the surface of the roadway in front of the curb ramp flush and free of abrupt changes? Yes No Yes No Yes No
29 Is the surface of the roadway and gutter flush, without a lip between the gutter and pavement surface? Yes No Yes No Yes No 30 Is the roadway surface within the pedestrian street crossing area in good condition? Yes No Yes No Yes No
31 If the curb ramp joins an existing sidewalk, is the existing sidewalk in good condition?
Mark N/A if curb ramp does not join an existing sidewalk.

Yes No
N/A
Yes No Yes No
32 Retaining curb in place at back of sidewalk or curb ramp if required? Yes No Yes No Yes No
33 Has backfill been placed against sidewalk or adjacent ground leveled where curb ramp was constructed to prevent falling hazard?
Yes No Yes No Yes No
Remarks
Field inspection checklist completed by (print name) Signature {{Sig2_es_:signer2:signature }}
Date
{{Dte2_es_:signer2:date }} Job Title
I agree that by providing my electronic signature for this form, I agree to conduct business transactions by electronic means and that my electronic signature is the legal binding equivalent to my handwritten signature. I hereby agree that my electronic signature represents my execution or authentication of this form, and my intent to be bound by it.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

GENERAL INFORMATION
• This form is to provide documentation necessary for project certification of curb ramps constructed to meet ADA requirements. • The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, along with its implementing regulations, and the California Government Code Sections 4450 et seq. prescribe that facilities must be made accessible to persons with disabilities. • Design Information Bulletin 82, “Pedestrian Accessibility Guidelines for Highway Projects” (DIB 82), is Caltrans policy and contains design requirements for Caltrans projects to comply with state codes, and federal laws and regulations regarding pedestrian accessibility.
• Contact the project engineer for additional information about ADA requirements and issues with curb ramp compliance.

FORM
• Complete the form for each curb ramp constructed on the project and provide the curb ramp information for each location that will be used to identify the curb ramp location and its attributes. • CONTRACT NUMBER/COUNTY/ROUTE/POSTMILE: For local agency encroachment permit projects, write the encroachment permit number in the CONTRACT NUMBER field.
• PROJECT IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: For local agency encroachment permit projects, write N/A in the field. • Provide curb ramp information that uniquely identifies the passageway location so that this asset's attributes can be stored in a database.
• Establish a location number for each curb ramp location. • For each curb ramp location provide:
○ County
○ City
○ Route
○ Route Name, for example State Route 49
○ Name of the cross Street. For mid-block curb ramp, write N/A for cross street. • Latitude and longitude must be in decimal format to a minimum of six decimal places. Free Global Positioning System (GPS) applications for smart phones, tablets, and desk tops will report latitudes and longitudes to the necessary accuracy for differentiation of the permanent pedestrian facilities locations.
• For dual ramps, check "Dual Ramp 1" for the curb ramp that is used for crossing the main route and check "Dual Ramp 2" for the curb ramp used for crossing the cross street.
• Use applicable Design Bulletin: DIB 82-06 effective for projects ready to list 11/16/2017 or later. • Measure the curb ramp dimensions and slopes shown on the form using measuring devices that meet the following standards:
○ For dimensional measurements, use a standard measuring tape with 1/8 inch minimum markings. ○ For slope measurements, use a smart level with a minimum sensor accuracy of 0.1 degrees. ○ Ensure that the smart level has been properly calibrated prior to taking measurements. ○ For measuring slopes on elements with dimensions 4 feet or less, use a 2-foot smart level. For measuring slopes on elements with dimensions greater than 4 feet, use a 4-foot smart level. • Measurements taken must comply with the following:
○ Record dimensional measurements to the nearest 1/8 inch. ○ Record slope measurements to the nearest 0.1 percent. ○ For both dimensional and slope checks, take representative measurements equally dispersed across the surface in question.

Do not average the results. Record the individual measurements in the appropriate inspection report location. • If any of the following occur, contact the project engineer:
○ Measured slope exceeds the allowable slope.
○ Measured dimension does not meet meet the allowable dimension.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

CURB RAMP (CASE A, D, OR E) AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES (ADA)

COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT
DOT CEM-5773ADE (REV 09/2025)

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Notice: This document is available in alternative accessible formats. For more information, please contact the Forms Management Unit at (279) 234-2284, TTY 711, in writing at Forms Management Unit, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814, or by email at [email protected].

ADA CURB RAMP COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION
• The resident engineer must review the completed form and determine if the curb ramp is compliant with plan and specification requirements.
• Caltrans standards for curb ramps were developed to include some allowance due to measurement accuracies so that when constructed, the curb ramp would be within the maximum and minimum requirements of DIB 82. • Allowable construction allowances from the slopes and dimensions shown on the standard plan are based on the accuracy of the measuring devices previously specified and are:
○ ≤ 0.2 percent from the slope shown.
○ ≤ ¼ inch from the dimension shown.

Where appropriate the allowances for construction have been incorporated into this form for inspecting for compliance. For example, the standard plan sidewalk cross slope is 1.5% and the construction allowance is 0.2% so the measured sidewalk cross slope may be a maximum of 1.7% for contract compliance. • If a constructed curb ramp does not comply with the Caltrans standard plan requirements, notify the project engineer to evaluate the curb ramp prior to ordering the contractor correct or remove and replace the noncompliant curb ramp. • Further evaluation by the project engineer may determine that the curb ramp is compliant under the maximum or minimum ADA standards contained in DIB 82. The project engineer determination must cite the ADA standard within DIB 82 that allows Caltrans to accept the curb ramp as ADA compliant on the form.
• Upon ADA compliance inspection report completion, the resident engineer must file the inspection report within the project records and complete the ADA Certification and Summary Form DOT CEM-5773, "Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Project Compliance Certification." Transmit the summary form and any required attachments to: [email protected]

53604 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations

ARCHITECTURAL AND

TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS

COMPLIANCE BOARD
36 CFR Part 1190
[Docket No. ATBCB 2011–0004]
RIN 3014–AA26
Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian
Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way
AGENCY: Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board.

ACTION: Final rule.

The purpose of these guidelines is to
ensure that pedestrian facilities located
in the public right-of-way are readily
accessible to and usable by pedestrians
with disabilities. Despite on-going
efforts to improve access, pedestrians
with disabilities throughout the United
States continue to face major challenges
in public rights-of-way because many
sidewalks, crosswalks, and other
pedestrian facilities are inaccessible.

Equal access to pedestrian facilities is of
particular importance because
pedestrian travel is the principal means
of independent transportation for many
• Crosswalks: Curb ramps and
detectable warning surfaces are required
where a pedestrian circulation path
meets a vehicular way. Crosswalks at
multilane roundabouts and channelized
turn lanes must have additional
treatments that alert motorists to the
presence of pedestrians or slow or stop
traffic at those crosswalks.
• Transit Stops: Boarding and
alighting areas at sidewalk or street
level, as well as elevated boarding
platforms, must be sized and situated
such that a person with a disability can
board and alight buses and rail cars. persons with disabilities. Pedestrian access routes must connect SUMMARY: The Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board (Access Board or Board) issues its
final rule that provides minimum
guidelines for the accessibility of
pedestrian facilities in the public rightof-way. These guidelines, once adopted, would ensure that facilities used by
pedestrians, such as sidewalks and
crosswalks, constructed or altered in the
public right-of-way by Federal, state,
and local Governments are readily
accessible to and usable by pedestrians
with disabilities. When the guidelines
are adopted, with or without
modifications, as accessibility standards
in regulations issued by other Federal
agencies implementing the Americans
with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act, and the
Architectural Barriers Act, compliance
with those enforceable accessibility
standards is mandatory.

DATES: The final rule is effective
September 7, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Windley, Office of Technical and
Information Services, Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance
Board, 1331 F Street NW, Suite 1000,
Washington, DC 20004–1111.

Telephone (202) 272–0025 (voice) or
(202) 272–0028 (TTY). Email address
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Executive Summary
The U.S. Access Board issues its final
rule for accessibility guidelines for
pedestrian facilities in public rights-ofway (PROWAG or guidelines). These guidelines are issued under Title II of
the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (ADA) and the Architectural
Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA). Title II of
the ADA applies to State and local
government facilities, among others.

The ABA applies to facilities
constructed or altered by or on behalf of
the Federal Government, facilities
leased by Federal agencies, and some
facilities built with Federal funds.

Key accessible features of pedestrian
facilities specified in these guidelines
include:

Pedestrian Access Routes: Sidewalks,
shared use paths and other pedestrian
circulation paths must contain a
‘‘pedestrian access route,’’ which is
required to be accessible to and
traversable by individuals with
disabilities. The portions of these
sidewalks and paths that comprise the
pedestrian access route must be wide
enough to minimize the possibility of a
pedestrian using a mobility device
falling into a roadway when passed by
another pedestrian. Pedestrian access
routes have specified cross slopes and
running slopes so that they are
traversable by pedestrians using manual
wheelchairs or other mobility aids
without exhaustive effort. Surfaces of
paths in the pedestrian access route
must be firm, stable, and slip resistant,
without large openings or abrupt
changes in level. Objects may not
hazardously protrude onto sidewalks,
shared use paths, or other pedestrian
circulation paths.
• Alternate Pedestrian Access Routes:

When an entity closes a pedestrian
access route for construction, it must
provide a temporary alternate
pedestrian access route with basic
accessible features. Alternate pedestrian
access routes ensure that construction in
the public right-of-way does not prevent
pedestrians with disabilities from
reaching their destinations.
• Accessible Pedestrian Signals: All
new and altered pedestrian signal heads
installed at crosswalks must include
‘‘accessible pedestrian signals’’ (APS),
which have audible and vibrotactile
features indicating the walk interval so
that a pedestrian who is blind or has
low vision will know when to cross the
street. Pedestrian push buttons must be
located within a reach range such that
a person seated in a wheelchair can
reach them. The walk speed used to
calculate the crossing time allows
pedestrians with disabilities sufficient
time to cross.
boarding and alighting areas and
boarding platforms to other pedestrian
facilities. Transit shelters must have
clear space for use by a person in a
wheelchair.
• On-Street Parking: On-street nonresidential parking must have designated accessible parking spaces
sized so that a person with a disability
may exit a parked vehicle and maneuver
to the sidewalk without entering a
vehicular way. Standard size designated
accessible on-street parking spaces must
be situated near an existing crosswalk
with curb ramps.

These minimum guidelines will
become enforceable once they are
adopted, with or without modifications,
as mandatory standards under the ADA
by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
and the U.S. Department of
Transportation (USDOT), or the four
Federal agencies that set standards for
the Federal Government under the
Architectural Barriers Act—the U.S.

Postal Service (USPS), General Services
Administration (GSA), U.S. Department
of Defense (DOD), and U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD)).

II. Legal Authority and Need for
Rulemaking
These guidelines are issued pursuant
to the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act,
which provide statutory authority for
the Access Board to issue minimum
accessibility guidelines to ensure that
transportation facilities are usable by
persons with disabilities. See 29 U.S.C.
792(b)(3)(B), 42 U.S.C. 12204. These
guidelines serve as the minimum
requirements for enforceable standards
issued by other agencies pursuant to
their responsibilities under the ADA
and the ABA. 29 U.S.C. 792(b)(3)(B); 42
U.S.C. 4151 et seq., 12134(c), 12149(b).

As described in the Rulemaking
History section below, these final
guidelines have been long awaited,
particularly by state and local
governments subject to Title II of the
ADA. Both the Access Board’s 2004

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 53605 Americans with Disabilities Act and
Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility
Guidelines (2004 ADAAG/ABAAG), and
the Board’s initial 1991 Americans with
Disabilities Act Accessibility
Guidelines, were developed primarily
for buildings and facilities on sites. 36
CFR part 1191; 56 FR 35408 (July 26,
1991). While some of the requirements
can be readily applied to pedestrian
facilities in the public right-of-way,
others need substantial modification,
and many issues specific to public
rights-of-way were simply not
addressed. Further, the magnitude of
existing physical constraints in public
rights-of-way poses unique
considerations that are not present in
the context of buildings and sites.

In the absence of final technical
requirements for accessibility of
pedestrian facilities, state and local
governments have been left to determine
on their own how to comply with the
ADA’s existing mandate to make public
pedestrian transportation facilities
accessible. The lack of final Federal
standards has contributed to uncertainty
about the relevant standards, which has
resulted in courts determining technical
requirements for accessibility, in some
cases applying requirements for
buildings and sites to public rights-ofway, although public rights-of-way are, for the most part, not specifically
addressed by these standards (see e.g.,
Kirola v. City & Cty. of S.F., 860 F.3d
1164 (9th Cir. 2017) (finding that
ADAAG applies to public rights-ofway); Fortyune v. City of Lomita, 766 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2014) (applying the
2010 ADA Standards to diagonal
See 29 U.S.C. 792(b)(3)(B); 42 U.S.C.
4151 et seq.

III. Rulemaking History
The Access Board began developing
accessibility guidelines for pedestrian
facilities in public rights-of-way shortly
after the ADA was enacted in 1990. In
1992, the Board issued proposed
guidelines for state and local
government facilities, including
pedestrian facilities in public rights-ofway, followed by interim guidelines in 1994 that also contained provisions for
public rights-of-way. 57 FR 60612
(December 21, 1992); 59 FR 31676 (June
20, 1994).

In response to the proposed and
interim guidelines, the Board received
numerous public comments that
indicated a need for further outreach,
education, and research on accessible
pedestrian facilities in public rights-ofway. Consequently, when the Board issued its first final guidelines for state
and local government facilities in 1998,
the requirements for pedestrian facilities
in the public right-of-way were not
included. 63 FR 2000 (January 13,
1998).

In 1999, the Access Board established
a Federal advisory committee to
recommend accessibility guidelines for
pedestrian facilities in public rights-ofway. The committee included a wide range of stakeholders, including
representatives of state and local
governments, the transportation
industry, disability rights advocacy
organizations, and other interested
groups.1
In 2001, the advisory committee
presented its consensus
recommendations to the Board. See U.S.

Access Board, Building a True
Community: Final Report of the Public
Rights-of-Way Access Advisory
Committee. (Jan. 10, 2001). Based on the
advisory committee’s recommendations,
the Access Board developed draft
accessibility guidelines for pedestrian
facilities in the public right-of-way,
which it made available for public
review and comment in 2002. 67 FR
41206 (June 17, 2002). In 2005, the
Board published revised draft
guidelines, also seeking to gather data
for a regulatory assessment of the
guidelines’ potential costs and benefits.
70 FR 70734 (November 23, 2005).

Following the 2005 release, the
Access Board continued to further
improve the draft guidelines, engaging
numerous stakeholders and sponsoring
research on various key provisions. The
Access Board also engaged in
substantial education and outreach
efforts, conducting training programs
around the country, and answering
questions on its technical assistance
hotline. In July 2007, the Public Rightsof-Way Access Advisory Committee released a 108-page planning and design
guide for alterations based on the 2005
draft guidelines.

In July 2011, the Access Board
initiated the instant rulemaking, issuing
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for
Accessibility Guidelines for Public
Rights-of-Way (NPRM). See 76 FR 44664
(July 26, 2011); Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking—Correction, 76 FR 45481
(July 29, 2011). The NPRM was
supported by a regulatory analysis based parking in public rights-of-way in the in part on cost estimates provided absence of enforceable accessibility
standards for public rights-of-way); see
also Sarfaty v. City of L.A., No. 2:17–cv–
03594–SVW–KS, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
40893 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 7, 2020)
(concluding that neither PROWAG draft
guidelines nor the 2010 ADA Standards
are applicable to on-street parking).

In addition, the Federal Government
similarly lacks accessibility criteria for
public rights-of-way, although there are
numerous Federal sites that contain
public rights-of-way, such as national
parks, medical and educational
campuses, and military installations.

Consequently, the Federal Government,
which seeks to be a leader in
accessibility, has been without clear,
specific, enforceable technical standards
for accessibility in public rights-of-way.

These final accessibility guidelines for
pedestrian facilities in public rights-ofway will serve as the technical basis of enforceable standards issued under the
ABA by GSA, USPS, DoD, and HUD.
1 The following organizations were members of
the advisory committee: AARP, America Walks,
American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, American Council of the
Blind, American Institute of Architects, American
Public Transit Association, American Public Works
Association, Association for Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired,
Bicycle Federation of America, Californians for
Disability Rights, Canadian Standards Association
(Technical Committee on Barrier-Free Design), City
of Birmingham (Department of Planning,
Engineering and Permits), Council of Citizens with
Low Vision International, Disability and Business
Technical Assistance Centers, Disability Rights
Education and Defense Fund, Federal Highway
Administration, Hawaii Commission on Persons
with Disabilities, Hawaii Department of
Transportation, Institute of Traffic Engineers (now
called Institute of Transportation Engineers), Los
Angeles Department of Public Works (Bureau of
Street Services), Massachusetts Architectural
Access Board, Municipality of Anchorage, National
Center for Bicycling and Walking, National Council
on Independent Living, National Federation of the
Blind, New York State Department of
Transportation, Paralyzed Veterans of America,
Portland Office of Transportation, San Francisco
Mayor’s Office on Disability, State of Alaska, TASH,
Texas Department of Transportation, and The
Seeing Eye.
through a 2010 interagency agreement
with the Volpe National Transportation
Systems Center (Volpe Center). See
Regulatory Assessment of Proposed
Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in
the Public Right-of-Way & Appendix
(June 2011); Volpe Center, ‘‘Cost
Analysis of Public Rights-of-Way
Accessibility Guidelines’’ (November
29, 2010), both available at https://
www.regulations.gov in rulemaking
docket (ATBCB–2011–0004).

The NPRM requested public
comments on all provisions of the
proposed Accessibility Guidelines for
Public Rights-of-Way (proposed rule or
proposed guidelines). In particular, the
Access Board sought comments from
regulated entities, including state and
local governments, on the costs and
impacts of certain portions of the
proposed rule. The comment period
ended on November 23, 2011, and was
subsequently reopened until February 2,

53606 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 2012.2 During the two comment periods,
460 commenters submitted
approximately 600 comments. The
Board also held public hearings in
Dallas, Texas and Washington, DC in
fall 2011.

On February 13, 2013, the Board
issued a supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking (SNPRM)
announcing its intent to add
requirements for shared use paths
(SUPs) to the proposed guidelines for
pedestrian facilities in the public rightof-way.3 78 FR 10110 (Feb. 13, 2013).

The SNPRM specified which provisions
of the proposed rule would be changed
to include requirements for SUPs.

During the 90-day comment period that
followed, 55 commenters provided
feedback on the provisions outlined in
the SNPRM.

The Board carefully reviewed the
public comments received in response
to the NPRM and SNPRM, consulted
with DOJ and USDOT, and revised the
rule text for final publication. In 2015,
the Board entered into a second
interagency agreement with the Volpe
Center to assess costs of the final
provisions. However, in January 2017,
in response to Executive Order 13771
(January 30, 2017), which required that
agencies identify two regulations for
elimination for every new regulation
proposed and that the total incremental
cost of any new regulations and
deregulatory actions be zero, the Board
ceased work on the PROWAG final rule.

Staff shifted efforts to education,
outreach, and technical assistance. From
2017 through 2022, Board staff
addressed hundreds of technical
2 Before the NPRM’s initial comment period
ended on November 23, 2011, three national
associations of local elected officials requested that
the Access Board extend the comment period to
allow local governments additional time to respond
to the proposed rule. A national association of
engineering companies also requested an extension
of the comment period. The Access Board thus
reopened the comment period through February 2,
2012. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking—
Reopening of Comment Period, 76 FR 75844 (Dec.
5, 2011).
3 In March 2011, the Board issued an advance
notice of proposed rulemaking announcing its
intent to develop accessibility guidelines for SUPs
and noted that it was considering including the
SUP requirements in the guidelines for pedestrian
facilities in the public right-of-way. 76 FR 17064,
17070 (March 28, 2011). The Board initially
determined that SUPs would be addressed in a
separate rulemaking, and thus did not include SUPs
in the proposed public right-of-way guidelines.

However, upon further consideration, the Board
determined that SUPs were sufficiently similar to
other pedestrian circulation paths such that they
should be included in the final rule for pedestrian
facilities in the public right-of-way. The Board then
issued the SNPRM informing the public of its
decision to include SUPs in the proposed
guidelines and soliciting comments regarding the
specific provisions that would apply to SUPs. 78 FR
10110 (Feb. 13, 2013).
assistance inquiries related to
PROWAG.

In 2021, following issuance of E.O.
13992 (January 20, 2021), which
rescinded E.O. 13771, the Board
resumed work on the PROWAG
rulemaking and entered into a final
interagency agreement with the Volpe
Center to prepare the final regulatory
impact analysis (FRIA). The FRIA is
available in the docket for this
rulemaking on regulations.gov and on
the Access Board’s website,
www.access-board.gov.

In consideration of the FRIA, public
comments and testimony, feedback from
other Federal agencies, and many years
of close collaboration with stakeholders,
the Access Board now issues these final
guidelines on accessible pedestrian
facilities in the public right-of-way.

IV. Summary of Significant Changes
The significant changes to the final
rule text from the versions proposed in
the NPRM and SNPRM are as follows:
• Alterations. There are three major
changes with the way alterations are
treated in the final rule. First, any
portion of a pedestrian facility that is
altered must be altered to comply with
these guidelines regardless of the
intended ‘‘scope of the project’’ by the
entity undertaking the alteration
(R201.1). This approach is consistent
with the way accessibility guidelines for
buildings and sites are applied. The
change is described in the Major Issues
section below.

Second, in the final rule, facilities and
portions of facilities that are ‘‘added’’ to
an existing, developed public right-ofway are ‘‘alterations,’’ and are subject to the requirements for altered facilities
(see R104.3; R201.1; R202). This
includes that compliance with the
requirements is required to the
maximum extent feasible where existing
physical constraints make compliance
with the applicable requirements
technically infeasible (R202.3). In the
proposed rule, added elements were
treated as new construction and subject
to full compliance with all applicable
requirements regardless of existing
physical constraints (NPRM R202.2).

This change is addressed in the Major
Issues section below.

Third, altered facilities must be
connected to an existing pedestrian
circulation path by a pedestrian access
route (R202.2). In the proposed rule,
only select alterations required a
connection; however, to ensure that
pedestrians with disabilities can realize
the benefits of an altered pedestrian
facility that is made accessible
consistent with these guidelines, the
final rule requires all altered facilities to
connect to a pedestrian circulation path.
• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices for Streets and Highways
(MUTCD). In the final rule, MUTCD
provisions are not incorporated by
reference. The Board proposed to
incorporate by reference various
sections of the MUTCD in the NPRM. As
explained in the major issues section
below, this created confusion as to the
application of those provisions in the
context of PROWAG. Consequently, the
Board has stated all required technical
provisions directly in the rule text,
many of which were taken from the
MUTCD, as explained in the Section-bySection discussion below. • Alterations that Trigger Installation
of Accessible Pedestrian Signals. In the
NPRM, the Board indicated that the
alteration of a signal controller and
software, or the replacement of a signal
head, would trigger the requirement to
install an accessible pedestrian signal
(NPRM R209.2). Upon consideration of
public comments, the Access Board
acknowledges the diverse nature of
alterations that affect pedestrian signals,
and declines in the final guidelines to
list specific actions that trigger the
requirement to install accessible
pedestrian signals. Rather, pedestrian
signals are subject to the same alteration
requirements as other pedestrian
facilities. The entity making the
alteration will assess, according to
requirements in the guidelines as
adopted by USDOT and DOJ, whether
installation of an accessible pedestrian
signal is required. The Board notes that
USDOT and DOJ may provide further
specifics as to alterations triggering
installation of APS in their rulemakings
adopting these guidelines.
• Crosswalk Treatments at
Roundabouts. The final rule expands
the crosswalk treatment options among
which jurisdictions must select for
installation at multilane pedestrian
crossings at roundabouts to include: a
traffic control signal with a pedestrian
signal head, a pedestrian hybrid beacon,
a pedestrian actuated rectangular rapid
flashing beacon, and a raised crossing.

This change is discussed in the Major
Issues section below.

V. Summary of Comments and Major
Issues Raised by Commenters
A. Overview of Commenters
In response to the NPRM, 460
commenters submitted approximately
600 comments on the provisions of the
proposed rule, including 25 state
departments of transportation and
highway administrations, 2 state utility
organizations, and 1 state transit

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 53607 authority. Eighty-seven local
government organizations commented,
including city and county departments
of transportation, engineering, public
works, and planning; city councils and
mayor’s offices; and highway districts
and transit authorities.

The Access Board received comments
from approximately 255 individuals
commenting on their own behalf,
including persons with a range of
disabilities who will directly benefit
from these guidelines, and mobility
specialists with experience teaching
persons with disabilities how to
navigate public rights-of-way.

Individual commenters also included
numerous civil engineers and planners
with expertise in the design and
construction of pedestrian facilities.

In addition, the Access Board
received comments from representatives
of approximately 90 organizations
including national and local disability
rights advocacy organizations,
engineering companies, law firms
involved in ADA litigation, professional
associations, and pedestrian and citizen
advocacy organizations.

In addition to soliciting written
comments, the Board also held two
public hearings on the proposed rule.

NPRM, 76 FR at 44664. In Dallas, Texas,
on September 12, 2011, twelve
witnesses testified regarding the
proposed guidelines. See PROW NPRM
Public Hearing, Dallas, Sept. 2011,
Docket ID ATBCB–2011–0346.

Witnesses included engineers and
architects, local government officials,
and disability rights advocates, among
others. Id. Fifteen individuals testified
at a public hearing in Washington, DC
on November 9, 2011, including
representatives from organizations
working with people with disabilities,
private industry, and professional
associations. See Transcript from PROW
NPRM, Docket ID ATBCB–2011–0607.

In response to the SNPRM to add
shared use paths to the proposed rule,
the Access Board received comments
from 55 commenters. Eighteen state and
local government entities commented,
as well as seven disability rights
organizations, three engineering
companies, four citizens’ organizations,
and two industry associations. In
addition, over 20 individuals, including
industry professionals and persons with
disabilities, responded to the SNPRM.

The Access Board appreciates the
robust and thoughtful public response
to the PROWAG rulemaking, and
carefully considered all testimony and
comments received in response to both
the NPRM and the SNPRM. Commenters
provided feedback on many specific
provisions of the proposed rule. The
majority of these comments are
addressed in the Section-by-Section
Analysis in Section VI of this preamble.

However, numerous commenters raised
concerns regarding four issues: the
application of the guidelines to new
construction and alterations; the
requirements regarding accessible
pedestrian signals; the requirement for
pedestrian signals or pedestrian hybrid
beacons at roundabouts; and the
extension of the leveling out of
intersections to pedestrian crossings.

The Board addresses these major issues
below.

B. Major Issues

1. Application of the Guidelines to New
Construction and Existing Facilities
Treatment of New Construction, Added
Facilities, and Alterations
In the proposed rule, the Board
identified three types of pedestrian
facilities subject to PROWAG: newly
constructed facilities, added facilities,
and altered facilities. The NPRM
specified that newly constructed and
added facilities were subject to full
compliance with PROWAG (NPRM
R201.1; NPRM R202.2), while
alterations were expected to comply to
the maximum extent practicable where
existing physical constraints make it
impracticable to fully comply (NPRM
R202.3.1).

These three classifications of facilities
were carried over from the accessibility
guidelines for buildings and sites, where
they have been used successfully for
many years. 69 FR 44083, 36 CFR part
1191 (July 23, 2004) and 56 FR 35408
(July 26, 1991). However, in response to
the PROWAG NPRM, the Board
received comments from state DOTs and
others indicating confusion as to how to
distinguish between new, added, and
altered facilities in the public right-ofway. In addition, since publication of the NPRM, the Board has regularly
received technical assistance inquiries
from individuals seeking to determine
whether a particular public right-of-way
construction project must fully comply
with requirements for new construction
or is subject to considerations for
existing physical constraints for
alterations.

The Board concurs that the
distinctions between new construction,
added facilities, and alterations, which
are readily apparent in construction of
a building, are not as clear in the public
right-of-way. For example, under the
language of the NPRM, a jurisdiction
might consider the extension of a
sidewalk an alteration of an existing
pedestrian facility or alternatively an
addition of a new pedestrian facility.

The level of compliance with
accessibility requirements might hinge
on that characterization.

In determining how to resolve this
confusion in the final rule, the Board
considered comments from state DOTs,
local government entities, an association
of engineering companies, and the
American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
indicating that any construction in
existing public rights-of-way should be
subject to considerations for existing
physical constraints, highlighting that
existing storm and sanitary sewer
infrastructure, utilities, and adjacent
developed facilities may make full
compliance with the guidelines
impossible.

In the final rule, the Board has
defined ‘‘alteration’’ as ‘‘a change to or
an addition of a pedestrian facility in an
existing developed public right-of-way
that affects or could affect pedestrian
access, circulation, or usability’’
(R104.3). In so defining ‘‘alteration,’’ the
Board has revised the requirements for
added facilities, now allowing them to
comply to the maximum extent feasible
where existing physical constraints
make compliance with applicable
requirements technically infeasible
(R202.3). The Board has also provided a
definition for ‘‘developed’’ as
‘‘[c]ontaining buildings, pedestrian
facilities, roadways, utilities, or
elements’’ (R104.3). Taken together, the
Board expects full compliance with the
requirements for new construction on
undeveloped land (i.e., greenfield),
while any construction undertaken in
an existing developed right-of-way is
expected to comply to the maximum
extent feasible where existing physical
constraints make compliance with
applicable requirements technically
infeasible. The Board has concluded
that these expectations for compliance
are reasonable in light of existing
infrastructure in developed rights-ofway, and the opportunity for full compliance in a new public right-of-way
built on undeveloped land.

Alterations vs. Maintenance
In response to the NPRM, the Board
received several comments seeking
clarity on what types of roadwork
would constitute an ‘‘alteration’’ within
the meaning of the rule. The proposed
guidelines defined ‘‘alteration’’ as ‘‘[A]
change to a facility in the public rightof-way that affects or could affect pedestrian access, circulation, or use.

Alterations include, but are not limited
to, resurfacing, rehabilitation,
reconstruction, historic restoration, or
changes or rearrangement of structural

53608 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations parts or elements of a facility’’ (NPRM
R105.5).

One state department of
transportation, four local government
entities, a national parks and recreation
organization, and an individual
engineer commenter requested further
clarification on the definition of
‘‘alteration,’’ or additional examples.

Much of the concern centered on the
Board’s inclusion of the example of
‘‘resurfacing.’’ Five states and AASHTO,
seven local government entities, various
organizations associated with the
construction industry, an independent
Federal agency, and an engineering
company expressed concern that
‘‘resurfacing’’ was included in the
definition of alteration and sought
additional information on the definition
of ‘‘resurfacing.’’ These commenters
were concerned that ‘‘maintenance’’
operations and ‘‘pavement
preservation’’ would trigger an
obligation to comply with these
guidelines.

Since the publication of the NPRM,
this issue has largely been resolved. In
2013, DOJ and USDOT issued joint
guidance clarifying when resurfacing is
considered an ‘‘alteration’’ for purposes
of ADA Title II compliance and
specifying the types of treatments that
are considered maintenance. See DOJ
and USDOT, Department of Justice/
Department of Transportation Joint
Technical Assistance on Title II of the
Americans with Disabilities Act
Requirements to Provide Curb Ramps
when Streets, Roads, or Highways are
Altered through Resurfacing (July 8,
2013), available at https://www.ada.gov/
doj-fhwa-ta.htm; see also Q & A
Supplement to the 2013 DOJ/DOT Joint
Technical Assistance on the Title II of
the ADA Requirements To Provide Curb
Ramps when Streets, Roads, or
Highways are Altered through
Resurfacing, available at https://
ada.gov/doj-fhwa-ta-supplement2015.html.

The Board’s revised definition of
‘‘alteration’’ in the final rule omits the
examples of specific roadway
treatments, deferring to USDOT’s and
DOJ’s joint technical assistance as to
which treatments and types of
construction are considered alterations
for purposes of enforcement of their
standards. However, the Board here
clarifies that where a roadway treatment
is determined to be an alteration,
compliance with PROWAG is triggered
and the technical requirements apply,
regardless of the ‘‘scope of the
[alteration] project.’’ The elimination of
the ‘‘scope of the project’’ language from
the final rule is discussed below.

Scope of the Project
The proposed guidelines indicated
that where existing elements are altered,
each altered facility ‘‘within the scope
of the project’’ must be made to comply
with the guidelines (NPRM R202.3).

One state and several local government
entities requested clarification on the
intended meaning of ‘‘scope of the
project,’’ and disability rights advocacy
organizations expressed concern that
regulated entities may define the scope
of the project to avoid compliance. The
Board has thus removed this language
from the final rule.

Under the final rule, altered portions
of existing pedestrian facilities are
expected to comply with the
requirements (R201.1). This means that
the portion of a pedestrian facility that
is altered is expected to comply with all
applicable technical requirements.

Where existing physical constraints
make compliance with applicable
requirements technically infeasible,
compliance with these requirements is
required to the maximum extent feasible
(R202.3). This is the same approach that
is employed in the 2004 ADA and ABA
Accessibility Guidelines for buildings
and sites.

Existing Physical Constraints
Section R202.3.1 of the NPRM stated
that where existing physical constraints
make full compliance with these
guidelines ‘‘impracticable,’’ alterations
must comply with the technical
specifications of these guidelines to the
‘‘extent practicable.’’ The proposed
section R202.3.1 provided examples of
existing physical constraints, including
‘‘underlying terrain, right-of-way
availability, underground structures,
adjacent developed facilities, drainage,
or the presence of a notable natural or
historic feature.’’
Numerous commenters expressed
varying concerns about section R202.3.1
of the proposed rule. One state public
utility commission, four local
government entities, and an engineering
firm requested that the Access Board
provide further explanation of the
meaning of ‘‘extent practicable’’ and one
state DOT recommended replacing the
term with ‘‘maximum extent
practicable.’’ A disability rights
advocacy organization requested a
requirement for full compliance with
the guidelines unless ‘‘technically
infeasible.’’ Three disability rights
advocacy organizations and two
individuals expressed concern that the
language describing existing physical
constraints was too broad or might be
used as an excuse to deviate from the
technical requirements. Three state
DOTs and one local government entity
requested clarification on ‘‘right-of-way
availability’’ as an existing physical
constraint and wondered whether they
would be expected to obtain additional
right-of-way.

In the final rule, the Board has
replaced the term ‘‘impracticable’’ with
‘‘technically infeasible’’ and ‘‘extent
practicable’’ with ‘‘maximum extent
feasible,’’ which are the terms used in
the 2004 ADA and ABA Accessibility
Guidelines. See e.g., 36 CFR part 1191,
App. B, 202.3 Exception 2. The Board
acknowledges that ‘‘impracticable’’ and
‘‘extent practicable’’ were intended to be
interpreted in the same way as
‘‘technically infeasible’’ and ‘‘maximum
extent feasible,’’ and the use of different
terms was creating confusion. The
expectation is that in the context of
alterations, entities are responsible for
compliance with applicable technical
requirements to the maximum extent
feasible where existing physical
constraints make compliance with those
requirements technically infeasible.

The Board also eliminated ‘‘right-ofway availability’’ as an example of an existing physical constraint. The Board
acknowledges that in many cases
regulated entities have authority to
acquire additional right-of-way, which
made it a confusing example of an
existing physical constraint. DOJ and
USDOT may provide further
information as to any expectations that
entities acquire additional right-of-way
to meet accessibility requirements.

A disability rights advocacy
organization requested that the Board
apply the ‘‘primary function’’ and ‘‘path
of travel’’ requirements from the 2004
ADA and ABA Accessibility Guidelines.
36 CFR part 1191, App. B 202.4. In
addition, a local chapter of a national
public works association, seven local
government entities, and a disability
rights advocacy organization would like
the final rule to contain a 20% threshold
for determining whether the cost of
providing accessibility features is
disproportionate to the overall cost of
the alteration.4 The Board points
4 Section 202.4 of the 2004 ADA and ABA
Guidelines states that an alteration that affects or
could affect the usability of or access to an area
containing a primary function shall be made so as
to ensure that, to the maximum extent feasible, the
path of travel to the altered area, including the rest
rooms, telephones, and drinking fountains serving
the altered area, are readily accessible to and usable
by individuals with disabilities, unless such
alterations are disproportionate to the overall
alterations in terms of cost and scope as determined
under criteria established by the Attorney General.

In existing transportation facilities, an area of
primary function shall be as defined under
regulations published by the Secretary of the
Department of Transportation or the Attorney
General. 36 CFR part 1191, App. B, § 202.4.

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 53609 commenters to the detailed explanation
in the preamble to the NPRM as to why
the primary function area and path of
travel concepts are not appropriate for
pedestrian rights-of-way. 76 FR 44664,
44672 (July 26, 2011).

Existing Facilities
Several commenters expressed
concern about their obligations under
Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act for existing
facilities that are not altered. See 28 CFR

35.150 (containing DOJ accessibility
requirements for state and local
governments’ existing facilities); see
also 49 CFR 27.11(c) (requiring
recipients of USDOT Federal financial
assistance to undertake accessibility
compliance planning). When DOJ and
USDOT conduct rulemaking to include
accessibility standards for pedestrian
facilities in the public right-of-way in
regulations implementing Title II of the
ADA and Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act, they will address the
application of their accessibility
standards to existing facilities that are
not altered. Comments concerning
existing facilities that are not altered
should be directed to DOJ and USDOT
at that time. These guidelines address
only new construction and alterations of
existing facilities, and are voluntary
until adopted by other agencies, with or
without modifications, as enforceable
standards.

2. Accessible Pedestrian Signals
Scoping for Accessible Pedestrian
Signals
Accessible Pedestrian Signals are
devices that communicate information
about pedestrian signal timing in nonvisual formats such as audible tones, speech messages, and/or vibrating
surfaces (R104.3). In the NPRM, the
Board proposed that all new and altered
pedestrian signals conform to the
requirements for accessible pedestrian
signals in sections 4E.08 through 4E.13
of the MUTCD (NPRM R209.1).

Several entities submitted comments
opposing universal installation of
accessible pedestrian signals. Eight state
and three local government entities
advocated for their jurisdictions’ more
limited practices with respect to
determining where accessible
pedestrian signals should be installed:
six states and one local government
installed accessible signals upon citizen
request or as part of planned upgrades;
DOJ’s 2010 ADA Standards state in part that
alterations made to provide an accessible path of
travel to the altered area will be deemed
disproportionate to the overall alteration when the
cost exceeds 20% of the cost of the alteration to the
primary function area. 28 CFR 35.151(b)(4)(iii)(A).
one state and one local government
consulted with mobility specialists or
disability advocacy groups before
installing an accessible pedestrian
signal in a given location; one state only
installed accessible pedestrian signals
where a substantial population of blind
individuals is known to travel, such as
near a school for students who are
blind; one city installed accessible
pedestrian signals within a quarter mile
of light rail stations, and elsewhere
upon request.

Two local governments, while not
stating a current practice, indicated that
they would like to work with
organizations representing the ‘‘low
vision community’’ to determine where
accessible signals should be installed.

Fifteen other local government
commenters and six individual
commenters from the engineering
industry, and an association of city
transportation engineers preferred that
the guidelines leave the decision as to
whether to install accessible pedestrian
signals to ‘‘engineering judgment,’’ as
specified in the MUTCD. A national
organization of transportation officials
expressed that the guidelines should
require accessible pedestrian signals
only where there is a demonstrated
need. Three states and two cities
indicated that they already provide
accessible pedestrian signals whenever
possible when new pedestrian signals
are installed, or existing signals are
altered.

This requirement for the installation
of accessible pedestrian signals was also
one of the proposed provisions of
PROWAG that generated the most
public support. More than 115
commenters, including disability rights
organizations, individuals with
disabilities, and mobility specialists,
supported the proposed requirement.

Upon careful consideration of the
comments, as well as the costs and
benefits of this requirement, the Board
has decided to retain in the final rule
scoping specifying that accessible
pedestrian signals be installed wherever
new pedestrian signals are provided,
and whenever pedestrian signals are
altered. Accessible pedestrian signals
are crucial to the independent
movement of individuals who are blind
or have low vision throughout public
rights-of-way.5 Over time this
5 The Access Board acknowledges a historical
difference of opinion between advocacy
organizations for people who are blind as to the
need for accessible pedestrian signals. The Board
further notes that this difference of opinion has
diminished over time. In the NPRM, the Access
Board observed that in response to the 2002 draft
guidelines, two thirds of commenters identifying
themselves as being blind or having low vision
requirement will make accessible
pedestrian signals ubiquitous
throughout the United States, allowing
people who are blind or have low vision
to undertake independent pedestrian
travel to any destination where
pedestrian facilities exist. Anything less
than a universal requirement is unlikely
to achieve a uniform nationwide result.

The Board has assessed the
incremental costs associated with the
installation of accessible pedestrian
signals. FRIA at 46. The Board
acknowledges that the requirement for
universal installation of APS is the
single most costly provision of
PROWAG. Id. However, it is the
provision expected to provide the
greatest advance in equity for persons
who are blind or have low vision, as the
use of accessible pedestrian signals is
one of the accessibility features of
public rights-of-way that has not been
uniformly adopted across the United
States. The Board has assessed the costs
and benefits of this requirement and is
confident that the combination of the
monetizable and unmonetizable benefits
greatly outweigh the costs. See FRIA at
129.

Specific changes to language of the
provision are addressed in the sectionby-section analysis below.

Alterations of Accessible Pedestrian
Signals
In the NPRM, the Board specified
alteration of the signal controller and
software, and replacement of a signal
head as alterations that would trigger
supported installation of accessible pedestrian
signals. 76 FR at 44676. In response to the NPRM,
commenters indicating a vision disability
overwhelmingly expressed support for accessible
pedestrian signals. In 2001, the National Federation
of the Blind (NFB) opposed universal installation of
accessible pedestrian signals on the grounds that
they were unnecessary in most circumstances, and
that the sounds emitted by accessible signals
interfered with detection of vehicles through
audible cues. See Public Rights of Way Advisory
Committee, Building a True Community, Minority
Report. 153 (January 10, 2001). However, even at
that time, the NFB noted changing features of
public rights-of-way that complicated the
traditional reliance on traffic noises for navigation,
including quieter cars, complex signal intersections,
wide streets, and the use of pedestrian actuated
signals. Id. In response to the NPRM, the NFB
advised that it now supports the use of accessible
pedestrian signals when installed in consultation
with the blind community. See NFB, Public
Comment, ATBCB–2011–0004–0251, available at
www.regulations.gov. The Access Board notes that
accessible pedestrian signals must be equally
available to all individuals, whether or not they are
affiliated with or known to any particular advocacy
organization or civic group. The Board observes that
the American Council of the Blind strongly
supports the installation of accessible pedestrian
signals wherever pedestrian signals exist. See
American Council of the Blind, Public Comment,
ATBCB–2011–0004–0341, available at
www.regulations.gov.

53610 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations installation of an accessible pedestrian
signal consistent with the technical
requirements (NPRM R209.2). The
Access Board received numerous
comments disagreeing with the
proposed provision. Ten state
departments of transportation and 28
local government entities responded, in
addition to five professional
organizations. These commenters
indicated that neither altering a signal
controller and software, nor replacing a
signal head offers an opportunity to
convert an existing pedestrian signal to
an accessible pedestrian signal. Some of
these commenters were concerned that
under the proposed language, a minor
modification or repair could result in an
extensive project to upgrade an entire
intersection. Others worried that they
would have to forgo regular software
upgrades provided by signal
manufactures unless they intended to
convert existing equipment to accessible
pedestrian signals.

Four disability rights advocacy
organizations, one pedestrian advocacy
organization, and four individuals
supported the proposed specifications
regarding specific actions that should
trigger installation of accessible
pedestrian signals, and requested that
the Access Board add other triggering
actions in the final rule. The National
Committee on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices (NCUTCD) recommended
requiring installation of accessible
pedestrian signals when traffic signal
equipment modification or timing
changes affect the ability of a pedestrian
with a disability to be aware of the
change. See NCUTCD, Public Comment,
ATBCB–2011–0004–0477, available at
www.regulations.gov. NCUTCD cited
reduction of walk time or pedestrian
clearance, and installation of modified
turn phasing as examples of such
changes that should warrant conversion
to an accessible pedestrian signal. Id.

The Access Board proposed the
requirements of section R209.2 to
ensure that accessible pedestrian signals
would be installed during alteration
projects. Upon consideration of public
comments, the Access Board
acknowledges the diverse nature of
alterations that affect pedestrian signals,
and declines in the final guidelines to
specify specific actions that trigger the
requirement to install accessible
pedestrian signals. Rather, pedestrian
signals are subject to the same alteration
requirements as other pedestrian
facilities. The entity making the
alteration will assess, according to
requirements in the guidelines as
adopted by USDOT and DOJ, whether
installation of an accessible pedestrian
signal is required. The Board notes that
USDOT and DOJ may provide further
specifics as to alterations triggering
installation of APS in their rulemakings
adopting these guidelines.

3. Pedestrian Crossing Treatments at
Roundabouts
In the NPRM, the Board proposed a
requirement for installation of an
accessible pedestrian actuated signal at
multilane pedestrian street crossings 6 at
roundabouts (NPRM Section R306.3.2).

In an advisory issued with the proposed
rule, the Board indicated that a
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB) could
be used in lieu of a standard pedestrian
signal.7
Roundabouts present unique
challenges for pedestrians who are
blind. At roundabouts, entering and
exiting vehicles yield, but do not stop.

The continuous traffic flow removes
many of the audible cues that
pedestrians who are blind use to
navigate pedestrian street crossings.

Without signals that periodically stop
vehicles, pedestrians must assess when
there is a sufficient gap in traffic to
cross. Sighted pedestrians visually
assess the distance and speed of oncoming cars to decide when they should cross. However, pedestrians who are
blind or have low vision are not able to
identify breaks in on-coming traffic by
sight and lack the audible cues that
might otherwise substitute for visible
information.

The Board included the requirement
for an accessible pedestrian signal or an
accessible PHB at multilane pedestrian
street crossings at roundabouts to make
those complex pedestrian street
crossings accessible to people who are
blind or have low vision. At multilane
roundabouts, pedestrians who are blind
or have low vision face additional
challenges. While a vehicle in the lane
nearest the curb might stop for a
pedestrian who is blind, the stopped
vehicle may mask the audible cues of a
car in the next lane that does not yield.

See Transportation Research Board,
NCHRP Report 674: Crossing Solutions
at Roundabouts and Channelized Turn
Lanes for Pedestrians with Vision
Disabilities, 6 (2011), available at
https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/
nchrp/nchrp_rpt_674.pdf. https://
onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/
nchrp_rpt_674.pdf. https://
onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/
6 In the final rule, the term ‘‘crosswalk’’ has been
substituted for ‘‘pedestrian street crossing’’ to use
terminology consistent with the MUTCD.
7 Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons (PHBs) are a special
type of hybrid beacon used to war and control
traffic at an unsignalized location to assist
pedestrians in crossing a street at a marked
crosswalk (R104.3).
nchrp_rpt_674.pdf. As a result,
pedestrians who are blind take
substantially more time to locate a
crossing opportunity and make more
errors in assessing such opportunities
than sighted pedestrians. Id. To address
these challenges, the proposed rule
specified a requirement for a pedestrian
actuated signal to be provided at all
multilane pedestrian street crossings at
roundabouts.

The Access Board received numerous
comments on this proposed provision.

Five state departments of transportation,
eleven local government entities, two
professional associations for engineers,
three engineering companies, and two
individuals opposed a universal
requirement for the proposed pedestrian
treatments at multilane roundabouts.

These commenters opined that
engineering judgement and/or warrant
criteria should be used on a case-by-case
basis to determine whether a pedestrian
treatment is appropriate at a given
roundabout crossing. Two states, seven
local government entities, a local public
works association, and AASHTO
opposed the requirement on the grounds
that pedestrian signals and PHBs will
create a false sense of safety for
pedestrians as drivers who would not be
expecting signals at roundabouts would
fail to yield to pedestrians.

One state, five local government
entities, and a professional association
related to the construction industry
expressed concern that the addition of
pedestrian signals or PHBs would defeat
the purpose of using roundabouts
instead of traditional intersections.

Specifically, these commenters noted
that roundabouts keep traffic
continuously flowing, reduce air
pollution from idling vehicles, reduce
accidents, and may cost less to build as
compared to fully signalized
intersections. Three local government
entities expressed concern that PHBs
would be confusing to motorists in parts
of the country where, at the time the
comments were submitted, they were
not frequently used. Three state
departments of transportation, eight
local government entities, a
transportation engineering firm, and a
public works professional association
found the proposed provision too
restrictive as written and urged the
Access Board to consider other
pedestrian crossing treatments such as
raised crosswalks and rapid rectangular
flashing beacons (RRFBs).

Many other commenters supported
the proposed requirement for signals or
PHBs at multilane pedestrian street
crossings at roundabouts. Two
municipalities, seven disability rights
advocacy organizations, two pedestrian

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 53611 advocacy organizations, one engineering
firm, and 99 individuals, including
persons with disabilities, mobility
specialists, and others, supported the
proposed provision. Three disability
rights organizations requested that the
final rule require signals or PHBs at all
roundabouts, including single lane
pedestrian crossings. Two researchers
who generally supported the proposed
rule also encouraged further study on
other acceptable treatments, such as
raised crosswalks and RRFBs.

The Access Board considered all of
the comments submitted regarding
pedestrian treatments at roundabouts. In
addition to the comments, the Board
considered relevant research on
alternate pedestrian treatments such as
raised crosswalks and RRFBs. Raised
crosswalks are marked pedestrian
crossings on elevated speed tables that
require a driver to slow down to cross
the speed table. Because drivers must
slow their vehicles to traverse the raised
crossing, they are more likely to yield to
pedestrians waiting to cross. RRFBs are
flashing yellow rectangular lights that
are activated by the pedestrian and
supplement a pedestrian warning sign.

The flashing beacons draw a driver’s
attention to the pedestrian in the
crosswalk, increasing the likelihood that
the driver will yield to the pedestrian.

Unlike the PHB, neither the raised
crosswalk nor the RRFB provide the
driver with a ‘‘stop’’ signal. Rather, they
bring increased awareness to the
presence of a pedestrian.

National Cooperative Highway
Research Program Project 674 assessed
the use of PHBs and raised crosswalks
at a multilane roundabout by blind
pedestrians in Golden, Colorado. See
Transportation Research Board, NCHRP
Report 674: Crossing Solutions at
Roundabouts and Channelized Turn
Lanes for Pedestrians with Vision
Disabilities 6 (2011), available at
https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/
nchrp/nchrp_rpt_674.pdf. Researchers
found positive effects on decision
making regarding crossings by blind
pedestrians using both types of
treatments. Id.

A study undertaken by Western
Michigan University confirmed the
effectiveness of PHBs at multilane
roundabouts and showed that RRFBs
could be effective in some instances.

See Dept. of Blindness and Low Vision
Studies, Western Michigan University et
al., Road Commission for Oakland
County PHB and RRFB Study: Final
Report, 5–7 (October 5, 2011) available
at https://www.rcocweb.org/
DocumentCenter/Home/View/99
(indicating that RRFBs installed at twolane roundabout entries had a positive impact on decision making by blind
pedestrians as to assessing when to
cross; however, RRFBs were less
effective at two-lane roundabout exits
and three-lane roundabouts).

A Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) study found further support for
the conclusion that under certain
circumstances, RRFBs can be effective at
providing accessibility for pedestrian
crossings at multilane roundabouts.

FHWA, Pub. No. FHWA–SA–15–69,
Evaluation of Rectangular RapidFlashing Beacons (RRFB) at Multilane Roundabouts, 34 (2015, Updated 2020)
available at https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/
intersection/roundabouts/
fhwasa15069.pdf.

The Board also reviewed
Transportation Research Boardsponsored research on crossing solutions at roundabouts and
channelized turn lanes for pedestrians
who are blind or have low vision. See
Transportation Research Board, NCHRP
3–78b: Guidelines for the Application of
Crossing Solutions at Roundabouts and
Channelized Turn Lanes for Pedestrians
with Vision Disabilities, Final Project
Report (2016) available at https://
itre.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/
2/2017/04/NCHRP-03-78b_FinalGuidelines.pdf; see also Transportation Research Board, NCHRP 834: Crossing
Solutions at Roundabouts and
Channelized Turn Lanes for Pedestrians
with Vision Disabilities, A Guidebook
(2017) available at https://www.trb.org/
Main/Blurbs/175586.aspx.

Multilane roundabouts remain highly
complex crossings for pedestrians who
are blind or have low vision. In light of
the lack of clear audible cues at these
crossings and the additional challenges
posed by the geometry of multilane
crossings in these locations, in the final
rule the Board has retained the
requirement for an enhanced crosswalk
treatment at each multilane pedestrian
crossing at roundabouts. However,
based on commenter feedback and the
Board’s review of available research, the
final rule includes three treatment
options for crosswalks at roundabouts,
in addition to standard accessible
pedestrian signals: PHBs, raised
crosswalks, and RRFBs. All three
treatments demonstrated positive effects
over untreated crossings in the research
studies described above. While the three
treatments did not perform identically
in each research study, the Board finds
that each treatment was effective in
certain scenarios. The final rule requires
that, like other accessible pedestrian
signals, all new and altered PHBs
provide audible and vibrotactile
information in addition to visible cues,
and all new and altered RRFBs provide
audible information communicating that
the warning lights are flashing.

The Board notes that research on
single lane roundabouts indicates that
certain single lane roundabouts pose
challenges to pedestrians with
disabilities attempting to cross. See
David A. Guth et. al., Blind and Sighted
Pedestrians’ Road Crossing Judgments
at a Single-Lane Roundabout, 55 Human
Factors, 632 (June 2013). However, it is
not clear from the limited available
research, whether all single lane
roundabouts, or only those with certain
characteristics, pose barriers to safe
crossing for pedestrians who are blind
such that enhanced crossing treatments
are required. USDOT plans to undertake
additional research to study the
conditions under which single lane
crossings at roundabouts present
challenges for pedestrians who are
blind.

4. Leveling Out of Intersections
Extended Through Pedestrian Crossings
In the NPRM, the Board proposed to
require that the grade of pedestrian
access routes in crosswalks not exceed
5% (NPRM R302.5.1). The proposed
rule also limited the cross slope of
pedestrian access routes to 2% (NPRM
R302.6), and the cross slope of
pedestrian access routes contained
within crosswalks at approaches
without yield or stop control to 5%
(NPRM R302.6.1). The effect of these
provisions was to require that in new
construction, the leveling out of streets
at intersections be extended to
crosswalks. It is common practice to
level out streets at intersections so that
the slope of a street does not present a
significant cross slope to the
intersecting roadway. AASHTO
recommends that at intersections,
grades in excess of three percent should
be avoided. See AASHTO, Policy on
Geometric Design of Highways and
Streets at 9–34.

The cross slope of a crosswalk is the
same as the grade of the roadway that
runs through it. Where traffic is required
to slow down at a crosswalk because
there is a device such as a stop or yield
sign, the grade of the road (and the cross
slope of the crosswalk) can be flatter
because vehicles move more slowly
through the crosswalk. However, where
traffic will flow across a crosswalk
without slowing or stopping, such as
during a green light or at an intersection
without any traffic control device,
abrupt changes in the grade of the road
should be minimized to prevent a
vehicle from jolting or bottoming out on
the grade change in hilly areas.

The proposed rule specified cross
slope of pedestrian street crossing in

53612 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations new construction and alterations
according to the type of traffic control
provided at the intersection. At NPRM
section R302.6.1, the proposed
guidelines called for a maximum 5%
cross slope for pedestrian street
crossings ‘‘without yield or stop
control.’’ In an advisory at R302.6.1, the
Board explained that crossings ‘‘without
yield or stop control’’ refer to those
crossings that do not have a stop or
yield sign, or alternately have a traffic
signal that is ‘‘designed for the green
phase.’’ The Board further clarified that
crossings ‘‘without yield or stop
control’’ are those intersections where
‘‘vehicles can proceed through the
intersection without slowing or
stopping.’’ Proposed provision R302.6
provided for a 1:48 maximum cross
slope for other pedestrian street
crossings at intersections, which would
include those with a stop or yield sign,
or other type of traffic control device
requiring a full stop or yield.

In response to the NPRM, ten state
entities, six local government entities,
eight individuals from the engineering
and planning industry, and one
engineering firm indicated that the
Board should use clearer language to
distinguish between the types of
crossings. Thus, in the final rule, the
Board has separated the requirements
according to the type of traffic control
at the crosswalk: crosswalk with yield
or stop control devices (R302.5.2.1);
crosswalk at an uncontrolled approach
(R302.5.2.2); crosswalk with traffic
control signal or PHB (R302.5.2.3); and
midblock and roundabout crosswalks
(R302.5.2.4).

Many commenters expressed concern
about the application of the cross slope
provisions in alterations. Three state
departments of transportation and one
local government entity were concerned
that changes in signalization alone,
without any construction to the
roadway itself, would trigger a
requirement to comply with the cross
slope requirements at pedestrian
crossings. Two states, one association
representing state departments of
transportation, one local government,
and one engineer pointed out that
signalization of intersections change
over time and questioned whether the
requirement should be tied to a fluid
marker. The local government and
engineer commenters noted that while
5% maximum cross slope might be
acceptable at the time of new
construction, once more houses and
facilities are built around an
intersection warranting a stop sign, the
requirement would shift to 2%.

Commenters noted that a 2% maximum
cross slope is less easily achieved in an
alteration than in new construction. The
Board notes that an alteration to a traffic
control device would not necessarily
trigger a requirement to comply with
cross slope requirements at that
crosswalk if the crosswalk is not being
altered.

One state expressed concern that
resurfacing roadways would trigger a
requirement to regrade intersections. A
local government indicated that
retrofitting cross slopes of existing
crossings would have more than
minimal impacts, and another local
government requested that existing
crossings be entirely exempted from the
requirement. Four organizations
associated with the construction and
public works industries expressed
concern about the cost of compliance for
existing intersections. One state was not
sure that it could meet the cross slope
requirements given existing
infrastructure. Seven local government
entities expressed that altering
intersections to comply with cross slope
requirements would be ‘‘unreasonable,’’
‘‘burdensome,’’ ‘‘impractical,’’
‘‘difficult,’’ or ‘‘not feasible without
major reconstruction.’’
The Board acknowledges that full
compliance with the cross slope
requirements for crosswalks, which is
expected in new construction, may be
challenging in some alterations due to
existing physical constraints. In
alterations, compliance with R302.5.2 is
required to the maximum extent feasible
where existing physical constraints, as
discussed in R202.3, make compliance
technically infeasible. If existing curbs,
gutters, sidewalks, and utilities are not
part of the facility being altered, they are
generally considered ‘‘adjacent
developed facilities’’ which are a type of
existing physical constraint under
R202.3 that could constrain the
technical feasibility of compliance with
R302.5.2. Thus, if a public entity is not
otherwise altering the adjacent
developed facilities as part of its
crosswalk alteration and those existing
physical constraints would make
compliance with R302.5.2 technically
infeasible, then compliance is required
to the maximum extent feasible without
needing to alter the adjacent developed
facilities.

The Board notes, however, that when
alterations are made to crosswalks,
R203.6.2 requires curb ramps or blended
transitions to be provided on both ends
of the crosswalk where a pedestrian
access route crosses a curb, thus making
such curb ramps or blended transitions
part of the crosswalk being altered.

Accordingly, existing curb ramps and
blended transitions are not considered
existing physical constraints under
R202.3. Similarly, existing curbs within
the crosswalk where there is no curb
ramp or blended transition, are not
considered existing physical constraints
under R202.3.

The Board has assessed the costs of
compliance with the crosswalk cross
slope requirements in the FRIA. See
FRIA at 114. In light of the existing
physical constraints provision at
R202.3, the application of which to
R302.5.2 is described above, as well as
the large number of jurisdictions whose
design guidance for crosswalk cross
slope already meets the PROWAG
technical requirements, the Board
believes commenters’ concerns that this
requirement is ‘‘unreasonable,’’
‘‘burdensome,’’ or ‘‘not feasible without
major reconstruction’’ to be based on a
misunderstanding of the requirements.

Further, the Board regards the
accessibility of crosswalks, where
individuals with disabilities are present
in vehicular ways, to be critical in
ensuring equitable use of pedestrian
facilities.

Several state and local jurisdictions
objected to the technical requirements
themselves. One state department of
transportation indicated that a 3%
maximum cross slope is appropriate for
pedestrian crossings with stop and yield
control, and 6% maximum is
appropriate for other crossings. Two
local government entities recommended
5% maximum cross slope for all
crossings. Another state agreed with a
grade limitation on side streets, but not
through streets, which would eliminate
restrictions on cross slope of pedestrian
crossings spanning through streets.

Another state DOT commented that
regrading pedestrian crossings is costly
and problematic for vehicles, and
preferred that tabling not be required.

Three local government entities, a
public works association, and an
association of engineering professionals
expressed concern that the cross slope
requirements will create a ‘‘roller
coaster’’ street profile or ‘‘jolt’’ vehicles
as they pass over pedestrian crossings.

The Board disagrees that the technical
requirements, when properly
implemented, will result in the
engineering concerns expressed by some
commenters. Further, the Board
observes that if an entity can
demonstrate that the unique
characteristics of the underlying terrain
of a specific newly designed
intersection preclude full compliance
with the cross slope requirements,
under DOJ’s Title II regulations under
the ADA, full compliance with the cross
slope requirements may not be required.

See 28 CFR 35.151. In alterations, where
compliance is technically infeasible,

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 53613 alterations must comply with
requirements to the maximum extent
feasible (R202.3). In addition, the Board
has provided an exception for the grade
of crosswalks where superelevation
exceeds 5% (R302.4.3).

Other commenters supported the
proposed requirements. A professional
organization of mobility specialists for
people who are blind requested that the
Board encourage tabling wherever
feasible. A pedestrian advocacy
organization asserted that 2% should be
the maximum cross slope for all
pedestrian crossings. A non-profit
accessible design organization also
indicated that 2% maximum cross slope
should be the standard for all pedestrian
crossings, noting that a 5% cross slope
is too steep for many manual wheelchair
users.

After careful review of the comments,
the Board has retained the substantive
cross slope requirements for crosswalks
as proposed. A cross slope of 1:48
(2.1%) is well established in
accessibility guidelines as the
appropriate maneuverable cross slope
for most individuals in manual
wheelchairs and persons with balance
impairments. See, e.g., Uniform Federal
Accessibility Standards (UFAS), 49 FR
31528 (Aug. 7, 1984) and the 2004 ABA
and ADA Accessibility Guidelines, 36
CFR part 1191.

The Board notes that if the 1:48 cross
slope ratio were expressed as a
percentage to the nearest hundredth, the
relevant percentage would be 2.08%.

This percentage has been expressed as

2.1% in the regulatory text due to the
limitations of current digital measuring
tools commonly used in sidewalk
construction, which would round

2.08% to 2.1%.

In these guidelines, the Board
balances accessibility with engineering
considerations. The Board has assessed
the costs of compliance with the
crosswalk cross slope requirements in
the FRIA. See FRIA at 114.

5. MUTCD
The proposed guidelines incorporated
by reference portions of the 2009 edition
of the USDOT Federal Highway
Administration’s (FHWA’s) Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD), which is the standard for
traffic control devices used throughout
the United States. The incorporated
sections included several definitions
and technical requirements for alternate
pedestrian access routes and accessible
pedestrian signals and push buttons
(NPRM R105.2; R205; R209.1).

Several disability rights advocacy
organizations objected to this approach.

Two organizations objected to the
Access Board’s use of the MUTCD in
lieu of creating its own technical
specifications for these regulated
features, while others did not oppose
the use of the MUTCD standard butfelt
that the relevant text of the MUTCD
should be reproduced within the
guidelines or in an appendix. A variety
of commenters urged the Access Board
to include the full text of MUTCD
definitions for specified terms
incorporated by reference.

The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act requires Federal
agencies to use technical standards
developed by voluntary consensus
standards organizations to carry out
policy objectives. 15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.

Wherever practical and appropriate,
government adoption of voluntary
standards reduces the burden of
compliance with Federal regulations on
regulated entities, and also reduces
costs to the government. See generally,
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB), Circular A–119. The MUTCD
was developed as a voluntary consensus
standard for traffic control devices and
was subsequently adopted by the FHWA
as a national standard. See FHWA,
Evolution of MUTCD, available at
https://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knohistory.htm. States must adopt the content of the MUTCD within two years
of issuance. 23 CFR part 655, subpart F.

Consistent with its statutory
obligations and OMB guidance to
reduce the burden on regulated entities,
the Access Board uses existing technical
standards where possible to meet its
policy objectives. Accordingly, the
Board proposed incorporation by
reference of the MUTCD sections.

However, upon review of the comments,
and after over a decade of providing
technical assistance on the application
of those provisions, the Board concurs
with commenters that incorporating
MUTCD provisions by reference does
not provide sufficient clarity for a
mandatory standard.

Specifically, the Board notes that the
MUTCD contains several types of
provisions, some of which are
mandatory standards and some of which
are guidance, options, and supporting
explanations. The Board proposed to
incorporate by reference the standards,
but further indicated that the guidance,
options, and support statements must be
used to interpret the standards. The
NPRM further stated that if there were
any differences between the MUTCD
and the proposed rule, the proposed
rule applied. Upon review, and in light
of the comments, it is clear that this
approach does not provide sufficient
specificity to achieve uniform
nationwide accessibility. In addition,
application of the MUTCD relies heavily
on engineering judgement, which
further invites the possibility of
subjective determinations of the need
for specific accessibility features.

In the final rule, the Board has
addressed this confusion by eliminating
all references to the MUTCD and
including the specific definitions and
requirements directly in the rule text.

The technical provisions and the
definitions included in the rule text
adhere closely to substantive
requirements of the MUTCD. The origin
of the substantive requirements, and any
deviations from the MUTCD, are
explained in the Section-by-Section
discussion below.

The Board notes that four state DOTs
and three local government commenters
expressed concern that these guidelines
‘‘conflict’’ with the MUTCD. One state
DOT and two local governments
indicated that where MUTCD and these
guidelines differ, the MUTCD should
apply. Two state DOTs commented that
if certain treatments are required for
accessibility purposes, they should be
contained in the MUTCD. Another state
department of transportation observed
that the MUTCD and the guidelines
should not be interpreted as conflicting.

In the development of this final rule,
the Access Board consulted
representatives from USDOT’s Federal
Highways Administration, which issues
the MUTCD. In addition, the Access
Board reviewed USDOT’s proposed rule
to update the MUTCD. National
Standards for Traffic Control Devices;
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control
Devices for Streets and Highways;
Revision, 85 FR 80898 (proposed Dec.
14, 2020)(to be codified at 23 CFR parts
470, 635, and 655). When USDOT
undertakes its own rulemaking to adopt
these guidelines as enforceable
standards, USDOT will determine how
to ensure that there is no ‘‘conflict’’
within its own regulations.

VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
A. Structural Changes to the Rule Text
To improve clarity of the rule text, the
Board made some non-substantive
structural changes. First, while not a
change to the rule text itself, the
advisories that appeared with the
proposed rule text have been removed.

The Access Board no longer publishes
advisories in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) as the information
contained in those advisories is
guidance, not mandatory requirements.

The Access Board will provide guidance
on its website to assist regulated parties
understand and properly implement the
final enforceable standards that are

53614 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations issued by the standard-setting agencies.

In some areas, information that
previously appeared in an advisory has
been moved to the rule text. Those
instances are discussed in the sectionby-section discussion below.

Second, as previously noted, the
Board eliminated incorporation by
reference of portions of the MUTCD,
opting instead to state the requirements
directly in the PROWAG rule text. The
Board agreed with numerous
commenters who indicated that stating
the requirements in the rule text would
provide greater clarity. Substantive
changes relating to the specific MUTCD
sections referenced in the proposed rule
are discussed in their respective
sections below.

B. Chapter 1: Application and
Administration
R101 Purpose and Application
The final rule contains scoping and
technical requirements that ensure that
pedestrian facilities located in public
rights-of-way are readily accessible to
and usable by pedestrians with
disabilities. This includes both
pedestrian facilities in a street or
highway right-of-way and pedestrian
facilities located in an independent
right-of-way or easement, such as a
shared use path. These scoping and
technical requirements apply to
facilities covered by both the ADA and
the ABA and become mandatory once
adopted for enforcement by another
Federal agency issuing regulations
implementing the ADA, Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act, or the ABA.

The intent of this section has not
changed from what was proposed in the
NPRM; however, the text has been
edited for clarity. Specifically, R101.1
states that the guidelines apply to public
rights-of-way, including a public rightof-way thatforms the boundary of a site or that lies within a site. This
clarification is provided so that
jurisdictions understand that these
guidelines apply to public rights-of-way
that may also be part of a ‘‘site,’’ and
thus subject to 36 CFR 1191. See CFR
part 1191, App. B, 106.5 & App. C
F106.5 (defining ‘‘site’’ as a ‘‘parcel of
land bounded by a property line or a
designated portion of a public right-ofway’’). Where a public right-of-way is part of a site covered by the ABA or
Title II of the ADA, these guidelines
apply to the public right-of-way portion
of that site.

As stated in the Major Issues section
above, these guidelines do not address
existing facilities unless they are altered
at the discretion of a covered entity.

DOJ’s and USDOT’s regulations
implementing these guidelines under
the ADA, will address requirements for
existing pedestrian facilities in the
public right-of-way.

R102 Deviations From These
Guidelines
This section, titled ‘‘Equivalent
Facilitation’’ in the proposed rule, states
that under the ADA, the use of
alternative designs, products, or
technologies that result in substantially
equivalent or greater accessibility and
usability than the proposed guidelines
is permitted. The Access Board has
added language clarifying that the use of
alternative designs, products, or
technologies is not permitted for
facilities subject to the ABA. The Board
has also added a provision at R102.2
explaining that under the ABA,
deviations from an enforceable standard
issued by GSA, HUD, DoD, or USPS
require an approved waiver or
modification, which is issued by the
standard-setting agency upon a
determination that the waiver or
modification is ‘‘clearly necessary.’’ See
42 U.S.C. 4156.

R103 Conventions
R103.1 Conventional Industry
Tolerances
Conventional industry tolerances
apply where dimensions are not stated
as a range. The final rule clarifies that
dimensions that are stated as having a
specific minimum or maximum
endpoint are considered a range. For
example, a cross slope specified as
‘‘1:48 (2.1%) maximum’’ is considered a
range from zero to 1:48 (2.1%).

Designing to a dimension below the
maximum allows for construction
inaccuracies without the need for a
tolerance.

Several engineers and state DOTs
requested that we provide a list of
specific tolerances. Tolerances are
determined by the industry for the
material used. It would not be beneficial
to codify specific tolerances in these
guidelines that cannot be easily updated
when revised by industry. The Board
also received comments requesting
guidance on how measurements should
be taken to assess compliance and
others expressing concern about how
construction variations would be treated
in enforcement scenarios. These
concerns should be directed to the
enforcing agencies when they issue their
proposed rules.

R103.2 Calculation of Percentages
Where the required number of
elements or facilities to be provided
based on the specified ratio or
percentage is not a whole number, the
result is rounded up to the next whole
number. For example, if a group of five
benches is provided at a location that is
not a transit stop or shelter, R209.6.2
requires 50% of the benches to provide
clear space complying with R404. Since
50% of five is 2.5, the result is rounded
up and three benches would be required
to provide the clear space.

In the final rule, the Board has
omitted the proposed sentence
indicating that rounding down for
values less than one half is permitted
where the determination of the required
size or dimension of an element or
facility involves ratios or percentages.

The Board notes the potential for
misinterpretation of this sentence as
allowing a regulated entity to round
down the measurement of a slope, for
example a cross slope of 2.44%, to a
whole number. The Board further notes
that while this provision is included in
the 2004 ABA and ADA Accessibility
Guidelines, it has long been a source of
confusion. Notably, the Board received
a comment from a local government
entity erroneously applying this
provision to the walking speed used to
determine pedestrian signal timing.

R103.3 Units of Measurement
Linear measurements in these
guidelines are stated in both U.S.
customary units and metric units.

Slopes are expressed in both ratios and
percentages. Each system should be
used independently and consistently, as
they may not be exact equivalents.

In the proposed rule, slope
measurements were stated only in
percentages, which in most cases had
been rounded to whole numbers. For
consistency with the 2004 ADA and
ABA Accessibility Guidelines, which
expresses slope only in ratios, in the
final rule slopes are expressed in both
ratios and percentages. The practical
effect of this change is that slopes stated
as 2 percent in the proposed rule are
1:48 (2.1%) in the final rule, which is
the ratio used in the 2004 ADA and
ABA Accessibility Guidelines. The
Board has elected to state percentages to
one decimal place for ease of
implementation, as current digital
measuring tools commonly used in
sidewalk construction typically provide
measurements to one decimal place.

R104 Definitions
This was section 105 in the NPRM but
was redesignated as section 104 when
the Board deleted proposed section 104
as the result of the decision to eliminate
the reference to the MUTCD in favor of
providing the actual language from the
MUTCD (sometimes as modified)
throughout the rule.

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 151 / Tuesday, August 8, 2023 / Rules and Regulations 53615 R104.1 Undefined Terms
The proposed rule indicated that
undefined terms are defined using a
collegiate dictionary in the sense that
the context implies. The final rule
implements the Board’s current
standard approach to undefined terms,
stating that undefined terms shall be
given their ordinary meaning in the
sense that the context implies.

R104.2 Interchangeability
This provision states that the plural
and singular forms of a word are used
interchangeably in these guidelines.

R104.3 Defined Terms
The Board’s decision to include all
substantive requirements in the final
rule text in lieu of incorporating
MUTCD provisions by reference has
resulted in significant expansion of the
number of defined terms in these
guidelines. The proposed rule text, as
modified by the SNPRM, included 17
definitions and nine MUTCD definitions
that were incorporated by reference.

In addition, the proposed rule
specified that terms appearing in the
sections of the MUTCD that were
incorporated by reference would have
the meanings as stated in the definition
section of the MUTCD. In moving
MUTCD requirements and definitions
that had been previously incorporated
by reference directly into the rule text,
the Board also added to the rule text the
relevant defined terms from MUTCD
that appeared in these sections.

The Board also added several terms to
provide clarity to the rule text and
removed a few defined terms that were
no longer needed in light of revisions to
the proposed rule. In total, the final rule
has 52 defined terms, which are
identified throughout the rule text in
italic font.

The following terms were added from
the MUTCD, either verbatim, or with
minimal edits made for clarity:

Accessible Pedestrian Signal,
Crosswalk, Highway, Median,
Pedestrian, Pedestrian Interval Change,
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon, Pedestrian
Signal Head, Push Button, Push Button
Locator Tone, Roadway, Roundabout,
Sidewalk, Splitter Island, Traveled Way,
and Walk Interval. The following
additional terms, which have
definitions that are not taken from
MUTCD, have been added to provide
further clarity to the rule text: Block
Perimeter, Boarding Platform, Building,
Curb, Detectable Warning Surface,
Developed, Grade, Parallel Curb Ramp,
Passenger Loading Zone, Pedestrian
Activated Warning Devices, Pedestrian
Refuge Island, Perpendicular Curb
Ramp, Ramp, Stair, Standard Curb
Height, Street,8 Transit Shelter, Transit
Stop, Transitional Segment, and
Vibrotactile.

A few proposed defined terms have
been removed from the final rule:
• ‘‘Facility,’’ a term and definition
that came from ADAAG, has been
replaced by ‘‘pedestrian facility’’ and a
corresponding definition that more
accurately reflects how the term is used
in PROWAG. In addition, the reference
to ‘‘elements’’ was removed from the
definition of pedestrian facility, since
elements are components of a
pedestrian facility.
• ‘‘Island,’’ which was proposed to be
incorporated by reference from MUTCD,
has been replaced by ‘‘Pedestrian Refuge
Island’’ with a corresponding definition
that clarifies the characteristics that
make an island suitable for pedestrian
refuge (specifically, that the traversable
path of the island be at least 72 inches
long in the direction of travel to allow
sufficient space for two detectable
warning surfaces, separation of those
surfaces, and space for a pedestrian to
wait).
• ‘‘Intersection,’’ which was proposed
to be incorporated by reference from
MUTCD, has been eliminated from the
defined terms. The Board concluded
that future regulated entities,
specifically state and local departments
of transportation, can readily identify an
intersection, and that reproducing the
highly technical MUTCD definition of
intersection in the rule text would not
provide additional clarity.
• ‘‘Vertical Surface Discontinuities’’
was eliminated entirely from the rule
text. In the final rule, this concept is
expressed in the relevant provisions as
‘‘changes in level,’’ which is a widely
understood requirement of ADAAG.

In the final PROWAG rule text, most
of the original definitions that were
proposed have been edited for clarity as
follows:
• Accessible: The word ‘‘facility,’’
which is no longer a defined term, has
been replaced with ‘‘pedestrian facility’’
and ‘‘element.’’
• Alteration: The defined term now
also includes ‘‘altered.’’ As explained in
the Major Issues section above, the
definition has been edited to clarify that
an addition of a pedestrian facility to an
existing, developed right-of-way is
considered an alteration within the
requirements of PROWAG. Several
8 In the NPRM, the Board proposed to incorporate
the definition of ‘‘street’’ from MUTCD, which is
used in the MUTCD as a synonym of ‘‘highway.’’
However, the definition of ‘‘street’’ in the final rule reflects the use of the term in PROWAG as a
synonym of the defined term ‘‘roadway,’’ not
‘‘highway.’’
commenters requested edits to or
clarifications regarding the examples
that were included in the proposed
definition. The Board has removed the
examples from the definitions.

Providing examples, if necessary, is
better left to the enforcing agencies.
• Blended Transition: This definition
has been revised to more accurately
describe the portion of a pedestrian
access route that is a blended transition,
and to differentiate blended transitions
from curb ramps.
• Cross Slope: The word ‘‘grade’’ has
been changed to slope, which reflects
more typical usage.
• Curb Line: The word ‘‘highway’’
was removed for clarity, as ‘‘street’’
sufficiently conveys the concept.
• Curb Ramp: The edited definition
clarifies that the words ‘‘parallel’’ and
‘‘perpendicular’’ are stated relative to
the curb or street that curb ramps serve.
• Element: The word ‘‘pedestrian
facility’’ has been substituted for
‘‘facility,’’ reflecting the substitution of
defined terms, as described above.
• Grade Break: The term ‘‘running
slope’’ has been substituted for ‘‘grade’’
for consistency in the way these terms
are used throughout the rule text.
• Operable Part: The phrase ‘‘interact
with the element’’ has been added to as
a use of an operable part. This addition
is designed to cover QR codes and any
other markings that are intended to be
scanned with a mobile device.
• Pedestrian Access Route: The term
‘‘accessible’’ has been added to clarify
that the pedestrian access route is the
portion of a pedestrian circulation path
that complies with the pedestrian access
route accessibility requirements in these
guidelines. The phrase ‘‘coinciding
with’’ has been removed as redundant.
• Pedestrian Circulation Path: The
word ‘‘travel’’ was removed in favor of
the word ‘‘use’’ for clarity.
• Qualified Historic Building or
Facility: The term ‘‘qualified historic
facility’’ was updated to ‘‘qualified
historic building or facility’’ for clarity
to match the term that is used in the
2004 ABA and ADA Accessibility
Guidelines.
• Running Slope: The word ‘‘slope’’
has been substituted for ‘‘grade’’ for
consistency. In response to comments,
the Board has clarified that grade and
running slope are synonymous.
• Shared Use Path: In response to
comments from state and local
government entities, the Board has
edited the definition to emphasize the
transportation purpose of shared use
paths. While many shared use paths are
also used for recreation, a path that is
used primarily for recreation is not
subject to the shared use path