NCHRP Synthesis Report 404: State of the Practice in Highway Access Management

• Authored by:  Jerome S. Gluck
• Event:  2010 National Conference on Access Management

Overview of Synthesis Survey

• All 50 state DOTs contacted – Targeted key individuals with access management responsibilities at each state DOT
• 69-question survey was administered online:
• Email distribution to DOT contacts in all 50 states
• ITE Traffic Engineering Council
• ITE Transportation Planning Council
• National Association of County Engineers
• Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Profiles of Contemporary Practices

• Virginia:
  • VDOT’s Implementation of Statewide Access Management Program
• North Carolina:
  • NCDOT’s Strategic Corridors Initiative
• Indiana:
  • INDOT’s Development of an Access Classification System
• Minnesota:
  • MnDOT’s Development and Access Permitting Review Process
• Oregon:
  • ODOT’s Automated Permit Database
• Louisiana:
  • LA DOTD’s Traffic Impact Study Policy and Process
  • LA DOTD’s Approach to Implementing Access Management
• California:
  • Caltrans’ Equitable Share Responsibility Calculations
• New Jersey:
  • NJDOT’s Vehicle-Use Limitations for Non-Conforming Lots
  • Transit-Related Trip Generation Credits in the New Jersey Access Code

Commonly-cited STRENGTHS of Access Management Programs

• Inherent flexibility for making decisions
  • Design waivers
  • Flexible guidelines
• Representing a defensible administrative rule
• Providing uniformity when controlling access
• Strong organizational commitment

Commonly-cited BARRIERS to Access Management Implementation

• Political resistance
• Lack of staff and funding resources
• Organizational and institutional limitations
• Lack of education and training opportunities
• Resistance by development community
• Limited coordination with local governments
• Legal issues
• Lack of “vision”