Appeal Documents - Laserfiche WebLink

movements into and out of the driveway with movements into and out of the adjacent driveways and intersection. 'therefore, the proposed driveway located is the most appropriate location in order to maintain efficient traffic flow movements. The applicant has not established the need for the access to River Road, a major arterial. The applicant has ignored the language of EC 7.420 which may allow access if "[tl he applicant proposes a restricted movement access connection, including but not limited to median barriers or directional in/out barriers." There is no discussion of any potential access restrictions whatsoever and there are no physical restrictions which prevent compliance with that provision. Certainly, access restrictions should be considered before full access should be considered per FC 7.420. The applicant cites no need or benefit to the proposed access point. The applicant provides no substantial evidence to support their claims of adequate safety of the proposed access point but instead relies on general statements. It is widely accepted that access to major arterial roadways is undesirable (hence the standard to not allow it in the first place) due to the safety implications of access to major arterial roadways creating additional conflict points. There are numerous resources that establish the benefits of access management of arterial roadways and the requirement to limit access to them especially when alternatives exist. For example, FH'.-X's . 1cme.r AIanaement in the Vicinity oJ' Inlerreclionr' states that "[p]roviding access (i.e., driveways, entrances or exits) onto roadways with the lowest traffic volumes and speeds generally improves safety, near intersections. In planning, designing, and managing access, critical consideration must be given to arterial and collector streets as these streets serve both mobility and access functions. To the extent possible, it is best to manage driveways so that access is provided to and from the roadway with the lower functional classification as these roadways typically have lower traffic volumes and speeds. This helps to reduce the frequency of conflicts, which min tnizes both the opportunity for crashes and the severity of those crashes, should they occur", "[w1here restricting turning movements to and from a driveway is possible, it is most beneficial from a safety perspective to prohibit left-turning movements. Research suggests that approximately 72 percent of crashes at a driveway involve a left-turning vehicle [G]. As illustrated in Figure 4, approximately 34 percent of these crashes are due to an outbound vehicle turning left across through traffic. Twenty-eight percent of crashes are due to an inbound, left-turning vehicle conflicting with opposite direction through traffic, and 10 percent are 5 due to outbound, left-turning movements incorrectly merging into the same direction through movement. This suggests ghat reducing or eliminating left turns to or from driveways, combined with efforts to reduce conflict points (described in Section 13), enhances safety" and "[research over the past decades has consistently shown that crash rates increase as driveway density increases on a roadway (i.e., number of driveways per mile)." There are numerous other sources that could be referenced that discuss the benefits of access management and the costs of not adhering to typical access management principles. htu~s: safety.fliwN&dot.am intersection other topics%'tliti%asal0002,'fliNN isa10002.pdf 12