Current through Register Vol. 63, No. 3, March 1, 2024
(1) Applicability.
This rule describes standards and criteria that the department applies to the
review of an Application for State Highway Approach that has been deemed
complete as set forth in OAR 734-051-3030. Applications submitted for change of
use of an approach may be reviewed under the standards and criteria set forth
in OAR 734-051-3020 in lieu of this rule.
(2) General Approval Criteria. Except for
applications where the department identifies safety or operations concerns set
forth in section (3), and except for applications that are subject to alternate
access considerations as set forth in sections (5) through (7), the Region
Manager shall approve an Application for State Highway Approach that meets the
general approval criteria (a)-(c) in this section. Additional criteria set
forth in section (9) apply to interchange areas.
(a) Approach Spacing Standards. Section (8)
of this rule sets forth the approach spacing standards, except that the spacing
standards applicable to interchanges and interchange areas are set forth in
section (9).
(b) Channelization
Standards. An application meets the channelization standards of this rule if
none of the conditions in (A) through (C), below, exist; where a condition in
(A) through (C) exists, an application may meet the channelization standards if
the existing or proposed lane configuration on the highway conforms to the
design requirements of the ODOT Highway Design Manual in effect at the time the
application is filed.
(A) Average daily trips
for the existing or proposed development exceed four hundred (400) for an
application on a two-lane highway with annual average daily traffic of five
thousand (5,000) or more motor vehicles; or
(B) Average daily trips for the existing or
proposed development exceed four hundred (400) for an application on a
four-lane highway with annual average daily traffic of ten thousand (10,000) or
more motor vehicles; or
(C)
Average daily trips for the existing or proposed development multiplied by the
annual average daily traffic on the highway is equal to or greater than the
products listed in the Table 1.
(c) Sight Distance Standards. Table 2 sets
forth the sight distance standards for approaches. An Application for State
Highway Approach meets the sight distance standard of this rule if the
intersection sight distance at the intersection of the proposed approach and
highway is equal to or greater than shown in Table 2. Intersection sight
distance shall never be less than stopping sight distance, as calculated in
accordance with 2011 AASHTO Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.
Sight distance must be unobstructed within the sight triangle based on the
following positions of measurement:
(A)
Driver's eye height equal to 3.5 feet above the road surface of the proposed
approach at a location 15 feet from the edge of the travel lane; and
(B) Object height equal to 3.5 feet above the
road surface at the near edge of the travel lane to the left and at the far
edge of the travel lane to the right of the approach. [Table not included. See
ED. NOTE.]
(3) Safety and Operations Concerns. The
department has the burden of proving safety and highway operations concerns
that it relies upon in requiring mitigation or in denying an application based
on those concerns. The department may deny an application where the applicant
is unable to provide adequate improvements to mitigate documented safety or
highway operations concerns; safety and highway operations concerns that the
department may consider are limited to (a) through (f), below:
(a) Regular queuing on the highway that
impedes turning movements associated with the proposed approach. Regular
queuing will be evaluated based on the ninety-fifth (95th) percentile queue on
the highway during the highway peak hour, as determined by field observation or
traffic analysis in accordance with ODOT's Analysis Procedures Manual; or
(b) Overlapping left turn
movements or competing use of a center turn lane from a connection located on
the opposite side of the highway; or
(c) Location of the proposed approach within
a highway segment with a crash rate that is twenty (20) percent or higher than
the statewide average for similar highways; or
(d) Location of the proposed approach within
a highway segment listed in the top five percent of locations identified by the
Safety Priority Index System developed by the department; or
(e) The proposed approach is on a district or
regional highway with a posted speed of 50 miles per hour or higher and the
distance to the nearest public approach is less than the stopping sight
distance on the highway, calculated in accordance with the 2011 AASHTO Policy
on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets; or
(f) Insufficient distance for weave movements
made by vehicles exiting the proposed approach across multiple lanes in the
vicinity of:
(A) Signalized intersections; or
(B) Roads classified as collectors
or arterials in an acknowledged transportation system plan or comprehensive
plan, or classified as such by the Federal Highway Administration; or
(C) On-ramps or off-ramps.
(4)
Applications that Do Not Meet Approval Standards and Criteria - Deviations. The
department may approve an application that does not meet the approval standards
and criteria of this rule for approach spacing, sight distance, and/or
channelization if a deviation from the standards is approved as set forth in
OAR 734-051-3050.
(5) Applications
for Properties with No Alternate Access. For an application for an approach to
property with a right of access and no alternate access, the department may
waive the standards and criteria of this rule for access spacing, sight
distance and channelization if the department and the applicant agree on an
approach location and mitigation measures that optimize safety, highway
operations and site design. Approval of an application under this section does
not require approval of a deviation. If agreement cannot be reached the
department shall apply OAR 734-051-4020(2)(4) to the application to approve,
deny, or approve with mitigation the application, consistent with the
procedures in 734-051-3040. In applying 734-051-4020(2)(4), the department may
include any matters of agreement or other results from discussion with the
applicant pursuant to this section. The department's decision to deny or
approve with mitigation applications under 734-051-4020(2)(4) is subject to
post-decision review under 734-051-3080.
(6) Applications Where the Department Shall
Consider Alternate Access. The region manager shall consider alternate access
to a property only for an application for an approach to a highway designated
as an expressway as described in subsection (a) of this section, or for a
second or subsequent approach to a property in a rural area as described in
subsection (b) of this section.
(a)
Expressways. The region manager may approve an application to an expressway for
a property that has alternate access when the criteria in (A) through (C) below
are met:
(A) The department determines that
either:
(i) The alternate access to the
property cannot be made reasonable based on findings under section (7) of this
rule; or
(ii) The approach
provides an immediate and long-term benefit to the state highway system as set
forth in OAR 734-051-4030, in addition to mitigating any safety or operations
concerns; and
(B) The
application meets the applicable standards and criteria of this rule or a
deviation is approved as set forth in OAR 734-051-3050; and
(C) The approach does not cause any of the
safety or operations concerns set forth in section (3) of this rule, or those
concerns can be adequately mitigated.
(b) A Second or Subsequent Approach in a
Rural Area. The region manager may approve an application for a second or
subsequent approach to a property in a rural area that has alternate access
when the criteria in paragraphs (A) through (C) are met:
(A) The department determines that either:
(i) The alternate access to the property
cannot be made reasonable based on findings under section (7) of this rule; or
(ii) The approach will serve rural
infill or redevelopment and approval of the approach will result in a net
reduction of connections to the highway or the net result improves safety for
any remaining approaches; and
(B) The application meets the applicable
standards and criteria of this rule or a deviation is approved as set forth in
OAR 734-051-3050; and
(C) The
approach does not cause any of the safety or operations concerns set forth in
section (3) of this rule, or those concerns can be adequately mitigated.
(7)
Reasonable Alternate Access Criteria. In determining whether alternate access
is or can be made reasonable pursuant to section (6) of this rule, the
department shall consider all of the following provisions in subsections (a)
through (e) below:
(a) Authorized Uses.
Alternate access to the property is adequate to allow the authorized uses for
the property identified in the acknowledged local jurisdiction comprehensive
plan and local land use regulations, taking into account the economic
development needs of the property;
(b) Type, Number, Size and Location of
Alternate Access. The type, number, size and location of alternate access are
adequate to serve the volume and type of traffic reasonably anticipated to
enter and exit the property, based on the planned uses for the property and
taking into account the economic development needs of the property;
(c) Constraints to Alternate Access. The
presence of constraints that limit the development of alternate access
including:
(A) Legal restrictions;
(B) Geographic restrictions;
(C) Historical or cultural resources; and
(D) Physical considerations such
as planned streets, roadway width, and weight and size restrictions;
(d) Availability of Mitigation
Measures. The availability of mitigation measures set forth in OAR 734-051-3070
that the applicant could make on the property or along the roadway frontage of
the property, including situations in which the applicant or the local
jurisdiction commits proportional shares toward the cost of removal or
mitigation of geographic, safety, or physical restrictions on the property or
local street network. Neither the lack of commitment by a local government to
share the cost of mitigation nor the cost of mitigation alone is conclusive in
evaluating whether a vehicle access is or could be made reasonable; and
(e) Phasing. In circumstances
where a significant difference exists between the existing and the planned
local road network the department may consider a phased method to establishing
reasonable alternative access as follows:
(A)
Where a planned public street or road network cannot be provided at the time of
development, an application for an approach may be approved with conditions
requiring a connection to the planned local street or road network when it
becomes available;
(B) The
approach permit to the state highway may be revoked and the approach removed,
or the approach permit may be modified and additional mitigation required when
the planned street or road network becomes available; and
(C) ODOT and the local government enter into
an agreement regarding the timing, cost and responsibility for the development
of the planned street or road network.
(8) Access Management Spacing Standards.
Tables 3 through 10 set forth the access management spacing standards. Tables
7, 8, 9, and 10, including Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4, are the spacing standards for
interchanges and approaches in interchange areas. Tables 3 and 6 are the
standards for unclassified highways such as service roads and frontage roads.
An application meets the spacing standards set forth in Tables 3 through 10 if
the spacing of a proposed approach is equal to or greater than the distance
shown in the applicable table. The spacing standards in Tables 3 through 6 are
subject to the method of measurement and exceptions in subsections (a) through
(c) below:
(a) The spacing standards in
Tables 3 through 6 apply to the distance measured along the highway from the
center of an existing or proposed private approach to the center of the nearest
existing private connection, proposed approach, or public approach on the same
side of the highway in both directions;
(b) The following exceptions in paragraphs
(A) through (E) apply to the spacing standards in Tables 3 through 6:
(A) On one-way highways or highways with a
non-traversable median, where turning movements to and from the highway are
limited to either right in/right out or left in/left out turns only, the
applicable approach spacing standards equal one-half the spacing standards in
Tables 4 through 6.
(B) Tables 4
through 6 apply to highways designated as expressways regardless of average
daily traffic.
(C) The spacing
standards included in special transportation area management plans, and
facility plans that are adopted by the Commission, take precedence over the
spacing standards described in Tables 3 through 6.
(D) For special transportation areas where no
management plan has been adopted, the minimum access management spacing for
public road approaches is the existing city block spacing or the city block
spacing as identified in the local comprehensive plan. Public road connections
are preferred over private approaches and in special transportation areas,
private approaches are discouraged; however where private approaches are
allowed and where land use patterns permit, the minimum access management
spacing for private approaches is 175 feet or mid-block if the current city
block spacing is less than 350 feet.
(E) For a signalized private approach, the
signal spacing standards in OAR 734-020-0400 through 734-020-0500 supersede the
access management spacing standards in Tables 3 through 6; and
(c) The spacing standards in
Tables 3 through 6 do not apply to approaches in existence prior to January 1,
2012, except when:
(A) A new approach or
change of use of an approach is required under ORS
374.312;
(B) Where infill development or infill
redevelopment occurs and spacing or safety will be improved by moving in the
direction of the spacing standards in Tables 3 through 6; or
(C) Where a highway or interchange project
occurs and spacing or safety will be improved by moving in the direction of the
applicable spacing standards in Tables 3 through 6.
(9) Spacing Criteria for
Applications in an Interchange Area. In addition to the spacing standards in
Tables 7 through 10, the following criteria in subsections (a) and (b) below
apply to approval of an application for a proposed approach located in an
interchange area:
(a) The approach must be
consistent with adopted facility plans; and
(b) Location of proposed traffic signals
within an interchange area as illustrated in Figures 1, 2, 3 and 4 must meet
the criteria of OAR 734-020-0400 through 734-020-0500.
Tables referenced are not included in rule text.
Click here for PDF
copy of table(s)
Stat. Auth.: ORS
184.616,
184.619,
374.310-374.314,
374.345 &
374.355
Stats. Implemented: ORS
374.300-374.360, §27, ch. 330, OL
2011
