DOCSLIB.ORG

Corner Clearance Criteria

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Corner Clearance Criteria Technical Update Corner Clearance Criteria A PRIMER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES AS THEY CONSIDER APPROVING SITE PLANS FOR PROPERTIES LOCATED ON OR NEAR A STREET CORNER Corner clearances represent the Frontage roads and connectors minimum distances that should be required between intersections and Inadequate corner clearances can driveways along arterial and collector result in traffic-operation, safety, and streets. As stated in AASHTO’s A Policy capacity problems. These problems on Geometric Design of Highways and can be caused by blocked driveway Streets: “Driveways should not be ingress and egress movements, situated within the functional conflicting and confusing turns at boundary of at-grade intersections. intersections, insufficient weaving This boundary would include the distances, and backups from far-side longitudinal limits of auxiliary lanes.” driveways into intersections. Also, Corner Clearance is discussed in FHWA’s Office of Operations website Specific operational and safety titled, “Access Management Principles problems include: Presentation”. Through traffic is blocked by (http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/access_mgm vehicles waiting to turn into a t/presentations/am_principles_intro/i driveway. ndex.htm) It is listed among the main Right or left turns into or out of methods that are utilized as part of an a driveway (both on artery and agency’s Access Management crossroad) are blocked. Program. These methods include: Driveway traffic is unable to Permits, legislation, and corridor enter left-turn lanes. planning Driveway exit movements are Medians impacted by stopped vehicles in Auxiliary lanes left-turn lanes. Signals and signal spacing Traffic entering an arterial road Driveway location, spacing, and from the intersecting street or design road has insufficient distance. Corner Clearance The weaving maneuvers for Cross-access and joint access vehicles turning onto an artery Fall 2015 The Ohio LTAP Center P a g e | 1 of 6 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/ltap Technical Update and then immediately turning maneuvers. left into a driveway are too Driveways should be located as short. far from the intersection as Confusion and conflicts resulting possible – either at or within 10 from dual interpretation of feet of the property line furthest right-turn signals. from the intersection. Application Guidelines Actions vary for retrofits and new facilities. Corrective retrofit actions The following principles should guide include: corner clearance and driveway Locating driveways at the planning: farthest edge of the property Ideally, no driveways should be line from the intersection; permitted off of major highways Consolidating driveways with (or major arterials). This adjacent properties, thereby requires safe and convenient increasing corner clearances; alternative access and Closing driveways along the reasonable internal site arterial and requiring property circulation. access from the secondary road; Where this is not possible, major and highways/arterials should have Installing a raised median barrier physical (restrictive) medians to on approaches to intersections preclude left turns. Each corner to preclude left turns into or out parcel should have one driveway of a driveway. per roadway that is placed as far from the intersections as From a planning perspective, two possible. actions should be encouraged; both Along undivided major require a proactive approach to highways/arterials, it is desirable corner clearances: to eliminate left-turn ingress Establishing the desirable and egress at driveways within location of access points the “influence area” of an before property is subdivided intersection. This may entail or developed and providing short sections of a Establishing minimum median divider and/or adopting requirements for property a driveway design that frontages in zoning and discourages or prevents left-turn subdivision regulations. Fall 2015 The Ohio LTAP Center P a g e | 2 of 6 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/LTAP Technical Update Figure 1: Physical and Functional Areas of an Intersection. Figure 2: Potential Access Points to Serve Corner Properties at the Intersection of Two Public Roads (very high number of conflict points). Fall 2015 The Ohio LTAP Center P a g e | 3 of 6 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/LTAP Technical Update Figure 3: Potential Access Arrangement to Reduce the Number of Conflict Points for Properties Located at the Intersection of Two Public Roads. (The number of conflict points has been greatly reduced.) Access Spacing for Major Arterials: Provide separation between access connections so that drivers can assess potential conflict locations one-at-a-time. Applicable spacing criteria may include: Functional area AASHTO stopping sight distance Preventing right turn overlap (see below) Other criteria as established by the Jurisdiction Right turn overlap occurs when a through vehicle must monitor two egress right turning vehicles at once while still performing other driving tasks. By separating access points a proper distance, the overlap does not occur, and the through driver has only one egress right turning vehicle to monitor. Recommended minimum access spacings to avoid right turn overlap shown in Figure 4 are comparable to AASHTO stopping sight distances. Fall 2015 The Ohio LTAP Center P a g e | 4 of 6 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/LTAP Technical Update Figure 4 - Minimum Access Spacing to Prevent Right Turn Overlap. Speed Recommended Minimum Spacing __________ _(mph) (feet)_______________ 25 120 30 185 35 245 40 300 45 350 Intersection clearance should be the same as driveway spacings or at least as long as stopping sight distance. Source: Transportation Research Board Record 644 (1977). Additional Access Spacing Considerations: At a minimum, the upstream corner clearance should be longer than the longest expected queue at the adjacent intersection. High speed, high volume roadways need longer corner clearances whereas the corner clearance on a local street can be much shorter. Residential streets – driveways on corner lots should be located on the lesser street and near the property line most distant from the intersection. Typically, all elements of an access drive, including the radii should be within a property frontage. At a minimum, all driveway geometrics should be along the frontage of the property served by the driveway. On major roadways, the corner clearance should be at least as long as the stopping sight distance so that vehicles turning corners can make safe stops when encountering entering traffic. Encourage owners of adjacent properties to construct joint-use driveways in lieu of separate driveways. Encourage a property owner to replace two or more driveways with a single driveway (or fewer driveways). For adjacent properties, locate joint access on the property line. Reciprocal cross-access easement agreements must be executed. Fall 2015 The Ohio LTAP Center P a g e | 5 of 6 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/LTAP Technical Update Notes DISCLAIMER: This RON Technical Update is provided for purposes of general information only. This is not a primary technical or legal authority, and should not be relied upon as such. Interested persons should refer to the source documents referenced herein. Please note also that information contained in this document could become outdated or obsolete over time. Fall 2015 The Ohio LTAP Center P a g e | 6 of 6 http://www.dot.state.oh.us/LTAP .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Access Management Manual, September 5, 2019 TABLE of CONTENTS
    AccessAccess ManagementManagement ManualManual T E X A S Prepared by the City of Irving Public Works/Traffic and Transportation Department Adopted September 5, 2019 Access Management Manual, September 5, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Introduction Page 1.0 Purpose 1 1.1 Scope 1 1.2 Definitions 3 1.3 Authority 10 Section 2 Principles of Access Management 2.1 Relationship between Access and Mobility 11 2.2 Integration of Land Use and Transportation 11 2.3 Relationship between Access and Roadway Efficiency 12 2.4 Relationship between Access and Traffic Safety 12 Section 3 Access Management Programs and Policies 3.1 Identifying Functional Hierarchy of Roadways 14 3.1.1 Sub-Classifications of Roadways 14 3.1.1.1 Revising the “Master Thoroughfare Plan” 15 3.1.2 Comprehensive Plan 15 3.1.3 Discretionary Treatment by the Director 15 3.2 Land Use 15 3.3 Unified Access Planning Policy 16 3.4 Granting Access 16 3.4.1 General Mutual Access 17 3.4.2 Expiration of Access Permission 17 3.4.3 “Grandfathered” Access and Non-Conforming Access 17 3.4.4 Illegal Access 19 3.4.4.1 Stealth Connection 19 3.4.5 Temporary Access 19 3.4.6 Emergency Access 19 3.4.7 Abandoned Access 20 3.4.8 Field Access 20 3.4.9 Provision for Special Case Access 20 3.4.10 Appeals, Variances and Administrative Remedies 20 3.5 Parking and Access Policy 20 3.6 Access vs Accessibility 21 3.7 Precedence of Access Rights Policy 21 3.8 Right to Access A Specific Roadway 22 3.9 Traffic Impact Analyses (TIA’s) 22 3.9.1 Level of Service (LOS) 22 3.9.2 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Requirements
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. 64 Improvements in Apex & Cary Concept 2B Expressway
    S U B K B S 3 CULLER ANITA A S 10 ' D C K ON 22 SHENTON WILLIAM T B C ' S CULLER RUSSELL OVID B FERGUSON 2 9 BOWSER JENNY B S ' BS BELL CHRISTOPHER T SHENTON MARILYN A T CUS 64 17300 Lake 12 ENTERPRISES INC v " L 2016 B BELL MELISSA SUE DUCHE v S T SORRELL LOYD V Pine Dr. 3 ADT 1 B 6 v 33300 0 L " ' K C W O A Laura D 11300 N LL SORRELL DENISE B C v SF 2040 2 2016 RESERVE AT MILLS FARM LLC Duncan Rd. ADT 26500 TOWN & COUNTRY v T 2040 KENNELS S 10' 6' 18' 10' 12' 12' EXIST 12' EXIST 4' 19' 19' 4' 12' EXIST 12' EXIST 12' 10' 18' 6' 10' B ' 9 v PAVED AUX EXIST EXIST AUX PAVED 3200 7200 SHOULDER LANE PS PS LANE SHOULDER T S B ' 9 9600 13800 2700 4400 TT v 38400 42700 11300 8600 v C N 71700 D 75400 K O C C N B O 41600 D 40000 K S " C SALEM STREET ARBORETUM CONDO 2 8 B 4 CLARK HAROLD R CLARK JENNIFER C 1S F 72300 71700 HINSON TIMOTHY M US HWY 64 ALLARD JONATHAN W 12 HINSON LAURA C ' C O ALLARD ERIN F N P C C R 0.02 0.02 0.02 " 0.02 0.02 12 0.02 0.04 2 0.04 . 1 US HWY 64 F :1 .08 08 2: 6:1 6:1 3500 1 F 4 1 0 :1 4: 3200 ' C 6 1 ON :1 6: P C C R 1 6 P VARIABLE 6: :1 VARIABLE C " 4500 R 12 2 2400 " SLOPES :1 :1 SLOPES 500 D 12 2500 2 v R v 6300 F ORIGINAL VARIABLE VARIABLE ORIGINAL C 4200 O GROUND SLOPES SLOPES GROUND N C X T O S R B 13600 PP A TYPICAL SECTION NO.
    [Show full text]
  • MDOT Access Management Guidebook
    ReducingTrafficCongestion andImprovingTrafficSafety inMichiganCommunities: THE ACCESSMANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK COMMUNITYA COMMUNITYB Cover graphics and ROW graphic by John Warbach, Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. Photos by Tom Doyle, Michigan Department of Transportation. Speed Differential graphic by Michigan Department of Transportation. Road Hierarchy graphic by Rossman Martin & Associates, Inc. Reducing Traffic Congestion and Improving Traffic Safety in Michigan Communities: THE ACCESS MANAGEMENT GUIDEBOOK October, 2001 Prepared by the Planning & Zoning Center, Inc. 715 N. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48906-5206 517/886-0555 (tele), www.pzcenter.com Under contract to the Michigan Department of Transportation With the assistance of three Advisory Committees listed on the next page The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Michigan State Transportation Commission or the Michigan Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. Dedication This Guidebook is dedicated to the countless local elected officials, planning and zoning commissioners, zoning administrators, building inspectors, professional planners, and local, county and state road authority personnel who: • work tirelessly every day to make taxpayers investment in Michigan roads stretch as far as it can with the best possible result; and • who try to make land use decisions that build better communities without undermining the integrity of Michigan's road system. D:\word\access\title
    [Show full text]
  • Neighborhood Road Design Guidebook a Massachusetts Guide to Sustainable Design for Neighborhood Roads
    NEIGHBORHOOD ROAD DESIGN GUIDEBOOK A MASSACHUSETTS GUIDE TO SUSTAINABLE DESIGN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD ROADS A joint project of the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Planning Association Home Builders Association of Massachusetts Prepared for the Citizen Planner’s Training Collaborative March 14, 2012 Overview 2 1. Why a new Guidebook now? 2. Who will use this? 3. What is the general approach 4. Examples of recommended design standards 5. Cross Sections 6. Implementation Why Now? 3 1. Road design for whom? 2. Change in vehicle types 3. What is a win-win approach? 4. Length of time to change rules and regulations Why a new Guide now? 4 Massachusetts guide for Neighborhood Roads to create model guidelines and match local settings. This is called “context sensitive” design. Other road design manuals don’t get at local streets very well Who might use the Guidebook? 5 There are many “actors” in Transportation Design Engineers and designers (private and public sectors) Applicants who are building new infrastructure as part of their projects; Planning Directors/Planners; Planning Boards, Board of Selectmen, Fire and Emergency Service providers; Regional Planning Associations – link to state funding and state projects; Abutters; Land use and environmental advocates; and Finally –build roads that benefit the USERS What kind of Guidebook? 6 Project Goals Reduce environmental impacts of roadway development, operation and maintenance; Encourage Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) in residential roadway design; Provide specific guidelines and references for municipal application; Promote innovative techniques for stormwater management; and Reduce maintenance costs of roadways and stormwater systems. What kind of Guidebook? 7 Project Goals (contin.) Encourage consistency in approach and rationale in residential roadway design across Massachusetts; Promote inter-connectivity of roads; Promote pedestrian and non- motorized access; Promote universal accessibility; and Provide guidance for the design of neighborhood scale residential roads.
    [Show full text]
  • Driveway Guidelines for Residents
    The City of Plantation Engineering Department 401 Northwest 70th Avenue, Plantation FL 33317 Engineering Department guidelines for driveway permit applications. 1. New and replacement driveways require a Building permit. Seal coating a single-family driveway does not require a permit. 2. Application Process: a. Applicant will submit application to the Building Department. Building permit application shall be completed in full with the following: ჿ Provide (3) three sets of plans on original survey with proposed driveway improvements. ჿ If the residential property resides in an HOA community an approval letter from the HOA is required. b. Upon submission of the Building permit application city staff will prepare a notice of findings/corrections that will be provided to the applicant for review and revision. If the applicant has Engineering related questions they can contact the Engineering Department at (954) 797-2282 to discuss. c. Once staff comments have been addressed the applicant will resubmit the changes for review. Identical plan changes must be provided on all three plan sets. d. If application is complete and the request meets the requirements the permit will be approved and the applicant will be notified that the permit is ready for pick-up. 3. The typical requirements for all single residence driveways are as follows: a. The allowable driveway surface material can be constructed of asphalt, concrete or paver brick. Refer to the City’s Engineering detail for “Standard Driveway Detail” minimum requirements. b. The maximum allowable impervious area for any property is 65% of the overall lot area. If a driveway is to be expanded it must meet this criterion.
    [Show full text]
  • 214 Driveways 214.1 General
    Topic #625-000-002 FDOT Design Manual January 1, 2019 214 Driveways 214.1 General This chapter provides driveway design criteria and requirements for connections to the State Highway System. The FDOT Access Management Guidebook provides further guidance and information on driveways and medians. For additional information and definitions, including Connection Categories, and requirements for obtaining access to the State Highway System, refer to: • Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), Rule 14-96 (State Highway Connection Permits) and • Rule 14-97, F.A.C. (State Highway System Access Control Classification System and Access Management Standards). This criteria applies to new construction, reconstruction, and Resurfacing, Restoration and Rehabilitation (RRR) projects. New Construction criteria must be met for new and reconstruction projects, and for proposed improvements included within RRR projects. For RRR Projects, unaltered driveways that are not in compliance with the new construction criteria in this chapter, Standard Plans, or ADA requirements are not required to be reconstructed. The terms “driveway”, “connection”, and “turnout” are used in various FDOT manuals, handbooks, and guides. A driveway is an access constructed within a public R/W connecting a public road with adjacent property. The intent is to provide vehicular access in a manner that will not cause the blocking of any sidewalk, border area, or roadway. The term “connection” encompasses a driveway or side road and its appurtenances: • islands, • curb cut ramps, • separators, • signing, • transition tapers, • pavement marking, • auxiliary lanes, • required signalization, • travel way flares, • maintenance of traffic or • drainage pipes and structures, • other means of access to or from controlled access facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. 64 Improvements in Apex & Cary Concept 2B Expressway
    NEAL DAVID C BATTLE WILLIAM MICHAEL NEAL HOLLY GETMAN BATTLE LISA ANNE DELAIR SHANE K DELAIR KERRI E CAMBERATO JOSEPH A FULTON WILLIAM H WARM JAN K FULTON BARBARA E 2200 C N O 2016 2016 C WORSHAM JULIUS BERRYE III Chalon Dr. ' 5 2700 WORSHAM DONNA WESTON 2300 ADT ADT Edinburgh Dr. 2040 2040 MINIMUM 800 FT.* 3300 CUS 64 DESIRABLE 1,000 FT. TO 1,300 FT.* L FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS* 500 1200 C 500 1300 A 600 1800 14' 6' 18' 12' 12' 12' 12' 17.5' 17.5' 12' 12' 12' 12' 18' 6' 14' 43300 45700 45700 50300 C P 700 2200 C 15' W/GR 20 15' W/GR ' BS R T 50300 " A 8 1 75800 78900 78900 83900 WILKES JOELLEN H 10' 10' 83900 FDPS FDPS US HWY 64 US HWY 64 US HWY 64 3500 6300 .75' .75' 1800 1700 5000 .02 .02 4300 7500 500 .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 2: .08 .04 .02 .04 .08 :1 2000 2500 1 2 6000 6:1 6:1 4:1 :1 600 MP 4 " C 6:1 :1 96 6 (2) GRADE VARIABLE 6:1 6:1 VARIABLE POINT 2 C SLOPES :1 :1 SLOPES 2 24' 46' 24' 5800 8000 SCHMIDT FREDERICK K A SCHMIDT SUSANORIGINAL BVARIABLE EXIST PAVEMENT EXIST MEDIAN EXIST PAVEMENT VARIABLE ORIGINAL 5800 GROUND SLOPES SLOPES GROUND 6800 Mackenan Dr. 10000 Gregson Dr. C 4' 12' 12' 4' A 7000 Edinburgh Dr. LEFT OR U-TURN LEFT OR U-TURN FULL CONTROL OF ACCESS* MINIMUM 800 FT.* ORIGINAL ORIGINAL GROUND 30' 0.75' 0.75' 30' GROUND DESIRABLE 1,000 FT.
    [Show full text]
  • Access Control
    Access Control Appendix D US 54 /400 Study Area Proposed Access Management Code City of Andover, KS D1 Table of Contents Section 1: Purpose D3 Section 2: Applicability D4 Section 3: Conformance with Plans, Regulations, and Statutes D5 Section 4: Conflicts and Revisions D5 Section 5: Functional Classification for Access Management D5 Section 6: Access Control Recommendations D8 Section 7: Medians D12 Section 8: Street and Connection Spacing Requirements D13 Section 9: Auxiliary Lanes D14 Section 10: Land Development Access Guidelines D16 Section 11: Circulation and Unified Access D17 Section 12: Driveway Connection Geometry D18 Section 13: Outparcels and Shopping Center Access D22 Section 14: Redevelopment Application D23 Section 15: Traffic Impact Study Requirements D23 Section 16: Review / Exceptions Process D29 Section 17: Glossary D31 D2 Section 1: Purpose The Transportation Research Board Access Management Manual 2003 defines access management as “the systematic control of the location, spacing, design, and operations of driveways, median opening, interchanges, and street connections to a roadway.” Along the US 54/US-400 Corridor, access management techniques are recommended to plan for appropriate access located along future roadways and undeveloped areas. When properly executed, good access management techniques help preserve transportation systems by reducing the number of access points in developed or undeveloped areas while still providing “reasonable access”. Common access related issues which could degrade the street system are: • Driveways or side streets in close proximity to major intersections • Driveways or side streets spaced too close together • Lack of left-turn lanes to store turning vehicles • Deceleration of turning traffic in through lanes • Traffic signals too close together Why Access Management Is Important Access management balances traffic safety and efficiency with reasonable property access.
    [Show full text]
  • HOV Brochure
    P F 3 e O 3 d 5 e B 3 r o 0 a x l F 9 W i r Contact Us! 7 s t a 1 W y 8 , a W y A S o PUBLIC WORKS 9 u 8 t h 0 “What Your 6 253-661-4131 3 - 9 Washington 7 1 PUBLIC SAFETY 8 Driver Guide Does Not 253-661-4707 Teach E-MAIL This guide will You.” [email protected] ex p la in t o dr iv er s WEB SITE t he b est wa y t o cityoffederalway.com n a v iga t e o ur C it y usin g H O V la n es a n d U-t ur n s sa f ely , lega lly , a n d ef f ic ien t ly . BROUGHT TO YOU BY YOUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT As you may have USING HOV MYTH: When exiting business driveways and LEGAL noticed, Federal entering the roadway, I must drive through the HOV lane and enter traffic directly in the general Way is now home LANES U-TURNS purpose or ”through” lane to HOV lanes The City is along many of our The most common FACT: NO! The HOV lanes are intended as encouraging use of major roadways. question drivers of a single- acceleration lanes for vehicles entering the LEGAL U-turns HOV lanes have been installed on S 348th occupancy vehicle ask is: roadway. Enter the HOV lane to accelerate, and where appropriate. Street, on SR 99 (S 312th to S 324th), and on “When and where am I change lanes at your first safe opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections
    Technical Summary Access Management in the Vicinity of Intersections FHWA-SA-10-002 Foreword This technical summary is designed as a reference for State and local transportation officials, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Division Safety Engineers, and other professionals involved in the design, selection, and implementation of access management near traditional intersections (e.g., signalized, unsignalized and stop controlled intersections). Its purpose is to provide an overview of safety considerations in the design, implementation, and management of driveways near traditional intersections in urban, suburban, and rural environments where design considerations can vary as a function of land uses, travel speeds, volumes of traffic by mode (e.g., car, pedestrian, or bicycle), and many other variables. The technical summary does not include any discussion on roundabout intersections. More information about roundabouts is available in Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, published by the FHWA [1]. Section 1 of this technical summary presents an overview of access management factors that should be considered for improving safety near intersections in any setting. Section 2 presents access management considerations and treatments to improve safety near traditional intersections in suburban, urban, and rural settings. This section features a case study of an access management retrofit project in a suburban area. Section 3 points the reader to additional resources. This publication does not supersede any publication; and is a Final version. Disclaimer and Quality Assurance Statement Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document.
    [Show full text]
  • 11.20.050 Lot Design. (1) Access. Every Lot Shall Be Provided with Satisfactory Access by a Public Street Connecting to an Exist
    11.20.050 Lot design. (1) Access. Every lot shall be provided with satisfactory access by a public street connecting to an existing public street, except as provided in WCC 11.16.190, and 11.20.020(10-12), and 11.20.020(11). 11.20.020 Streets. (1) Locations. The street layout of every subdivision shall be in conformance with any adopted comprehensive plan or circulation element thereof, and shall provide for the continuation of major streets which serve property contiguous to the subdivision. Street networks shall provide ready access for fire and other emergency vehicles. The hearing examiner, upon recommendation of city staff, may require additional access points if such are found to be necessary to protect the public safety. (2) Intersections. Street intersections shall be as nearly at right angles as is practicable. Street jogs with off-sets of less than 125 feet between centerlines should be avoided in residential subdivisions where possible. The streets should be designed so as to not intersect with arterial streets at intersections any closer than 1,000 feet. (3) Grades. Grades shall be not less than five-tenths percent on any street, and not more than 10 percent for local streets, or more than eight percent for collector or arterial streets. (4) Alignment. Connecting street centerlines deflecting from each other at any one point more than 10 degrees shall be connected by a curve of at least a 100-foot radius for collector and local streets, and at least a 300-foot radius for arterial streets. A tangent at least 100 feet long shall be introduced between curves on arterial streets.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 27 PRIVATE ROADS Section 27.1. Definitions. for Purposes of This Chapter, the Following Words and Phrases Hall Be Define
    CHAPTER 27 PRIVATE ROADS Section 27.1. Definitions. For purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases hall be defined as follows: 1. A “driveway” is an improved or unimproved path or road extending from a public or private road to a single lot, building, dwelling or structure, intended to provide ingress and egress primarily for the occupants thereof. 2. A “shared driveway” is a path or road extending from a public or private road to two lots, buildings, dwellings or structures, intended to provide ingress and egress primarily for the occupants thereof. 3. A “private road” is the entire length of any undedicated path, drive or road which is privately owned and maintained and which provides or is intended to provide the primary means of ingress and egress to three or more lots, dwellings, dwelling units or structures or combination thereof. Driveways providing access to a single building, dwelling or structure are not considered to be part of a private road. Private road provisions of this chapter shall not apply to internal roads serving only one lot or parcel of land which has direct public or private street frontage and is under the control of one person, corporation, or association, and which is to be developed for uses subject to site plan review under this Ordinance. Such internal roads shall not provide the principal means of access to any abutting lot or parcel of land. Examples of access roads that may be exempted from the provisions of this chapter include those serving multi-family dwellings, nursing homes, hospitals, factories, schools, mobile-home parks, and shopping centers.
    [Show full text]