May 23


They are Going to Close My Median Access – Help Me Stop Them!

By Mike Spack

May 23, 2017

Access Management, arterial, business, government, media, redevelopment, Transportation Research Board

By Mike Spack, PE, PTOE

I get several calls a year from lawyers who want me to fight for their client.  The government is going to close a median, their driveway, or cut-off their access in some other way.  Usually, I can’t help the lawyer in these cases because the government has the right to do this (what they need is an appraiser to determine if it will damage the parcel and how much).

Occasionally there is a viable alternative to reducing the access.  These are fun projects for us to work on because they take creativity and solid engineering analyses.

It is well documented that limiting access on arterial roadways reduces crashes and improves the throughput of the arterial.  Access management is usually a good deal for society, although it can push crash problems to the local network if there isn’t a robust collector network to support the increased traffic from the arterial’s access management.

And of course, access management negatively affects individual businesses and property owners.  At least that’s what they and their lawyers usually say when confronted with a proposal to limit their access.

I was excited to see a presentation several years ago by David Plazak, currently at the Transportation Research Board, who conducted intersecting research on the economics of access management while he was at Iowa State University.  To summarize his findings:

  • Limiting access during construction does hurt business operations.
  • After construction:
    • About 5% of the businesses studied didn’t rebound.
    • About 35% of the businesses wouldn’t/couldn’t say if they were up or down.
    • About 25% of the businesses were about the same as before.
    • About 35% saw business increase!
  • Businesses along access controlled roads are more profitable than comparable businesses on less access controlled roads.
  • Tenant turnover is less along access controlled roads than comparable businesses on less access controlled roads.
  • Redevelopment typically goes to a “better and higher use” along access controlled arterials – small commercial/retail is usually replaced with taller office buildings.  The office buildings then support nearby restaurants and gas stations.
  • The logic behind the overall economic improvement – Even though it may take several hundred extra feet to get into the business, people’s overall trips are shorter because the arterial is moving so much better.  Also, by having better throughput you are expanding the geographical range of your customers base (they care about how long it takes to get to the business, not how far it is).

I did some digging around Mr. Plazak’s research and it is a little dated and it also isn’t as comprehensive as I’d like.  A good lawyer with a few days of time could certainly poke some holes in his overarching conclusions.

My take away is that, yes, an individual business may be hurt by access management and deserves compensation for that “taking,” but no, it doesn’t mean reasonable access management isn’t in society’s best interest or the overall value of the parcel.


  • cool interesting article. I would tend to agree as motorists adjust once sufficient product definition attraction exists

  • “My take away is that, yes, an individual business may be hurt by access management and deserves compensation for that “taking,” but no, it doesn’t mean reasonable access management isn’t in society’s best interest or the overall value of the parcel.” There are several legal holes in your argument not to mention counter to the laws and best practices in the majority of states. You should call me if you want to continue to promote this opinion.

  • “deserves compensation for that “taking,”. The private access is actually “taking” away safety from ALL highway users. A driveway has adverse impacts on all other economic uses of the right of way – including the freight of goods and services. Every driveway creates a new hazard to some degree. In three states commercial owners have found to be liable for crashes caused by their driveway design and location in the same manner there is a duty of care on the property overall. Owners do not have a right to create a hazard in the public right of way, yet that is what every driveway does.

  • I’m not a lawyer, but I’ve been taught by lawyers that all property owners have the right to reasonable access to public roads. There are often situations where negotiation needs to occur between providing the right of access with minimizing the public hazard. The extreme conclusion of your argument is that all intersections, public or private, cause a hazard in the public right-of-way because data bears out that there is crash potential at all intersections.

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    Mike Spack

    My mission is to help traffic engineers, transportation planners, and other transportation professionals improve our world.

    Get these blog posts sent to your email! Sign up below.