Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This study was performed under the overall guidance of the NCHRP Project Committee SP 20-06. The Committee is chaired by MICHAEL E. TARDIF, Friemund, Jackson and Tardif, LLC. Members are JAMES R. âJIMâ BAILEY, Texas DOT; CARMEN D. TUCKER BAKARICH, Kansas DOT; RICHARD A. CHRISTOPHER, HDR Engineering; JOANN GEORGALLIS, California Department of Transportation; MARCELLE SATTIEWHITE JONES, Stantec Consulting Services, Inc.; RODNEY M. LOVE, Mississippi DOT; SID SCOTT, III, HKA- Global; FRANCINE T. STEELMAN, Florida Department of Transportation. MICHELLE S. ANDOTRA provided liaison with the Federal Highway Administration, ROBERT J. SHEA provided liaison with TRBâs Technical Activities Division, and GWEN CHISHOLM SMITH represents the NCHRP staff. NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state depart- ments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These prob- lems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 initiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Coopera- tive Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Depart ment of Transportation, under Agreement No. 693JJ31950003.
58 NCHRP LRD 87 APPENDIX C: SURVEY FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEWS FOR CASE EXAMPLES This appendix describes the follow-up interview questionnaire that the research team used for the follow-up interviews. The goal of in- terviewing participants was to confirm survey results and obtain additional information beyond the survey. The research team discussed lessons learned and best practices and requested available documentation as appropriate. The research team used the following list of questions as a starting point for discussions during the interviews: ⢠Please describe your stateâs experience with managing unauthorized access to state right-of-way. ⢠Has unauthorized access to the right-of-way been an issue? o For how long? o What are some of the negative impacts that the DOT has to deal with? ⢠What are the key issues with managing unauthorized access to state right-of-way? ⢠Please describe your stateâs processes and procedures managing unauthorized access to state right-of-way. o Are there any differences in applying the process depending on the type of right-of-way or how the right-of-way was ac- quired (e.g., limited-access right-of-way, acquired via condemnation, or federally funded or supported)? o How standardized is the process to manage unauthorized access to state right-of-way at your state DOT? o Do different DOT districts or offices apply the process in different ways? o Can you describe examples of when the process might be applied in different ways? ⢠Is there a need or opportunity to improve how the DOT is currently managing unauthorized access to the right-of-way? o What would need to change to help the DOT improve how it is managing unauthorized access to the right-of-way? ⢠What are the lessons learned (both good and bad) and recommendations for other state DOTs dealing with unauthorized ac- cess to right-of-way? o How did the DOT arrive at the best practice? o What were the catalysts for change to develop the best practice? ⢠Does your agency have a program that allows homeless shelters or similar social services in the state right-of-way? ⢠What are the key issues with allowing homeless shelters or similar social services in the state right-of-way? o What are the lessons learned (both good and bad) and recommendations for other state DOTs considering such a program? o What are your recommendations for other state DOTs that are considering the implementation of such a program? ⢠What are the state DOTâs plans for the future when dealing with the homeless populations in state right-of-way?
