DOCSLIB.ORG

Right-Of-Way Problems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Right-Of-Way Problems HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD Bulletin 77 LIBRARY % NOV 2 11957 7'GHrm RESEADGI RIGHT-OF-WAY PROBLEMS National Academy of Sciences- National Research Counci publication 275 HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD 1953 R. H. BALDOCK, Chairman W. H. ROOT, Vice Chairman FRED BURGGRAF, Director Executive Committee THOMAS H. MACDONALD, Commissioner, Bureau of Public Roads^ FRANCIS V. DUPONT, Commissioner, Bureau of Public Roads'' HAL H. HALE, Executive Secretary, American Association of State Highway Officials LOUIS JORDAN, Executive Secretary, Division of Engineering and Industrial Research, Natumal Research Council R. H. BALDOCK, State Highway Engineer, Oregon State Highway Commission W. H. ROOT, Maintenance Engineer, Iowa State Highway Commission FYKE JOHNSON, President, Automotive Safety Foundation G. DONALD KENNEDY, Vice President, Portland Cement Association BURTON W. MARSH, Director, Safety and Traffie Engineering Department, American Auto• mobile Assodaiion R. A. MoYER, Research Engineer, Institute of Transportation and Traffic Engineering, University of California F. V. REAGEL, Engineer of Materials, Missouri State Highway Department K. B. WOODS, Associate Director, Joint Highway Research Project, Purdue University > Resigned March 31, 19S3. •ECFective April 1, 1943. Editorial Staff FRED BURGGRAF W. J. MILLER 2101 Constitution Avenue, Washington 25, D. C. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Highway Research Board. HIGHWAY RESEARCH BOARD Bulletin 77 Right-of'Way Problems PRESENTED AT THE Thirty-Second Annual Meeting January 13-16, 1953 1953 Washington, D.C. DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION H.S. Fairbank, Chairman Deputy Commissioner Bureau of Public Roads COMMITTEE ON LAND ACQUISITION AND CONTROL OF HIGHWAY ACCESS AND ADJACENT AREAS David R. Levin, Chairman Chief, Land Studies Section Financial and Administrative Research Branch Bureau of Public Roads Frank C. Balfour, Chief Right-of-Way Agent, California Division of Highways T. L. Dickson, Director of Public Works, San Antonio, Texas ""H. E. Hilts, Deputy Commissioner, Programs and Design Division, Bureau of Public Roads Theodore M. Matson, Director, Bureau of Highway Traffic, Yale Uni• versity H. J. Neale, Landscape Engineer, Virginia Department of Highways K. B. Rykken, Special Assistant to the Executive Vice-President, Ameri• can Automobile Association Flavel Shurtleff, Counsel, American Planning and Civic Association, Marshfield Hills, Massachusetts •Deceased September 5, 1953 11 Foreword IT is the purpose of this 1952 annual report of the Committee on Land Acquisition and Control of Highway Access and Adjacent Areas, as in past years, to present significant developments in the diverse fields of the Committee's in• terest. Sections on land acquisition, control of the road• side, control of highway access, and parking are included, as well as papers presented at the open session of the com• mittee during the annual meeting of the Board in January 1953. Since many of the materials included may not be available elsewhere in printed form, this bulletin may serve as a source book of information to those interested in the fields covered. iii Contents FOREWORD iii REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON LAND ACQUISITION AND CONTROL OF HIGHWAY ACCESS AND ADJACENT AREAS David R. Levin, Chairman 1 LEGAL ASPECTS OF LIMITING HIGHWAY ACCESS Harry B. Reese 36 METHODS USED TO PROTECT, RESERVE, AND ACQUIRE RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR FUTURE USE IN MARYLAND LeRoy C. Moser 51 RESERVING LANDS FOR STREET AND HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS R. B. Sawtelle 60 IV Report of Committee on Land Acquisition and Control of Highway Access and Adjacent Areas DAVID R. LEVIN, Chairman Chief, Land Studies Section, Financial and Administrative Research Branch Bureau of Public Roads • THE broad pattern of the committee's Acquisition and Control of Adjacent Area," activities during 1952 repeats that of the Highway Research Board. preceding year. This report calls atten• tion to some of the important work done LAND ACQUISITION by the committee during the year, with particular emphasis on the study of ways Reservation of Highway Right-of-Way Prior and means of reserving highway right-of- to Acquisition way prior to acquisition, a major under• Work on the second phase of a major taking of the committee. project of the committee, the study of ways Among other activities of the committee and means of reserving land for highway are its interest in a legal research project right-of-way prior to acquisition,' contin• at the College of Law, Ohio State Uni• ued during 1952. This phase contemplates versity, on the subject of public control a study of existing legal or administrative of highway access: cooperation with the measures authorizing reservations of land American Bar Association in a project at the state level. All states which were involving legal, administrative and eco• known to have used some one or more nomic phases of the parking problem; and methods to accomplish this purpose were cooperation with the Highway Research contacted and a number of replies were Board Committee on Roadside Development received indicating a fair amount of suc• in a study of various phases of the problem cess with methods used. Of particular of roadside control. value were replies received from Mary• Although no startling amount of legisla• land and Wisconsin, in each of which an tion in the fields of the committee's ac• awareness of the problem, ^propriate tivities was enacted during the year, due enabling legislation and the cooperation perhaps to the fact that most state legisla• of local governmental units have seem• tures did not meet in regular session in ingly combined to produce some accom• this off-year, a number of what might be plishments of note. For this reason, it termed progressive court decisions, from seemed appropriate to have LeRoy C. the committee's viewpoint, were handed Moser, right-of-way engineer of the down. Others, not so favorable, pointed Maryland State Roads Commission, and up the need for new legislation in these R. B. Sawtelle, right-of-way engineer fields, and i^ is hoped that accomplish• of the Wisconsin State Highway Com• ments in the legislative field during the mission, address an open session of the regular sessions of 1953 will be sub• committee at the Thirty-Second Annual stantial. Meeting of the Highway Research Board. In this connection, a most-significant Both Moser's paper, "Methods Used to project is being sponsored by the Highway Protect, Reserve and Acquire Rights Research Board, comprising an analysis of Way for Future Use in Maryland," of all state statutes pertaining to streets and Sawtelle's paper, "Ways and Means and highways, with a view to developing of Reserving Lands for Street and High• recommended legislative guides for the way Improvements," are reproduced in states. this bulletin. Both papers contain ex• cellent accounts of the two states' ex- The 1951 annual report of the committee and special papers were published in 'See "Land Acquisition and Control of Adjacent Areas," High• November 1952, as Bulletin 55, "Land way Research Board Bulletins 38 and 59 for previous reports on this project. perience. Both might be helpful to other first instance, the court stated, the com• states as examples of what can be done mission obviously hoped to avoid the ex• without drastic legislative changes. pense incident to any attempt to enlarge The committee hopes to complete a a roadbed that had been hemmed in by report on this project during the coming various commercial establishments that year. tend to spring up along the border of a Where sufficient funds are available, public highway. The supreme court found the most-practical method of providing it evident that the present undertaking land for future highway improvements would not have been necessary had the IS by purchase or condemnation. In ad• state taken a sufficiently wide easement dition to lack of funds, an obstacle to this when the original road was constructed. line of attack, in a number of states, is Under the circumstances, said the court, lack of specific statutory authority to ac• it was certainly permissible for the com• quire land for future use. Determination mission to look ahead in its planning. of the state's rights in this respect have In this case, also, the landowners dis• been generally left to judicial determina• puted the highway commission's authority tion. Decisions were handed down by the to reroute the highway in such a manner as courts during the year, upholding the to bypass the three towns of Jericho, state highway department's right to ac• Clarkedale, and Turrell, since these three quire sufficient right-of-way for future communities were shown on the map that use in Arkansas and Mississippi. the legislature adopted as the basic state 1. Arkansas. The Arkansas case highway system. The court disagreed with (Woollard et al. v. Arkansas State High• this contention, however, since the com• way Commission, 249 S.W. (2d) 564, mission had statutory authority "to make, June 9, 1952) came before the state's from time to time such necessary changes supreme court on appeal from a judg• and additions to the roads designated as ment of the Chancery Court of Critten• state highways as it may deem proper." den County, denying an injunction asked (Arkansas Stats. 1947, Sec. 76-501.) for by 20 landowners and the town of Tur- In a previous decision. Bonds v. Wilson, rell to enjoin the state highway com• et al. 284 S. W. 24 (1926) the court had held mission from relocating a 12-mi. segment that changes in the system, however sub• of US 61. The new highway, lying west of stantial, were not prohibited as long as the existing road, would bypass the three a particular unit of the system was not towns of Jericho, Clarkedale, and Turrell. eliminated as a whole. The section of US Plans for the relocated highway includ• 61 now in question could hardly be said to ed a 250-ft.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Right-Of-Way
    HD-1301 Chapter RIGHT-OF-WAY Subject General Information GENERAL: The procurement of right of way to widths that accommodate the construction, adequate drainage, and proper maintenance of the highway is a very important part of the overall project. Adequate right-of-way widths permit the construction of gentle slopes, resulting in more safety for the motorist and allowing easier and more economical maintenance. Traffic requirements, topography, environmental issues, utilities, land use, costs, intersection design, and extent of ultimate expansion influence the width of right of way for the complete development of a roadway. RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH: Right of way should be of sufficient width to accommodate construction and the continued maintenance and operation of the facility. Avoiding right-angle breaks in the right-of-way line and irregularities in widths facilitates maintenance operations and fencing and optimizes land use. Consider the use of curb-and-gutter sections in urbanized areas for the reduction of right-of-way widths and compatibility with adjacent development. The use of right of way, permanent easements, and temporary easements should be determined on a site-specific basis in order to facilitate the construction, operation, and maintenance of the facility and adjacent land use. Typically, permanent right of way should be acquired to the back edge of the berm on curb-and-gutter projects with easements used for that portion beyond the right of way for construction, operation, and maintenance of drainage structures. EASEMENTS: It is common practice to use two types of easements on proposed highway projects: temporary and permanent. Temporary Easement—A temporary easement is the use of a tract of land for a specified time duration (typically the duration of construction), with the land reverting to the owner’s exclusive use at the end of the period.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 State of Utah Uniform Fine Schedule
    2021 UNIFORM FINE SCHEDULE INTENT It is the intent of the Uniform Fine Schedule to assist the sentencing judge in determining the appropriate fine to be imposed as a condition of the sentence in a particular case and to minimize disparity in sentencing for similar offenses and offenders. This schedule is not intended to supplant or to minimize a court’s authority to impose a just sentence. APPLICABILITY These guidelines shall apply to all courts of record and not of record whenever a criminal fine may be imposed. In determining whether a fine is appropriate to impose as a condition of the sentence for a public offense, a judge should consider several factors, including aggravating and/or mitigating circumstances set forth in the Sentencing And Release Guidelines, Tab 6, the cumulative effect of probation conditions, and the ability of the defendant to pay. The amounts listed in the Uniform Fine Schedule may be used as a starting point for setting monetary bail as a condition of pretrial release, however, an individual’s ability to pay must be considered consistent with Appendix J of the Code of Judicial Administration. In those parking, traffic, and infraction cases where the defendant is not required to appear and is mailed a citation indicating the fine amount, pursuant to Utah Code of Judicial Administration Rule 4-701, the amount may be increased $50 if the defendant fails to appear or to pay within fourteen days after receiving the citation. The amount may be increased by an additional $75 if the defendant fails to appear or to pay within forty days after receiving the citation.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Enforcement & Legal Elements Necessary for Prosecution
    Partnership to Combat Critical Infrastructure Copper Theft Webinar Law Enforcement & Legal Elements Necessary for Prosecution February 28, 2012 Roxann M. Ryan, J.D., Ph.D. Iowa Department of Public Safety Division of Intelligence & Fusion Center The theft of copper and other precious metals is hardly new,1 although the targets have changed over time. As copper prices have reached all-time highs, burglars and thieves are accessing new sources of metal. The criminal charges available also have changed over time. In 2011, the Iowa legislature amended two statutes to specifically address the potential risk to public-utility critical infrastructure. What began as House File 299 during the 2011 Iowa legislative session became law on July 1, 2011. That legislation consisted of two primary initiatives: (1) Local ordinances are authorized.2 Municipalities and counties can pass ordinances to require salvage dealers to maintain complete records of their supplies. Failure to comply can result in a suspension or revocation of the salvage dealer’s permit or license. (2) Penalties are increased for trespass on public utility property.3 It is a class “D” felony to trespass on public utility property, which carries a sentence of up to 5 years in prison and a fine of $7500. The options for criminal charges include far more than these two additions. Copper thieves typically commit one or more of the following crimes: Burglary 713.6A. Burglary in the third degree 1. All burglary which is not burglary in the first degree or burglary in the The elements of Burglary are as second degree is burglary in the third degree.
    [Show full text]
  • Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum
    Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum Spring, 1998 8 Duke Env L & Pol'y F 209 ECONOMIC INCENTIVES AND LEGAL TOOLS FOR PRIVATE SECTOR CONSERVATION Ian Bowles, * David Downes, ** Dana Clark, *** and Marianne Guerin-McManus **** * Vice President and Director of Policy Department, Conservation International. ** Senior Attorney with the Center for International Environmental Law. *** Senior Attorney with the Center for International Environmental Law. **** Director of Conservation Finance Program, Conservation International. SUMMARY: ... At the same time, public concern about environmental issues like clean drinking water, overconsumption of natural resources, and worldwide loss of tropical forests has grown explosively and led policymakers to devote more attention to these issues. ... In most jurisdictions, a conservation easement is created when the landowner transfers some or all rights to develop the property to a government agency or qualified conservation non-governmental organization (NGO); the landowner can maintain certain uses but cannot legally take actions inconsistent with the terms of the conservation easement. ... To encourage donations of conservation easements, a number of jurisdictions specifically provide that a conservation easement qualifies as a charitable contribution, enabling a landowner to deduct its value from her taxable income. ... This provision has proven to be a significant incentive for conservation of biodiversity. ... One method for capturing at least some of the many costs of timber extraction is a user fee. ... Recreation, though not as destructive as extractive resource development, has environmental consequences. ... When a landowner donates a conservation easement, or enters into a conservation agreement, ensure that the landowner's property is taxed at a rate according to its current market value (its value subject to the easement or the agreement), rather than its potential development value.
    [Show full text]
  • Right of Way Manual
    Right of Way Manual Office of Land Management Updated 07/26/2018 General Index 100 Pre-Acquisition 200 Appraisals 300 Acquisition 400 Relocation Assistance Program 500 Property Management 800 Special Procedures Table of Contents 100 Pre-Acquisition ...................................................................................................................................1 101 Initial Program Development Process ........................................................................................................1 101.1 Background .........................................................................................................................................1 101.2 Policy ...................................................................................................................................................1 101.3 Procedures ..........................................................................................................................................1 102 Project Numbers and Right of Way State Project Numbers .......................................................................3 102.1 Policy ...................................................................................................................................................3 102.2 Procedure ...........................................................................................................................................3 103 Base Maps...................................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Deed of Right-Of-Way Easement
    PREPARED BY: ______________________ PLANNING BOARD FILE# ______________________ DEED OF RIGHT-OF-WAY EASEMENT THIS DEED OF EASEMENT is made on this__________ day of_______________, 20_______by ___________________________________________________ whose mailing address is ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________ (hereinafter referred to as "Grantor"), and THE COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee"). The words “Grantor” and “Grantee” shall mean all Grantors and all Grantees listed above. THIS EASEMENT is granted by Grantor to Grantee for and in consideration of One ($1.00) Dollar, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. Grantor also acknowledges that the conveyance of this right-of-way easement is a condition of site plan/subdivision approval by the Middlesex County Planning Board (File Number___________) for the development of Block No. ___________, Lot No.___________ as delineated on the prevailing tax map of the ___________ of ___________. THE LANDS AFFECTED by this Easement (the “Affected Lands”) are more formally described on Exhibit "A" (attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference) prepared by______________________, New Jersey License No. __________________. Said Affected Lands is also depicted on a Site Plan/Subdivision Plan dated ___________________________ (last revised ______________________), as prepared by______________________, New Jersey License No. _____________________, attached hereto as Exhibit "B". SAID AFFECTED LANDS are a part of the lands and premises conveyed unto Grantor by deed from ____________________, dated ____________________ and recorded in the Middlesex County Clerk's Office on _____________ at Deed Book _________, Page ________. THIS DEED OF EASEMENT conveys to Grantee the right to utilize the easement area in perpetuity for the widening or improving of _______________ Road (County Road No.
    [Show full text]
  • Right of Way Manual, Section 4.1, Land Title
    Topic 575-000-000 Right of Way Manual Effective Date: April 15, 1999 Acquisition Revised: May 18, 2017 Section 7.15 LAND TITLE PURPOSE ............................................................................................................... 7.15.1 AUTHORITY ........................................................................................................... 7.15.1 SCOPE .................................................................................................................... 7.15.1 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 7.15.1 DEFINITIONS ......................................................................................................... 7.15.1 7.15.1 QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF TITLE .............................................. 7.15.3 7.15.2 TITLE EVIDENCE ............................................................................. 7.15.4 7.15.3 TITLE SEARCH REPORTS .............................................................. 7.15.4 7.15.4 TITLE INSURANCE .......................................................................... 7.15.7 7.15.5 OPINION OF TITLE .......................................................................... 7.15.8 7.15.6 TITLE EXAMINATION ...................................................................... 7.15.8 7.15.7 PARCEL NUMBERS......................................................................... 7.15.8 7.15.8 FEE TITLE .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Guidelines for Wildlife Fencing and Associated Escape and Lateral Access Control Measures
    CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES FOR WILDLIFE FENCING AND ASSOCIATED ESCAPE AND LATERAL ACCESS CONTROL MEASURES Requested by: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Standing Committee on the Environment Prepared by: Marcel P. Huijser, Angela V. Kociolek, Tiffany D.H. Allen, Patrick McGowen Western Transportation Institute – Montana State University PO Box 174250 Bozeman, MT 59717-4250 Patricia C. Cramer 264 E 100 North, Logan, Utah 84321 Marie Venner Lakewood, CO 80232 April 2015 The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 25-25, Task 84, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board. SPECIAL NOTE: This report IS NOT an official publication of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, or The National Academies. Wildlife Fencing and Associated Measures Disclaimer DISCLAIMER DISCLAIMER STATEMENT The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This document is not a report of the Transportation Research Board or of the National Research Council. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and conducted as part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 25-25 Task 84. The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state Departments of Transportation. Project 25-25 is intended to fund quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO Standing Committee on the Environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Fsh 2409.18 – Timber Sale Preparation Handbook
    2409.18_80 Page 1 of 37 FOREST SERVICE HANDBOOK NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS (WO) WASHINGTON, DC FSH 2409.18 – TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK CHAPTER 80 – USES OF TIMBER OTHER THAN COMMERCIAL TIMBER SALES SPECIAL FOREST PRODUCTS - FOREST BOTANICAL PRODUCTS Amendment No.: 2409.18-2017-1 Effective Date: January 3, 2017 Duration: This amendment is effective until superseded or removed. Approved: GLENN P. CASAMASSA Date Approved: 12/28/2016 Associate Deputy Chief, NFS Posting Instructions: Amendments are numbered consecutively by Handbook number and calendar year. Post by document; remove the entire document and replace it with this amendment. Retain this transmittal as the first page(s) of this document. The last amendment to this Handbook was 2409.18-2016-1 to chapter 80. New Document 2409.18_80 37 Pages Superseded Document(s) by 2409.18_80 37 Pages Issuance Number and (Amendment 2409.18-2016-1, 10/26/2016) Effective Date Digest: 82.5 - Revises references to 36 CFR 223.15 throughout the section. 82.53 - Removes reference to the interim directive, at paragraph 4. WO AMENDMENT 2409.18-2017-1 2409.18_80 EFFECTIVE DATE: 01/03/2017 Page 2 of 37 DURATION: This amendment is effective until superseded or removed. FSH 2409.18 - TIMBER SALE PREPARATION HANDBOOK CHAPTER 80 - USES OF TIMBER OTHER THAN COMMERCIAL TIMBER SALES SPECIAL FOREST PRODUCTS - FOREST BOTANICAL PRODUCTS Table of Contents 80.1 - Authority ........................................................................................................................... 4 81 - DISASTER RELIEF
    [Show full text]
  • Ottawa County – Understanding Road Right-Of-Way
    Understanding Road Right-of-Way for Ottawa County Road Commission and Township Collaboration 2012 County Road Right-of-Way Statutory Where, What, and Why All county roads are located road centerline does not The McNitt Act and other on land that is referred to as match the center of the road legislation established or road right-of-way. right-of-way. It is advisable transferred easements for road to utilize a surveying or and public utility use. The width of the county road engineering firm to right-of-way can vary a great determine the actual width Deeded deal. However, the general and location of the road rule of thumb is that the road right-of-way. right-of-way is 66 feet wide, Deeds are recorded documents approximately 33 feet on both The road right-of-way is that transfer property in fee, sides of the center of the road. intended for all county road, interest, or provide easement rights. pedestrian facility, and There are instances where the public utility purposes. Plat Dedication Establishment of Road Right-of-Way Plats are maps recorded by the Statutory • 10 Year Period of Use State to establish right-of-way and lots within a subdivision. Deed • Condemnation Plat Dedication 10 Year Period of Use Right-of-Way Regulation A right-of-way is established if Authority and Responsibility there has been some type of public use or maintenance The Road Commission has the and safe operations of the within a ten year period. responsibility to maintain county road system. roads in “reasonable repair so Condemnation that it is reasonably safe and Public Act 283 of 1909 convenient for public travel.” requires a permit from the Road Commission to Public Act 352 of 1925 Regulation and control of construct, operate, maintain, provides for the purchase and condemnation of private activities and work in the or remove any facility or property for public highway county road right-of-way is perform any other work purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Right of Way Manual
    RIGHT OF WAY MANUAL Prepared by NORTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BISMARCK, NORTH DAKOTA www.dot.nd.gov DIRECTOR Thomas K. Sorel ENVIRONMENTAL AND TRANSPORTATIONS SERVICES DIVISION Mark S. Gaydos, P.E. March, 2019 Note: This manual provides a written account of how certain activities are performed and is designed to guide and assist staff in performing their functions. When appropriate, there may be deviations from these written procedures due to changes in personnel, policies, interpretation, law, experimentation with different systems, or simply evolution of the process itself. This manual may be changed at any time. Staff members are encouraged to review this manual periodically and suggest changes in the manual to keep the manual current and to minimize differences between the manual and actual practices. Changes to this manual shall be submitted for NDDOT and FHWA approval. North Dakota Division 4503 Coleman Street, Suite 205 Bismarck, North Dakota 58503 March 15, 2019 Phone 701-250-4204 Fax 701-250-4395 Mr. Ronald J. Henke North Dakota Department of Transportation 608 East Boulevard Bismarck, North Dakota 58505-0700 Attention: Mr. Mark Gaydos Dear Mr. Henke: Subject: North Dakota Department of Transportation (NDDOT) 2019 Right-of-Way Manual We have reviewed the subject revisions to NDDOT’s Right-of-Way Manual and find that the changes adequately address the requirements of 23 CFR 710 and 49 CFR 24. The revisions to the Right-of-Way Manual are hereby approved. If you have any questions regarding this issue, please contact Pam Todd at 701-221-9477. Sincerely yours, Wendall L. Meyer Division Administrator ecc: Chad Orn, NDDOT Michael Knox, NDDOT Table of Contents SECTION 1 – RIGHT OF WAY FUNCTION AND ORGANIZATION 1.1 Responsibility ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Right-Of-Way Request Or 63650 Environmental Assessment
    ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT For Right-of-Way Request OR 63650 United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Medford District Jackson County, Oregon ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) for RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUEST OR 63650 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT MEDFORD DISTRICT JACKSON COUNTY OREGON EA COVER SHEET RESOURCE AREA: Ashland ACTION/TITLE: R\W Request OR 63650 EA NUMBER: OR-116-07-06 LOCATION: T. 38 S., R. 3 E., in Section 25, W.M., Jackson County Oregon (see Map) List of Preparers Title Responsibility John Samuelson Forest Engineer Road Specifications Joe Hoppe Realty Specialist Project Lead Brad Tong Botanist Special Status Plants, Botany George Arnold Wildlife Biologist T&E Animals, Wildlife Chris Volpe Fisheries Biologist Fisheries, Riparian Dave Squyres Hydrologist Hydrology, Soils & Watershed Dave Knutson Cultural Resource Technician Cultural Resources Kristi Mastrofini Environmental Coordinator NEPA Compliance 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) for RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUEST OR 63650 A. INTRODUCTION This Environmental Assessment (EA) documents the environmental analysis conducted to estimate the site-specific effects on the human environment that may result from the implementation of BLM’s proposed action. This document complies with the Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) and the Department of the Interior’s manual guidance on the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (516 DM 1-7). B. WHAT IS BLM PROPOSING & WHY? The Ashland Resource Area of the Medford District Bureau of Land Management (BLM) proposes to grant a right-of-way for the construction/reconstruction of approximately 250 feet of road on Public Land in the Howard Prairie Reservoir area.
    [Show full text]