Land Use Versus Land Cover: Geo-Analysis of National Roads and Synchronisation Algorithms

remote sensing

Article Land Use versus Land Cover: Geo-Analysis of National Roads and Synchronisation Algorithms

Katarzyna Kocur-Bera 1,* and Agnieszka Dawidowicz 2 1 Institute of Geoinformation and Cartography, Faculty of Geodesy, Geospatial and Civil Engineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-720 Olsztyn, Poland 2 Institute of Geography and Land Management, Faculty of Geodesy, Geospatial and Civil Engineering, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, 10-720 Olsztyn, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]

Received: 5 November 2019; Accepted: 13 December 2019; Published: 17 December 2019

Abstract: Technological progress in Earth surface observation provides a vast range of information on the land and methods of its use. This enables property owners, users and administrators to monitor the state of the boundaries of the land they own/administer. The land cover, monitored directly on the ground, is not always consistent with the land use entered in the Land and Property Registry (LPR). Discrepancies between these data are often found in former communist countries. One of the reasons for this was the rapid process of land privatisation, which took place in Poland, without updating information on the plot geodetic boundaries. The study examined and compared the land use (entered in the LPR) with the land cover (on the ground) for national roads (acr. LU-LC). The most frequent discrepancies were selected, using CLC2018, digital orthophotomaps (using the Web Map Service (WMS) browsing service compliant with Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standards), cadastral data, statistical modelling and an updated survey of the right-of-way. Subsequently, six algorithms were proposed to synchronise the land use and land cover when the right-of-way was used by unauthorised persons, and two algorithms for cases of unauthorised use of land by the road administrator. Currently, it is diﬃcult to synchronise the land cover with the land use from the administrative, legal and social points of view. The results of analyses show that full synchronisation of land use and land cover is complicated and time-consuming, although desired.

Keywords: spatial analysis; updating data; land use/cover (acr. LU-LC); cadastral data; synchronisation algorithms

1. Introduction Changes in the population’s lifestyle and increases in their mobility and the consumption and transfer of goods on the local and global scale have significantly increased road transport. This particularly applies to the countries that joined the European Union during the past two decades, when the road infrastructure was backward compared to the other EU countries. Increased demand for transport [1] requires the right-of-way administration in a way which allows for fast and safe traffic [2]. It applies both to the part on which the motor traffic takes place (roadway) and the land which enables its proper functioning (right-of-way). The experience of communism and the socioeconomic system transformation in Eastern European countries in the 1990s resulted in different treatment of common property and common resources [3]. They are regarded as “no-one’s property”. In some people’s perception, it opens the possibility of using road infrastructure, public space or forests for one’s private purposes. Such an approach has its consequences because—as this study shows—some public roads are used for non-transport purposes. This lack of coincidence of land use (the spatial range of public property administration) and land

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053; doi:10.3390/rs11243053 www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 2 of 27 cover (acr. LU-LC) affects a number of aspects of life, from traffic safety, through road administration, to the portion of taxes received by communes. The issues related to examination of changes of land use/land cover have been present in the scientific discourse, in particular with respect to changes in the environment [4,5], ecosystems [6–9], landscape [10,11] and consequences to climate changes [12]. Causes for changes in the LU-LC are sought in a global approach; it is pointed out that they result from a population increase and intensive land use [13–15]. Such studies often take land use as equivalent to land cover, because land cover is a consequence of the way in which people use it [16,17]. Monitoring the LU-LC is of key importance in this aspect on the local, regional and global scale [18]. Unlike in the cited papers, the authors of this study distinguish between land use and land cover, assuming that land use represents entries in the Land and Property Registry (LPR), whereas land cover represents situations deviating from such entries in the LPR. Such an approach is of particular importance in the case of public roads. Owing to it, it was possible to determine the scale and type of LU-LC discrepancies on public roads and to identify solution algorithms which will help to synchronise LU and LC. Discrepancies between data entered in the LPR and the state on the ground have been studied many times and are a multi-faceted issue. A group of researchers attempted to estimate the scale of obsolescence of cadastral data by comparing them to other sources employing modern technologies [19–22]. Another very important study trend focuses on using modern technologies to update or generalise data [23–26]. State-of-the-art tele-detection imaging in combination with deep learning method algorithms are used increasingly often [27–30]. A third group of articles presents an analysis of the effects of modernisation of cadastral data on an individual, a tax collecting authority, socioeconomic aspects and real estate management [31–36]. All of the issues discussed in studies associated with a lack of up-to-date cadastral data and methods of updating them are equally important. However, not each LU-LC discrepancy is a consequence of the fact that data are not updated; the mind-set of people, who treat public property in a specific manner, is also of great importance. This manuscript takes these issues into account and proposes an innovative approach based on legal solutions and good practice principles, which make it possible to achieve LU-LC synchronisation. The aim of the study is to analyse the use of land that makes up a right-of-way. The authors analysed the CLC2018 data, digital orthophotomaps (using the Web Map Service browsing service compliant with the Open Geospatial Consortium standards) and the findings of the right-of-way geodetic survey performed on parts of national roads in the Warmińsko-MazurskieVoivodship, Poland. Subsequently, the results were used to develop algorithms enabling synchronisation of land use and land cover. Eight algorithms were developed; six cover cases of land use by private entities, associations or other legal entities, whereas two algorithms concern synchronisation when road objects are situated on land not intended for the purpose. This paper consists of six sections. Section1 (introduction) presents the object and scope of the study, analyses the literature of the subject with respect to data updating and their consistency with the situation on the ground; Section2 (background) presents the scope of responsibilities of a road administrator in the aspect of having complete and relevant information on the land that he administers. This section also points out geodetic procedures that enable altering the right-of-way cadastral data. Section3 (methods and materials) presents the methods applied in the study and briefly characterises the area covered by the analyses, Section4 (results) presents the results of the quantitative analyses in the area and proposes models whose application enables synchronisation of land use and land cover, Section5 (discussion) analyses the quantitative results. The final section sums up the study results.

2. Background A public road administrator has a number of responsibilities, from the stage of the road network planning, through its construction and maintenance, until the moment when it falls into disuse. A speciﬁc scope of responsibility is laid down in the relevant laws, rules and regulations. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 3 of 27

RemoteThe responsibilities Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR of PEER a road REVIEW administrator in Poland are associated mainly with: (1) Developing3 of 28 draft plans for road network development with plans for funding construction, alterations, repairs, plansmaintenance for road and ne protectiontwork development of roads and with engineering plans forstructures; funding (2) construction, maintenance of alterations, the road pavement, repairs, maintenancesidewalks, engineering and protection structures, of roads traffi c and protection engineering devices structures; and other road-related (2) maintenance devices, of exceptthe road for pavement,the right-of-way sidewalks, part; (3) engineering responsibilities structures, related to traffic traffi c protection engineering; devices (4) preparing and other road infrastructure road-related devices,for national except defence-related for the right purposes;-of-way part; (5) coordination (3) responsibilities of work related in the to right-of-way; traffic engineering; (6) issuing (4) preparingpermits for road occupying infrastructure the right-of-way for national and defence for exits-related from purposes; roads as well(5) coordination as collecting of fees work and in fines; the right(7) maintaining-of-way; (6) aissuing register permits of roads, for bridges, occupying tunnels, the right culverts-of-way and and ferries for and exits providing from roads it at as a well request as collectingof an authorised fees and authority;fines; (7) maintaining (8) conducting a register periodical of roads, inspections bridges, tunnels, of the conditionculverts and of ferries roads and and providingroad engineering it at a request structures; of an (9) authorised performing authority; intervention (8) conducting work, maintenance periodical and inspections securing of work; the condition(10) preventing of roads road and damage road engineering by users and structures; adverse changes (9) performing in the environment; intervention (11) work, introducing maintenance traffic andrestrictions securing in work; situations (10) preventing when safety road is threatened; damage by (12) users performing and adverse periodical changes tra inffi thec measurements; environment; (11)(13) introducing maintaining traffic roadside restrictions vegetation in situations and (14) acquisition when safety of is land threatened; for right-of-way (12) performing of public periodical roads and trafficmanaging measurements; it under the (13) rights maintaining to the land roadside [37]. These vegetation tasks would and (14) be diacquisitionfficult to performof land for without right- fullof- wayinformation of public on roads the right-of-way,and managing consistent it under withthe rights the situation to the land on the[37]. ground. These tasks would be difficult to performThere without are two full definitions information that applyon the toright roads-of- andway, which consistent describe with di thefferently situation the on space the ground. used for traffiTherec. These are are:two “road”definitions and that “right-of-way”. apply to roads The and former which definition describe differently applies to object(s)the space which used for are traffic.consistent These with are: the “road” common and understanding “right-of-way”. of the The space former on whichdefinition traffi capplies takes place to object(s) (road, bridge, which etc.),are consistentwhereas the with latter the defines common a spatial understanding dimension of of the management. space on which According traffic totakes the Publicplace (road, Road Actbridge, [37] etc.),“road” whereas is a structure the latter which defines includes a spatial such engineeringdimension of structures management. as (e.g., According overpasses, to tunnels,the Public passages Road Actunder [37] roads, “road” retaining is a structure walls, which etc.), includes devices andsuch installationsengineering structures which make as (e.g. up a, overpasses, technical and tunnels, utility passageswhole, intended under roads, for tra retainingffic handling walls, and etc.), located devices within and a installations right-of-way which [37,38]. make “Right-of-way” up a technical denotes and utilityland delimited whole, intended with boundary for traffic lines handling with theand space located above within and a belowright-of its-way surface, [37,38 which]. “Right contains-of-way the” denotesroad, structures land delimited and engineering with boundary devices lines associated with the with space traffi abovec, its securing and below and its handling, surface, as which well containsas devices the used road, for purposesstructuresof and the roadengineering administration devices [37 associated]. There is with a perceptible traffic, its di ff securingerence in and the handling,spatial range as well between as devices these used two definitionsfor purposes (Figure of the1). road administration [37]. There is a perceptible difference in the spatial range between these two definitions (Figure 1).

FigureFigure 1. 1. TheThe spatial spatial range range of of “road” “road” and and “right “right-of-way”-of-way” according according to to the the definition deﬁnition [37]. [37]. Source: Source: O Ownwn studystudy on on [39]. [39].

Therefore,Therefore, activities activities related related to to right right-of-way-of-way administration administration covers covers a a broader broader spatial spatial dimension dimension thanthan the the place place used used and and commonly commonly perceived perceived for for vehicles vehicles and and people people transfer. transfer. Studies Studies conducted conducted in in thisthis manuscript concern concern a a right-of-way. right-of-way. This This arises arises from fro them fact the that fact in that the in Land the and Land Property and Property Registry, Registry,which is awhich part ofis landa part administration of land administration systems, enablingsystems, theenabling fulﬁlling the offulfilling the environmental, of the environmental, social and socialeconomic and needs economic of the needs society of [ 40 the,41 society], a right-of-way [40,41], a is right described-of-way as ais “road” described and is as intended a “road” for and tra ﬃ isc intendedin the spatial for traffic dimensions in the spatial mentioned dimensions in the Public mentioned Road in Act the [37 Public]. A right-of-way Road Act [37]. can A consist right-of of-way one, canseveral, consist or even of one, several several, hundred or even cadastral several plots hundred and it iscadastral subject to plots the sameand it administrative is subject to the and same legal administrativeregulations as theand other legal plotsregulations registered as the in theother LPR. plots registered in the LPR. Discrepancies between the situation on the ground (land cover) and that described in documents (land use) are usually established during the process of updating LPR data or as part of a modernisation procedure [42]. The Land and Property Registry is a very important database from the

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 4 of 27

Discrepancies between the situation on the ground (land cover) and that described in documents (land use) are usually established during the process of updating LPR data or as part of a modernisation procedure [42]. The Land and Property Registry is a very important database from the economic and social perspective, and it should be up-to-date, whereas the data contained in it should be of good quality [43–45]. LPR data on a plot boundary can be obtained only from such sources that will ensure their proper accuracy (data from photogrammetric measurements, data from land consolidation and exchange, etc.) or from measurement activities performed with sufficient accuracy (property division, resuming boundary markers, etc.). In such cases, when these data exist, boundary points previously revealed in LPR are marked [42] (see Figure2). The situation is much more complicated when geodetic documentation does not contain data, which clearly confirm the position of boundary points on the ground or the data were read from archival graphic documents, and they are only marked on the ground (see Figure3). In that case, missing data are established in the procedure of (a) resuming boundary marks as per art. 39 (1) [42]; (b) establishing the course of a plot boundary as per § 37–39 [46]; (c) plot delimitation as per chapter 6 [43]; (d) establishing water body coastline as per art. 15 [47]; and (e) adopting property boundaries in the division procedure [48]. Updating data on public roads is subject to the same administrative and legal regulations as plots entered into the LPR. In the case of administering a right-of-way, it is important who actually administers it. This arises from the fact that the roads and tasks that road administrators are obliged to perform are divided into categories. In the opinion of some authors, information on a road’s spatial range depends on the type of administrative task [49]. Public roads in Poland are divided into four categories, which take into account the administrative division of the country. These include: (1) Motorways, expressways, international roads, roads leading up to border crossing points, city ring roads, etc., are owned by the State Treasury; (2) roads connecting cities are owned by local governments of voivodships; (3) roads connecting county towns and commune villages and connecting commune villages with each other are owned by county local governments; (4) local roads which complement the road networks used for local purposes, are owned by commune local governments [34]. Discrepancies between the situation on the ground (land cover) and LPR data (land use) may make administering a right-of-way difficult and result in social and legal conflicts [31]. Conflicts are universal and timeless phenomena and they occur in all cultures and societies on various planes: political, economic, social, interpersonal, inter-group and international [50–52]. According to Kołodziejski [50], causes for spatial conflicts include: (1) Historically developed spatial structures; (2) having to meet social demands; (3) an ineffective legal and economic system, which forces a specific actions of business entities; (4) a deficit of funds for accomplishing specific goals; (5) high level of dispersion of the decision-making power within a specific managerial structure. Lack of LU-LC synchronisation is one of the causes of spatial conflicts.

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 5 of 27 1 2

3 Figure 2. Administrative-legal procedures leading to the plot boundary delimitation when data exist. Source: Own study on [33,42,46–48]. 4 Figure 2. Administrative-legal procedures leading to the plot boundary delimitation when data exist. Source: Own study on [33,42,46, 47,48].

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 6 of 27

190 Figure 3. Administrative legal procedures leading to the plot boundary delimitation when the necessary data are missing. Source: Own study on [33,42,46–48]. 191 Figure 3. Administrative legal procedures leading to the plot boundary delimitation when the necessary data are missing. Source: Own study on [33,42,46, 47, 48].

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 7 of 27

192 3. Materials and MethodsMethods 3.1. Description of Research Area 193 3.1. Description of Research Area The research area covers part of the national roads situated in the Warmia and Mazury region, 194 The research area covers part of the national roads situated in the Warmia and Mazury region, Poland. They are administered by the General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways (acronym 195 Poland. They are administered by the General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways of the Polish name: GDDKiA), Olsztyn Branch. In total, GDDKiA in Poland administers roads of the 196 (acronym of the Polish name: GDDKiA), Olsztyn Branch. In total, GDDKiA in Poland administers total length of 19,295.80 km [53], which accounts for 4.6% of all public roads. A total of 4271.1 km of 197 roads of the total length of 19,295.80 km [53], which accounts for 4.6% of all public roads. A total of national roads run within town borders (i.e., more than 22.7%), and the remaining 14,530 km—outside 198 4271.1 km of national roads run within town borders (i.e., more than 22.7%), and the remaining 14,530 town borders. The longest national road network is in the Mazowieckie Voivodship—2371.0 km, and 199 km—outside town borders. The longest national road network is in the Mazowieckie Voivodship— the shortest is in Swi˛etokrzyskie—754.6km´ [54]. The European north-south road E77 and east-west 200 2371.0 km, and the shortest is in Świętokrzyskie—754.6 km [54]. The European north-south road E77 road E28 run through the region under study. The road system in the region includes 1326.8 km of 201 and east-west road E28 run through the region under study. The road system in the region includes national roads, 1911.1 km of regional roads, 6979.8 km of county roads, and 2425.2 km of commune 202 1326.8 km of national roads, 1911.1 km of regional roads, 6979.8 km of county roads, and 2425.2 km roads. The national roads in the region under study (see Figure4) are international and inter-regional 203 of commune roads. The national roads in the region under study (see Figure 4) are international and expressways (colour green in Figure4), main roads of accelerated tra ﬃc (colour red in Figure5) and 204 inter-regional expressways (colour green in Figure 4), main roads of accelerated traffic (colour red in main roads (colour blue in Figure4). The study covered approx. 50% of the national roads in the 205 Figure 5) and main roads (colour blue in Figure 4). The study covered approx. 50% of the national Warmi´nsko-MazurskieVoivodship No. DK 15, DK 16, DK 22, DK 51, DK 53, DK 57, DK 58, DK 59, 206 roads in the Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodship No. DK 15, DK 16, DK 22, DK 51, DK 53, DK 57, DK DK 63 and DK 65. 207 58, DK 59, DK 63 and DK 65.

208 Figure 4. Study area. Source: Own study on [55,56]. DK—the abbreviation of national road (in polish: 209 DK – the abbreviation of national road (in polish: Droga Krajowa) Droga Krajowa)

210 3.2. Methodology Figure 4. Study area. Source: Own study on [55,56].

211 3.2. MethodologyThe study was conducted in six stages. In order to identify the occurring LU-LC inconsistencies on national roads, Corine Land Cover 2018 (CLC2018) data, an orthophotomap, cadastral data and 212 The study was conducted in six stages. In order to identify the occurring LU-LC inconsistencies result of right-of-way geodetic update were used. Using QGis software, the areas where LU-LC 213 on national roads, Corine Land Cover 2018 (CLC2018) data, an orthophotomap, cadastral data and inconsistencies on national roads are found were identified. Three incompatible land uses were found 214 result of right-of-way geodetic update were used. Using QGis software, the areas where LU/-LC on national roads (1.1.1: continuous urban fabric, 2.3.1: pastures, 243: land principally occupied by 215 inconsistencies on national roads are found were identified. Three incompatible land uses were found agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation). LU-LC was then compared taking into account 216 on national roads (1.1.1: continuous urban fabric, 2.3.1: pastures, 243: land principally occupied by orthophotomaps and the results of the findings of the right-of-way geodetic survey. This update 217 agriculture, with significant areas of natural vegetation). LU/LC was then compared taking into was carried out by various methods depending on the set of information on the boundaries of plots 218 account orthophotomaps and the results of the findings of the right-of-way geodetic survey. This 219 update was carried out by various methods depending on the set of information on the boundaries

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 8 of 27 Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 28

220 (seeof plots Figures (see 2Fig andures3). 2 A and method 3). A ofmethod statistical of statistical analysis analysis and the hedonicand the hedonic model was model used was based used on based the 221 ondiscrepancies the discrepancies in area in size area (AREA size (AREA LU-LC), LU their-LC), location their location (GEOloc.), (GEOloc.), land urbanisation land urbanisation (UA), where (UA) a, 222 wherediscrepancy a discrepancy exists, and exists the, presentand the landpresent use land method use formethod land intendedfor land intended for road traforﬃ roadc (LAND traffic COVER)(LAND 223 (stageCOVER) 3–5). (stage The 3 form–5). The of the form model of the was model selected was based selected on Akaike based criterionon Akaike [57 criterion,58]. The [5 last7,58 study]. The stage last 224 studypresents stage solution presents algorithms, solution which algorithms, enable which synchronisation enable synchronisation of land use and of land land cover. use and The land method cover. of 225 TheLU-LC method synchronisation of LU-LC synchronisation takes into account takes the into valid account laws the and valid good laws practice and good principles. practice It principles. should be 226 Itnoted should that be synchronisation noted that synchronisation can be achieved can not be only achieved by a change not only in theby landa change cover in but the also land by cover signing but a 227 alsocivil legalby sign agreement,ing a civil under legal which agreement, a usercan under use the which right-of-way a user can for use other the purposes. right-of- Figureway for5 shows other 228 purposes.the stages Fig of theure study. 5 shows the stages of the study.

229 Figure 5. Stages of research. Source: Own study. Abbreviation: CLC2018—Corine Land Cover 230 Figuredata from 5. Stages 2018; WMS—Webof research. Source: Map Service; Own study OGC—Open Geospatial Consortium; GDDKiA - General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways; LPR—Land and Property Registry; LU-LC—the 231 Abbreviation:difference between CLC2018 land – use Corine and landLand cover; Cover UA—the data from area 2018; urbanization. WMS – Web Map Service; OGC – Open 232 Geospatial Consortium; GDDKiA - General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways; LPR – 233 LandThe modeland Property of the Registry; relationship LU-LC between – the difference the independent between land variables use and andland thecover; dependent UA – the area variable 234 (AREAurbanization LU-LC) was. based on the hedonic regression analysis. This model was based on the assumption that heterogenic factors can be described with individual characteristics or their attributes [59–62]. 235 Therefore,The model hedonic of the regression relationship models between can be the used independent to assess how variables individual and attributesthe dependent affect variable the final 236 (AREAarea change LU-LC) index. was This based means on that the the hedonic final di regressionfference (AREA analysis. LU-LC) This depends model was on a based combination on the 237 assumptionof individual that characteristics, heterogenic which—for factors can the be model described under study—include with individual such characteristics attributes as orthe their land 238 attributescover (LAND [59–62 COVER),]. Therefore, location hedonic of discrepancies regression models(GEOloc.) can and be usedthe level to assess of urbanisation how individual of the 239 attributessurroundings affect where the thefinal discrepancy area change existed index. (UA). This Three means types that of the function final difference forms—linear, (AREA logarithmic LU-LC) 240 dependsand logarithmic–linear—are on a combination of individual often used characteristics, in empirical analyseswhich—for which the model employ unde hedonicr study regression—include 241 suchmodels attributes [63]. The as type the land of function cover (LAND form depends COVER), on thelocation distribution of discrepancies of variables (GEOloc.) in the model. and the Several level 242 ofresearchers urbanisation prefer of to the use surroundings the so-called semi-logarithmicwhere the discrepancy model forexisted different (UA). reasons Three [ 64types,65]. of One function reason 243 formsgiven— islinear, that the logarithmic semi-logarithmic and logarithmic model coe–ffilinecientsar— canare be often interpreted used in as empirical the percentage analyses change which of 244 employthe independent hedonic variableregression [59 models,66]. The [63]. selection The type of the of functionfunction form form was depends based on on the fittingdistribution criterion of 245 variables in the model. Several researchers prefer to use the so-called semi-logarithmic model for 246 different reasons [64,65]. One reason given is that the semi-logarithmic model coefficients can be 247 interpreted as the percentage change of the independent variable [59,66]. The selection of the function 248 form was based on the fitting criterion (determination coefficient), the efficiency of regression

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 9 of 27

(determination coefficient), the efficiency of regression coefficient interpretation and the Akaike information criterion [57,58] (see Equation (3)). These models can be expressed in the following form:

V = β + β Z + + ε , i 0 ij ij ··· i (1) Vi = ln Pi , β0 = ln a0, βij = ln aij, where Pi is the measured area in a different way than the road for the user under study, Zij is the vector of attributes affecting the differences, aij is the vector of the associated coefficients to be estimated and εi is the vector of error terms. Attributes were selected based on deduction arising from data analysis and detailed verification of each discrepancy location. The analysed variables are described in Table1. The effect of independent variables was interpreted [33,66] according to Equation (2), which allowed for determination of the percentage effect of each attribute under study on the final area discrepancies: W = exp.a 1 100, (2) ij ij − ∗ where Waij is the importance of an attribute, and aij is the regression coefficient. The Akaike information criterion [57,58] is presented by Equation (3):

Xn AIC = n ln e2 + 2k, (3) ∗ i=1 i where: n — numer of observations, k — numer of parameters, ei — the rest of the model for the i-th observation.

Table 1. Primary statistical data of the model, together with an attribute description.

Attribute Description Aver. Min. Max. Sdev. LU-LC discrepancy area [1—to 100 m2; 2—101 to AREA LU-LC* 200 m2; 3—201 to 300 m2; 4—301 to 400 m2; 5—401 to 0.31659 0.00 1.79176 0.5821 500 m2; 6—over 501 m2] Urbanisation level of the area in which the discrepancy UA exists LU-LC [1—town; 2—rural built-up area; 1.7163 1.00 3.00 0.6842 3—non-built-up area outside a town or village] Land cover [1—plot fence/stairs to a building/pavement leading up to a building/building/etc.; 2—fence around LAND COVER 1.6275 1.00 3.00 0.7302 a property with a part used for home vegetable or ﬂower garden, or lawn; 3—arable land] Number of national roads on which a discrepancy GEOloc. occurred [DK*** 15, DK 16, DK 22, DK 51, DK 53, 15. 65. DK 57, DK 58, DK 59, DK 63, DK 65] * LU-LC—the diﬀerence between land use and land cover. ** UA-the urbanisation level of the area. *** DK—the abbreviation of national road (in polish: Droga Krajowa). Source: Own study.

3.3. Data Collection At the initial stage of the study, Corine Land Cover 2018 data derived from the Copernicus Land Monitoring were used. For the construction of the CLC2018 base, the imagery from Sentinel-2 and Landstad-8 satellites with the resolution of 100 100 m was used. For detailed analyses, the following × were used the digital orthophotomaps shared under Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament of the European Union on infrastructure of spatial information [67] operating under the Web Map Service browsing service (compliant with the OGC standards) with a pixel ranging from 0.5 to 0.25 m, the results of the geodetic update of boundary points, performed by specialised geodesist teams (obtained from GDDKiA) and cadastral data (obtained from LPR). Table1 presents a description of LU-LC inconsistencies used in the statistical model.

4. Results The ﬁrst stage of the study indicated nine road sections where the most cases of LU-LC inconsistencies occurred. The results of the geodetic update of the national road boundaries and Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 28 Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 4 of 28

277 4.Remote Results Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 10 of 27 277 4. Results 278 The first stage of the study indicated nine road sections where the most cases of LU-LC 278 The first stage of the study indicated nine road sections where the most cases of LU-LC 279 inconsistenciesorthophotomaps occurred. were analysed The results for detailed of the geodetic interpretation update of of inconsistencies. the national road Each boundaries case of LU-LC and 279 inconsistencies occurred. The results of the geodetic update of the national road boundaries and 280 orthophotomapsdiscrepancy was were referred analysed to the currentfor detailed user interpretation of the part of theof inconsistencies. right-of-way. This Each means case thatof LU when-LC 280 orthophotomaps were analysed for detailed interpretation of inconsistencies. Each case of LU-LC 281 discrepancyseveral plots was included referred in ato right-of-way the current user were of used the part by one of the person right or-of a-way. group This of persons,means that the when areas 281 discrepancy was referred to the current user of the part of the right-of-way. This means that when 282 severalof the plots plots were included added in up.a right The-of analyses-way were showed used thatby one land person use was or a di groupﬀerent of than persons, the land the coverareas of in 282 several plots included in a right-of-way were used by one person or a group of persons, the areas of 283 the plots were added up. The analyses showed that land use was different than the land cover in 349 283 349the cases.plots were The highestadded up. number The analyses of cases showe (88) wasd that on theland national use was road different DK 65, than and the the land lowest cover (4) in was 349 on 284 cases. The highest number of cases (88) was on the national road DK 65, and the lowest (4) was on 284 thecases. national The highest road DK number 63 (see of Figure cases 6(88)). was on the national road DK 65, and the lowest (4) was on 285 the national road DK 63 (see Figure 6). 285 the national road DK 63 (see Figure 6).

286286 Figure 6. The number of examined LU-LC discrepancies in the area under study. Source: Own study 287287 FigureFigure 6. 6. TheThe numbernumber of examined LU--LCLC discrepanciesdiscrepancies in in th thee area area under under study. study. Source: Source: O wnOwn study study on [68]. 288288 onon [68]. [68]. The area of all the LU-LC discrepancies was 64,885 m2. The smallest area of a discrepancy was 2 2 289289 1 m2 TheandThe area therearea ofof were allall thethe 18 LU such-LC cases. discrepancies The largest waswas area 64,885 64,885 of a m discrepancym. .The The smallest smallest was area 9990area of of m a 2adiscrepancy anddiscrepancy it was situatedwas was 1 1 290 22 2 2 290 monm andthe and nationalthere there werewere road 1818 DK suchsuch 22 cases. near theThe villagelargestlargest ofareaarea Mojkowo ofof a a discrepancy discrepancy (Elbl ˛agcomune). was was 9990 9990 m Figure m and and7 it shows itwas was situated thesituated area 291 on the national road DK 22 near the village of Mojkowo (Elbląg comune). Figure 7 shows the area 291 ondistribution the nationa forl allroad the DK LU-LC 22 near discrepancies. the village of Mojkowo (Elbląg comune). Figure 7 shows the area 292292 distributiondistribution forfor allall thethe LULU-LC discrepancies.

1000010000

80008000

6000 6000

4000 4000

2000 AREA of discrepancy [m2] discrepancy AREAof 2000

AREA of discrepancy [m2] discrepancy AREAof

0 0

-2000 -2000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 Number of cases studied in the research area 293 Number of cases studied in the research area 293294 Figure 7. The area distribution for all the LU-LC discrepancies. Source: Own study on Statistica 13.1. 294 Figure 7. The area distribution for all the LU LU-LC-LC discrepancies. Source: O Ownwn study study on on Statistica Statistica 13 13.1..1. 295 InIn total,total, 42%42% (145)(145) of LU-LCLU-LC discrepancies were were situated situated within within the the administrative administrative borders borders of of 295 In total, 42% (145) of LU-LC discrepancies were situated within the administrative borders of 296 towns,towns, 45% 45% (158) (158) in in built-up built-up rural rural areas, areas, and and 13% 13% (46) in(46) non-urbanised in non-urbanised areas areas (outside (outside areas of areas compact of 296 towns, 45% (158) in built-up rural areas, and 13% (46) in non-urbanised areas (outside areas of 297 housingcompact development).housing development). An LU-LC An LU discrepancy-LC discrepancy usually usually involved involved an incorrectly an incorrectly constructed constructed fence 297 compact housing development). An LU-LC discrepancy usually involved an incorrectly constructed around a property; there were 46% of such cases and they covered a total area of 3418 m2. In 33% of

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 11 of 27 the LU-LC discrepancies, some land was taken over for a fence and a vegetable/flower garden or a lawn. In this manner, a total of 15,012 m2 of land was developed. In 14% of LU-LC discrepancies, the land was used for crop growing. Unlike in the other LU-LC discrepancies, arable land occupied as much as 44,983 m2. In 5% of LU-LC discrepancies, the land was occupied by stairs or a concrete pavement leading up to a building. The area of the occupied right-of-way was 823 m2. The other LU-LC discrepancies (2%) included land occupied by buildings and forest/afforested land, whose area was 214 and 435 m2, respectively. The impact of the attributes on the emerging LU-LC discrepancies was examined using the hedonic regression model. The form of the model was selected based on the distribution of variables, determination coefficient value, the effectiveness of the regression coefficient interpretation, and the Akaike criterion [57,58]. The estimation of regression parameters was carried out by the least squares’ method. Hedonic regression model included four variables: the discrepancy area (AREA LU-LC), geolocation (GEOloc.); type of land cover (LAND COVER) and the urbanisation level in the area (UA) where an LU-LC discrepancy exists (see Table1). The choice of attributes was based on deduction during the data accumulation and geo-location analysis for each case. Since the F-test for four independent variables and 345 (N-m-1) cases equalled F = 175.29, the hypothesis that regression coefficients are not statistically significant was rejected, and an alternative hypothesis was adopted. The multiple correlation coefficient for the model, which determines the total impact degree of all explaining variables on the explained variable is R = 0.7770. Since the log-linear model explained 60% of the total variance in the dependent variable (R2 = 0.6003), the model was; therefore, sufficiently fitted to the data (see Table2). It should be noted that the model takes into account all the observed and calculated cases of discrepancy, without rejecting any user of ground under analysis. Independent (explaining) variables describing the model are statistically significant at α = 0.05, they do not exhibit co-linearity (after performing the correlation matrix analysis).

Table 2. Modelling results.

Log-Linear Model Independent Variable Coeﬃcient Sdev. t-Student p CONST. 0.826942 0.072589 11.3921 0.0000 − − LAND COVER 0.481197 0.029735 16.1831 0.0000 UA 0.274247 0.031250 8.7759 0.0000 GEOloc. 0.002298 0.001031 2.2280 0.0265 − − R 0.777070 Adjusted R2 0.600398 Number of observations 349 F(3, 345) 175.29 Source: Own study on Statistica 13.1.

LU-LC synchronisation requires administrative and legal proceedings, whose procedure and course depends on the land cover. Following are eight algorithms which can be used for LU-LC synchronisation within the right-of-way boundaries. Both the subject (the person who took over the right-of-way) and the object (type of land cover) which caused the lack of LU-LC synchronisation were taken into account.

4.1. The Right-Of-Way Occupied by Objects Erected by Individuals/Legal Entities/Associations/Unions/Other Legal Entities

4.1.1. Objects Erected before 1985 The right-of-way boundaries can be violated by other entities/persons purposefully or inadvertently. The land cover analyses have shown that there are situations when a residential/industrial/sacred (or rather its fragment) building or an element associated with a building (e.g., retaining wall, stairs, cornices, etc.) is situated within a right-of-way. Removal of such parts of objects can make the buildings Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 28

337 parts of objects can make the buildings unusable. Figure 8 shows an example a fragment of an 338 orthophotomap, on which a corner of a building cuts into the right-of-way and the area shaded with 339 Remotered colour Sens. 2019 indicates, 11, 3053 a sketch from the survey on the ground, where one can see a structure serving12 of 27a 340 building situated within a right-of-way. 341 342 unusable. Figure 8 shows an example a fragment of an orthophotomap, on which a corner of a building cuts into the right-of-way and the area shaded with red colour indicates a sketch from the survey on 343 the ground, where one can see a structure serving a building situated within a right-of-way.

344 345 Figure 8. Example building fragment of building (blue colour) and entrance to building (red colour) 346 situated within a right-of-way.right-of-way. Source: [68,,6976].].

347 For the fragment of a building, the LU LU-LC-LC synchronisation can be performed by choosing one of 348 two solutionssolutions (see(see Figure Figure9). 9). The The first first involves involves segregation segregation of partof part of a of built-up a built plot,-up plot, in accordance in accordance with 349 thewith legal the legal procedure procedure laid downlaid down in the in Real the Real Estate Estate Management Management Act (segregationAct (segregation of a built-upof a built part-up part of a 350 plot).of a plot). When When it is applied,it is applied, a change a change of land of useland is use entered is entered into the into Land the andLand Property and Property Registry Registry (LPR) 351 and(LPR) the and right the of permanentright of permanent administration administration expires (the expires right of (the the roadright administrator). of the road administrator). Subsequently, 352 aSubsequently, civil law agreement a civil law of agreement sale/donation of sale/donation of a segregated of a piece segregated of land piece is signed; of land thereby, is signed; the thereby, LU-LC 353 synchronisationthe LU-LC synchronisation is achieved. is Another achieved. solution Another involves solution leaving involves a structure leaving within a structure the right-of-way within the 354 sinceright-of Art.-way 38.1. since of Art. the Public38.1. of Roadthe Public Act allows Road Act for suchallows situations: for such situations: “ ... objects “… thatobjects do that not posedo not a 355 threatpose a orthreat hinder or hinder the road the tra roadffic traffic nor do nor they do disturb they disturb the process the proce of performingss of performing the tasks the tasks of the of road the 356 administratorroad administrator can becan left be unchangedleft unchanged... ”[…”37 [37].]. Leaving Leaving such such an an object object as as itit isis doesdoes notnot require any 357 confirmationconfirmation or permit for the object to remain at the place [[69].70]. The solution for an object built after 358 1985 is shown in FigureFigure9 9..

359

Figure 9. Algorithm of LU-LC synchronisation (acr. S) for objects constructed before 1985. Source: Own study. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 28

360 Figure 9. Algorithm of LU-LC synchronisation (acr. S) for objects constructed before 1985. Source: 361 Own study. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 13 of 27 362 4.1.2. Occupation of a Right-Of-Way by a Fence, a Gate (Constructed in Accordance With/In 363 V4.1.2.iolation Occupation of the Valid of a Right-Of-WayLegal Procedures) by a Fence, a Gate (Constructed in Accordance With/In Violation 364 of theA Valid fence Legal around Procedures) a plot or a gate constructed within a right-of-way is a frequent case of violation 365 of administrativeA fence around boundaries a plot or aFig gateure constructed 10 shows a withinportion a of right-of-way the right-of isway a frequent occupied case by of a person violation (the of 366 owner)administrative who uses boundaries the adjacent Figure area. 10 The shows green a portion line indicat of thees right-of the right way-of occupiedway boundary, by a person while (thethe 367 showner)aded area who shows uses the the adjacent misused area. right- Theof-way green area. line indicates the right-of way boundary, while the 368 shaded area shows the misused right-of-way area. 369

370

371 Figure 10. ExampleExample field field sketches from measurements on the ground showing a fence made within a 372 rightright-of-way-of-way (ow (ownedned by an individual). Source: [68]. [68]. Currently, the body that administers a right-of-way, having found out that there is a fence, sends 373 Currently, the body that administers a right-of-way, having found out that there is a fence, sends an official letter to the investor ordering them to restore the right-of-way to the previous state [71], 374 an official letter to the investor ordering them to restore the right-of-way to the previous state [70], which implies that it has to be demolished or moved. If this is not done within the time limit set by the 375 which implies that it has to be demolished or moved. If this is not done within the time limit set by officials, the administrator escalates the issue to the construction supervisory body (architectural and 376 the officials, the administrator escalates the issue to the construction supervisory body (architectural construction administration body). This body verifies whether the fence was constructed in line with 377 and construction administration body). This body verifies whether the fence was constructed in line the valid regulations. Regardless of whether the fence was built under a building permit (e.g., when it 378 with the valid regulations. Regardless of whether the fence was built under a building permit (e.g. borders on an historic object) or without such a permit, a demolition order is issued as an administrative 379 when it borders on an historic object) or without such a permit, a demolition order is issued as an decision [72]. The fence owner/investor must move or remove the fence within the set time limit so that 380 administrative decision [71]. The fence owner/investor must move or remove the fence within the set it is situated outside the right-of-way. Otherwise, the owner/investor will pay a fine for non-contractual 381 time limit so that it is situated outside the right-of-way. Otherwise, the owner/investor will pay a fine occupation of the right-of-way [37]. Apart from the road administrator, the fence owner can also apply 382 for non-contractual occupation of the right-of-way [37]. Apart from the road administrator, the fence for a permit to demolish the fence (see Figure 11). If a building permit/notification was not required for 383 owner can also apply for a permit to demolish the fence (see Figure 11). If a building the fence construction (for fences lower than 2.2 m), the structure owner can move/remove the fence 384 permit/notification was not required for the fence construction (for fences lower than 2.2 m), the outside the right-of-way without the demolition decision. The LU-LC synchronisation takes place after 385 structure owner can move/remove the fence outside the right-of-way without the demolition the previous land arrangement is restored (Figure 11). 386 decision. The LU-LC synchronisation takes place after the previous land arrangement is restored 387 (Figure 11).

RemoteRemote Sens. Sens. 2019 2019, ,11 11, ,x x FOR FOR PEER PEER REVIEW REVIEW 88 ofof 2828 Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 14 of 27

388388 Figure 11. LU-LC synchronisation algorithm for a fence/gate built within a right-of-way. Source: 389 Figure 11. LU-LC synchronisation algorithm for a fence/gate built within a right-of-way. Source: Own 389 FigureOwn study. 11. LU-LC synchronisation algorithm for a fence/gate built within a right-of-way. Source: Own 390390 study.study. 4.1.3. Technical Infrastructure Devices within a Right-Of-Way 391391 4.1.3.4.1.3. Technical Technical I nfrastructureInfrastructure D Devicesevices within within a a R Rightight-O-Of-fW-Wayay There may be equipment serving the passenger, the right-of-way, equipment supporting the 392392 right-of-wayThereThere maymay administration be be equipmentequipment and servingserving equipment thethe passenger,passenger, unrelated thethe to righttheright road-of-of-way,-way, located equipmentequipment within the supportingsupporting right-of-way thethe 393393 right(ifright they-of-of- doway-way not administration administration interfere with and theand traequipment equipmentﬃc handling) unrelated unrelated [37]. For to to the devicesthe road road locatedlocated located within within within a the right-of-waythe right right-o-of-fway-way which (if (if 394394 theyarethey used do do not not for interfere interfere the road with operation,with the the traffic traffic a lease handling) handling)/rent or [37]. loan[37]. For agreementFor devices devices islocated located signed within within [37]. Lease a a right right/rent-of-of- agreementsway-way which which 395395 areinvolveare used used paymentfor for the the road road of rent, operation, operation, whereas a a alease/rent lease/rent loan is free or or ofloan loan charge. agreement agreement The choice is is signed signed of an [37]. [37]. agreement Lease/rent Lease/rent is a consequenceagreements agreements 396396 involveofinvolve the objectpayment payment type, of of rent, itsrent, function whereas whereas anda a loan loan the i sis personfree free of of charge. charge. (investor) The The whochoice choice constructed of of an an agreement agreement the device is is a a consequence consequence (e.g., local 397397 ofgovernments,of the the object object type, type, public-private its its function function partnership, and and the the person person etc.). For(investor) (investor) example, who who no constructed constructedfees are collected the the device device for constructing (e.g. (e.g., , locallocal 398398 governments,thegovernments, pavement public public lighting-private-private by a localpartnership, partnership, government etc.). etc.). For (commune)For example, example, withinno no fees fees the are are nationalcollected collected road for for construc construc right-of-waytingting the the in 399399 pavementanpavement area with lighting lighting housing by by a a developmentlocal local government government [73]; (commune) (commune) it is the opposite within within withthe the national national passenger road road service right right-of- facilities,of-way-way in in an such an area area as 400400 withpetrolwith housinghousing stations, developmentdevelopment parking spaces [72];[72]; or restaurants, itit isis thethe oppositeopposite for which withwith fees passengerpassenger are collected serviceservice [37 ]. facilities,facilities, Technical suchsuch infrastructure as as petrol petrol 401401 stations,devicesstations, unrelated parking parking spacesto spaces the road or or restaurants, restaurants, operation (e.g., for for whi power whichch fees cabinet, fees are are telecom collected collected cabinet, [37]. [37]. Technical Technical etc.) can be infrastructure infrastructure constructed 402402 devicesafterdevices obtaining unrelated unrelated a permit to to the the toroad road occupy operation operation a right-of-way. (e.g. (e.g., ,power power An cabinet, cabinet, investor telecom telecom also has cabinet, cabinet, to pay annualetc.) etc.) can can fees be be forconstructed constructed placing a 403403 afterdeviceafter obtaining obtaining within aa a right-of-waypermit permit to to occupy occupy [37]. a Aa right right lease-of-/ofrent-way.-way./loan An An agreement investor investor also also or ahas has permit to to pay pay to annual annual occupy fees fees a right-of-way for for plac placinging 404404 aendsa device device the within within LU-LC a a synchronisationright right-of-of-way-way [37]. [37]. process A A lease/rent/loan lease/rent/loan (see Figure 12agreement agreement). or or a a permit permit to to occupy occupy a a right right-of-of-way-way 405405 endsends the the LU LU-LC-LC synchronisation synchronisation process process (see (see Figure Figure 12). 12).

406406 407407 FigureFigureFigure 12. 12.12. LU LU-LCLU-LC-LC synchronisation synchronisation algorithm algorithm (acr. (acr. S) S) when when technical technical infrastructure infrastructure devices devices a arearere located locatedlocated 408408 withinwithinwithin a aa right right-of-way.right-of-of-way.-way. Source: Source:Source: O OwnOwnwn study. study.study.

409409 4.1.4.4.1.4. Advertisements Advertisements within within a a R Rightight-O-Of-fW-Wayay

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 15 of 27 Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 28

410 4.1.4. AdvertisementsPlacing an advertisement within a Right-Of-Waywithin a right-of-way (see Figure 13) requires a permit allowing one 411 to occupyPlacing a anright advertisement-of-way and the within payment a right-of-way of two kinds (see of Figurefees. Th 13e )first requires is paid a in permit connection allowing with one 412 tomounting occupy a and right-of-way putting up and an advertisement the payment of[37,73 two] and kinds the of other fees. is The a kind ﬁrst of istax paid for interference in connection with with 413 mountingthe landscape andputting (advertisement up an advertisement fee) [74,75]. [37,74] and the other is a kind of tax for interference with 414 theIf landscape the advertisement (advertisement owner fee) does [ 75 not,76 ]. have the relevant documents, they pay a fine for illegal 415 occupation of the right-of-way (10 times the amount of fee) and the time limit for its payment. The If the advertisement owner does not have the relevant documents, they pay a ﬁne for illegal 416 object must be removed after the set deadline and restore the right-of-way to its previous state occupation of the right-of-way (10 times the amount of fee) and the time limit for its payment. The object 417 consistent with the LPR [70]. If the investor fails to respond appropriately, administrative must be removed after the set deadline and restore the right-of-way to its previous state consistent with 418 enforcement proceedings are conducted (exercising the rights/obligations arising from the civil law the LPR [71]. If the investor fails to respond appropriately, administrative enforcement proceedings 419 agreements) (see Figure 13). 420 are conducted (exercising the rights/obligations arising from the civil law agreements) (see Figure 13).

421

422 FigureFigure 13. 13. Algorithm of of LU LU-LC-LC synchronisation synchronisation (acr. (acr. S) for S)an for advertise an advertisementment placed within placed a withinright- a 423 right-of-way.of-way. Source: Source: Own Ownstudy. study.

424 4.1.5.4.1.5. Crop Crop Growing Growing within within aa Right-Of-WayRight-Of-Way 425 LU-LCLU-LC synchronisation synchronisation inin casescases when a right right-of-way-of-way is is used used as as arable arable land land is one is one of the of the simplest simplest 426 algorithms.algorithms Figure. Figure 14 14 shows shows aa portion of of the the right right-of-way-of-way that that is isused used for for growing growing agricultural agricultural crops. crops.

427 Figure 14. Fragments of orthophotomaps showing cases of using a right-of-way as arable land. Source: [69].

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 28

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 16 of 27 428 Figure 14. Fragments of orthophotomaps showing cases of using a right-of-way as arable land. 429 Source: [76]. In such cases, when the farmer—crop owner—is informed, he removes the crop from the piece of 430 landIn which such is cases, not his. when If, the after farmer identifying—crop theowner border—is andinformed, the right-of-way he removes stabilisation, the crop from the the farmer piece 431 stillof land uses which the land is not in anhis. unauthorised If, after identifying manner, the ﬁnes border are chargedand the forright occupying-of-way stabilisation, a right-of-way the without farmer 432 permitstill uses (10 the times land the in an usual unauthorised fee for occupying manner, a fines right-of-way) are charged (Figure for occupying 15). a right-of-way without 433 permit (10 times the usual fee for occupying a right-of-way) (Figure 15).

434 435 FigureFigure 15. AlgorithmsAlgorithms of of LU LU-LC-LC synchronisation synchronisation (acr. (acr. S) when S) when a crop a cropis being is being grown grown within within a right a- 436 right-of-way.of-way. Source: Source: Own Ownstudy. study.

437 4.1.6.4.1.6. A HomeHome Garden,Garden, an Orchard,Orchard, anan AAfffforestedorested AreaArea//ForestForest withinwithin aa Right-Of-WayRight-Of-Way 438 TheThe LU-LCLU-LC synchronisation synchronisation procedure procedure when when there there is anis an orchard orchard/garden/forest/garden/forest within within a right-of-way a right-of- 439 involvesway involves identifying identifying the time the when time theywhen were they established were established and examining and examining whether whether they pose they a threat pose to a 440 trathreatffic. to Figure traffic. 16 Figshowsure 16 a case shows of thea case right-of-way of the right occupation-of-way occupation by a home by garden a home along garden with along woodlots. with 441 Onwoodlots. the left, On field the measurement left, field measurement results are shown; results moreover, are shown; it is moreover, shown what it portionis shown of thewhat right-of-way portion of 442 hasthe beenright- occupiedof-way has by been the private occupied owner by the who private owns owner the adjacent who owns area (wethe canadjacent see the area home (we gardencan see and the 443 thehome fence). garden To performand the fence). LU-LC To synchronisation, perform LU-LC the synchronisation, determination the of the determination time of the establishments of the time of the of 444 theestablishments elements in theof the right-of-way elements in that the are right not-of used-way for that its operationare not used (time for when its operation the fence (time was buildwhen and the 445 treefence planting). was build This and date tree is planting). of prime This importance date is of because prime ifimportance they were establishedbecause if they before were 1985 established and they 446 interferebefore 1985 with an thed they performance interfere ofwith their the tasks performance by the road of administrator, their tasks by they the cannotroad administrator, remain within they the 447 right-of-way.cannot remain All within the objects the right established-of-way. All after the 1985 objects have established to be removed after from1985 thehave right-of-way. to be removed It is from not 448 easythe right to establish-of-way. the It is date not when easy to an establish orchard/ gardenthe date were when created an orchar and oned/garden has to were have created documentation and one 449 confirminghas to have that documentation the land has beenconfirming used in that this the manner land forhas over been three used decades in this (photographs, manner for over residents’ three 450 statements,decades (photographs, other documents, residents’ etc.). statements, other documents, etc.). An opinion of an expert in gardening and horticulture is required. Leaving an orchard as it is does not require any confirmation or permit for it to remain in the right-of-way [70] and LU-LC synchronisation occurs. The situation is more complicated when the orchard makes the road administration difficult. Removal of the trees and other objects from the right-of-way is the only solution. No permit is required in Poland to remove fruit trees [77]; such a permit/notification is required for other types of trees. If a right-of-way user fails to abide by the decision issued by the road administrator, penalties are charged for non-contractual occupation of the right-of-way (until the trees are removed from the right-of-way). The situation is different for afforested areas within a right-of-way. Trees within a right-of-way are owned by the state/local government, and the road administrator is obliged to remove them if they pose a threat to traffic safety. The administrator is obliged to obtain a permit for tree removal if they are not fruit trees. If branches of trees growing outside the road hang over the right-of-way, the tree owner is informed, and an agreement is reached about who will remove the tree. It is usually done by specialist services ordered by the road manager. Figure 17 shows an LU-LC synchronisation algorithm if an orchard, home garden, etc. is situated within a right-of-way.

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 28

Remote Sens. 2019,, 11,, 3053x FOR PEER REVIEW 1117 of of 2728

451

452 Figure 16. Orthophotomaps with the land cover and land use (results of the measurements). Source: 453 [68,76].

454 An opinion of an expert in gardening and horticulture is required. Leaving an orchard as it is 455 does not require any confirmation or permit for it to remain in the right-of-way [69] and LU-LC 456 synchronisation occurs. The situation is more complicated when the orchard makes the road 457 administration difficult. Removal of the trees and other objects from the right-of-way is the only 458 solution. No permit is required in Poland to remove fruit trees [77]; such a permit/notification is 459 required for other types of trees. 460 If a right-of-way user fails to abide by the decision issued by the road administrator, penalties 461 are charged for non-contractual occupation of the right-of-way (until the trees are removed from the 462 right-of-way). 463470 The situation is different for afforested areas within a right-of-way. Trees within a right-of-way 464 are owned by the state/local government, and the road administrator is obliged to remove them if Figure 17. An LU-LC synchronisation algorithm with an orchard, a home garden and afforested areas 465 they aspose examples. a threat Source: to traffic Own safety. study. The administrator is obliged to obtain a permit for tree removal if 466 they are not fruit trees. If branches of trees growing outside the road hang over the right-of-way, the 467 4.2.tree Landowner Owned is informed, by Individuals and an/Legal agreement Entities Occupiedis reached by about Public who Roads will and remove Associated the Devices tree. It is usually 468 doneAn by LU-LCspecialist synchronisation services ordered should by the also road be performedmanager. Fig whenure a17 roadway shows an or LU tra-ffiLCc handingsynchronisation devices 469 werealgorithm constructed if an orchard, on land home owned garden, by etc. an individualis situated/ withinlegal person. a right-of This-way. applies mainly to objects constructed before the political transformations that took place in Poland in the early 1990s. When private land was taken over by a road used for public purposes in 1998, it was acquired by the relevant local government unit or by the state treasury by virtue of the law (see Figure 18). A decision was issued to confirm the fact. Private land taken over for a road constructed after 1999 is viewed differently. This could happen because the construction law allowed for execution of a construction project on land held (rather than owned) by the investor. The right-of-way updates revealed the existence of bus lay-bys, a retaining wall and a draining ditch, etc. constructed on private land. LU-LC synchronisation can be performed in two ways. The first (the simplest) is when the owner agrees to segregate the object (e.g., the draining ditch) and to allow for the land buyout. The situation is more difficult when the

470

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 18 of 27 owner does not want to sell the piece of land occupied by the road devices. Two options are considered in such cases. The first option involves transferring the devices without exposing them to the risk of damage. It is possible in the case of a lamppost, or a post powering cabinet, but not possible in the case of a retaining wall or a draining ditch. Lack of possibility of a device transfer from a specific location makes the road administrator bring the case to court (in a civil case) so that the court decides how the issue should be solved. The case is finally settled after the court issues its decision. Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 19 of 27

492 . Figure 18. An LU-LC synchronisation algorithm (acr. S) for private land taken over for a road or traﬃc handling devices. Source: Own study. 493 Figure 18. An LU-LC synchronisation algorithm (acr. S) for private land taken over for a road or traffic handling devices. Source: Own study.

494 495

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 20 of 27

4.3.4.3. LandLand TakenTaken overover byby LocalLocal GovernmentGovernment UnitsUnits (State(State TreasuryTreasury//CommuneCommune//CountyCounty//Voivodship)Voivodship) Other Other Than theThan Road the AdministratorRoad Administrator NationalNational roads in Poland can can be be owned owned by by the the State State Treasury Treasury and and other other roads roads can can be beowned owned by byrespective respective local local governments. governments. These These relations relations are arediscussed discussed in de intail detail in inSection Section 2 2(Background). (Background). A Aproblem problem may may appear appear in in some some situations situations when when fragments fragments of of a a national national road road are used by by local local governmentsgovernments (voivodship (voivodship/county/commune)/county/commune) for their for theireconomic economic purposes. purposes. In such cases, In such the correctness cases, the ofcorrectness the property of the communalisation property communalisation decision issuance decision process issuance is ﬁrst process controlled is first [78, 79controlled]. If a road [7 fragment8,79]. If a meetsroad fragment all the recommendations meets all the recommendations laid down in the law,laid then down a disputablein the law, part then is a segregated disputable [48 part] and is donatedsegregated to the[48] state and donated treasury. to A the defective state treasury. communalisation A defective decision, communalisation issued when decision, the road issued fragment when didthe notroad meet fragment the statutory did not conditions,meet the statutory is repealed conditions, and a new is repealed one is issued, and a withnew consequentone is issued, LU-LC with synchronisationconsequent LU-LC (see synchronisation Figure 19). (see Figure 19).

Figure 19. Algorithm of LU-LC synchronisation for a national road taken over by the Figure 19. Algorithm of LU-LC synchronisation for a national road taken over by the commune/county/voivodship local government. Source: Own study. commune/county/voivodship local government. Source: Own study. 5. Discussion 5. Discussion The aim of the study was to analyse the discrepancies between land use and land cover existing withinThe a right-of-way. aim of the study The sectionswas to analyse of national the discrepancies roads under study between were land selected use and based land on cover the results existing of analysiswithin a ofright CLC2018-of-way. and The cadastral sections (LPR) of national data. Itroads was foundunder thatstudy within were theselected right-of-way based on boundaries, the results theof anal rangesysis of of three CLC2018 other ways and cadastral of land cover (LPR) were data. included It was (1.1.1: found Continuous that within urban the right fabric;-of 2.4.1:-way Pastures;boundaries, 2.4.3: the Land ranges principally of three occupiedother ways by agricultureof land cover with were significant included areas (1.1.1: of naturalContinuous vegetation). urban Eachfabric case; 2.4.1: of thePastures LU-LC; 2.4.3: discrepancy Land principally was then occupied photo-interpreted by agriculture using wit anh orthophotomap significant areas and of natural results ofvegetation). the right-of-way Each geodetic case of update. the LU This-LC helped discrepancy obtain information was then on photo the actual-interpreted land cover using status. an Theorthophotomap detection indicated and results that the of followingthe right-of components-way geodetic of land update. cover This are foundhelped within obtain the information right-of-way: on Athe plot actual fence, land vegetable cover status. and flower The detection gardens, indicated home lawns, thatland the following under agricultural components cultivation, of land cover wooded are areas,found andwithin components the right-of associated-way: A plot with fence, buildings vegetable (a building and flower corner, gardens, pavement, home lawns, ones used land for under the operationagricultural of building,cultivation, stairs, wooded etc.). areas, The hedonic and components regression associated model being with constructed buildings (a took building into account corner, thepavement, discrepancy ones areaused (AREA for the LU-LC), operation the of land building, cover (LANDstairs, etc.). COVER), The hedonic surrounding regression urbanisation model being level (UA)constructed and the took geolocalisation into account (GEOloc). the discrepancy The number area (AREA of variables LU-LC), adopted the land for the cover model (LAND resulted COVER), from substantivesurrounding reasons urbanisation and the levelavailability (UA) ofand data. the The geolocalisation high F-statistics (GEOloc). value (175.29), The number the corresponding of variables probabilityadopted for level the (pmodel< 0.0001), resulted the determinationfrom substantive coe ffireasonscient level and andthe availability the Akaike informationof data. The criterion high F- (thestatistics semi-log value function (175.29), was the of corresponding the lowest AIC probabilityvalue) confirmed level (p the < 0.0001), statistical the significance determination of the coefficient adopted modellevel and and the the correctness Akaike information of the selected criterion function (the form semi- (seelog Supplementary function was of 1). the lowest AIC value) confirmedThe hedonic the statistical regression significance model demonstrated of the adopted that model all the and attributes the correctness under studyof the wereselected statistically function significantform (see Supplementary at the confidence 1). level α < 0.05 and they affected the discrepancy areas. The model

Remote Sens. 2019, 11, x; doi: FOR PEER REVIEW www.mdpi.com/journal/remotesensing Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 21 of 27

fits 60% of the sample under analysis. The model took into account all observed and measured LU-LC discrepancies. The area of the emerging LU-LC discrepancies was affected the most by the variables Land Cover and the surrounding urbanization level (UA). A detailed analysis of national roads shows that the size of the area on which the discrepancies exist is affected to the greatest extent by its current cover (LAND COVER) (impact 62%, assuming the other attributes are constant). This means that the discrepancy areas are the smallest in cases of incorrectly situated plot fences and the greatest when the right-of-way is used by farmers as arable land. The land is tilled with agricultural machines. They are large, which makes the accuracy of ploughing range low, which in turn may result in easy destruction of boundary points [80]. In consequence, the machine operator cannot identify the point where the arable land ends and the right-of-way starts. Fixed elements of a right-of-way, such as a roadway, a pavement, a bridge or a culvert are easily identifiable. It is much more difficult to identify a boundary of a right-of-way when it is overgrown with vegetation and the boundary points were destroyed. It is similar to a boundary between a right-of-way and a forest/afforested land. Trees are usually very invasive species and take over neighbouring areas very easily [81,82], especially when the area is well-lit and humid (draining ditches carrying off water from a roadway provide a lot of moisture). Although modern precision agricultural machines with a GPS receiver are available on the market [83], the percentage of farmers who own such equipment is low because they do not have sufficient funds for such investments [84]. Another equally important cause for LU-LC discrepancies is the way private and state ownership was perceived after the social and political transformations in Poland in 1989–1990. The transfer from planned and social ownership of means of production was replaced with the market economy [85]; it caused some misunderstanding of the definition of the state and private ownership. The “hunger for land” experienced by many Poles during the communist times, led to the situation in which each piece of private land was very valuable, whereas large swathes of state-owned land (after the fall of the communist rule) were seen as “no-one’s land”. Therefore, individuals eagerly took over pieces of land for their own purposes, such as parking spaces, driveways, lawns, gardens, etc. Road administrators during the communist times and in the early phase of the political transformations focused on road maintenance rather than on identification of their boundaries, because of, among other things, insufficient funds for administration. Currently, this model is changing owing to the funds for updating data on roads, access to new measurement technologies and changes of real estate prices after Poland’s accession to the European Union [86,87]. The model developed for the study also demonstrated the validity of the other attribute—urbanisation of the surroundings (UA). The impact of this attribute is 32% (with the other attributes constant). The smallest area of LU-LC discrepancies was found in urban areas, whereas the largest area was outside the housing developments in rural and urban areas. The area of LU-LC discrepancies grew with increasing distance from the compact housing developments. The level of urbanisation is higher in towns and in areas of compact housing development than in areas outside the town. There are more bitumen roads, concrete pavements, stairs, culverts, bridges, green areas surrounded by curbs, etc. It is a micro-world monitored and controlled by man more frequently than areas with no delimiting features. Crossing a border in an urban area is detected swiftly. A similar relationship can be seen in the developed model. LU-LC discrepancies were smaller in towns and in rural built-up areas and larger in other areas. The last analysed variable (GEOloc.) also affects the analysed discrepancies. This effect is smaller than with other attributes but still statistically significant (lower than 1% with the other attributes constant). The number of the national road was used for geolocation. National roads in Poland are divided into sections (one section usually connects two large cities), which are assigned a unique number. By describing an attribute under study in this manner, LU-LC discrepancies were demonstrated on a specific section of a road under study. The index estimated in the model has a Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 22 of 27 negative correlation, which suggests larger discrepancies in sections with lower numbers (DK 15, DK 16, etc.), and smaller LU-LC discrepancies in sections with higher numbers (DK 63, DK, 65, etc.). Apart from model factors which affect the occurrence of LU-LC discrepancies, there are “loopholes” in the regulations. This applies especially to provisions that enable issuing a building permit for a public road [80] on land being at the disposal of an investor. In such cases, when the investor is not the owner and the land was not purchased after the construction process was completed, the land is still owned by the person who provided it. Such LU-LC discrepancies were not identified in the area under study. When considering the factors that affect LU-LC discrepancies, one cannot leave out the development of modern measurement technologies [20,33], which have a great impact on geodetic surveys. Previous right-of-way surveys were performed several decades ago, when the LPR database was being created or after the road was constructed, with equipment and technologies that were in use at the time. Modern geodetic equipment that is in use nowadays offers much higher accuracy than that in use in the early 20th century. Lack of LU-LC synchronisation is also partly caused by a low number of modernisations of cadastral databases in Poland [19,20,31–33]. The LU-LC consistency is an important attribute, which affects decision-making processes in the road network administration. For example, (a) agreements signed with service providers for the right-of-way maintenance (snow removal in winter, cleaning the roadway in spring, mowing grass in the road shoulders in summer) are based on the state registered in the LPR (land use), which is why the actual land cover should be compatible with it; (b) the body administering the right-of-way is responsible for repair/renovation of a damaged right-of-way, when its fragment is used by other persons contrary to the land use, it can compromise the safety of traffic users; (c) state revenue is reduced when roads are used for purposes other than transport (tax calculation in Poland is based on the land use and the size of its area; if a right-of-way is occupied by buildings, home gardens, lawns or arable land, the person using the land does not pay taxes for such areas because public roads are exempt from tax [88,89]); (d) lack of LU-LC consistency for a right-of-way can block the space development because issuing a permit for an investment project requires that an appropriate distance should be left between the right-of-way boundary and newly erected structures [70,90]. Managing road infrastructure is associated with a broad range of actions which may lead to numerous conflicts in some situations, which can be alleviated when full spatial information is available. The proposed algorithms take into account the most frequently occurring methods of improper use of the right-of-way. These include: A building corner, a home garden, a plot fence, agricultural use, an advertising structure, technical infrastructure, and a secondary road (a road area administered by an authority other than the General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways). These algorithms enable the successful synchronisation of the land use with the land cover; they are consistent with the applicable regulations, judgments of courts and the principles of good practice.

6. Conclusions Monitoring of LU-LC changes has become an important issue in studying not only global environmental changes in recent years, but also affect local activities, in particular road administrators. Each road administrator should possess information on the spatial range of objects that he administers. Public road data in cadastral documents do not always reflect the situation on the ground. This manuscript innovatively combines the LU-LC incompatibilities detecting method using Corine Land Cover data with the synchronisation algorithms LU-LC taking into account different land cover of the right-of-way. The LU-LC incompatibilities concerned primarily for: Objects erected before 1985 (the synchronisation algorithm in Figure9); occupation of a right-of-way by a fence or a gate (synchronisation algorithm in Figure 11); technical infrastructure devices (synchronisation algorithm in Figure 12); advertisements (synchronisation algorithm in Figure 13); crop (synchronisation algorithm in Figure 15); a home garden, an orchard, an afforested area/forest (synchronisation algorithm in Figure 17); land owned by individuals/legal entities occupied by public roads and associated devices Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 23 of 27

(synchronisation algorithm in Figure 18) and land taken over by local government units (State Treasury/commune/county/voivodship) other than the road administrator (synchronisation algorithm in Figure 19). The study showed that it is difficult to solve the LU-LC discrepancy problem, both from the administrative and legal, and from the social perspective (see algorithm Figure 18 showing a conflict with the landowner). Consequences of a lack of LU-LC synchronisation affect not only the national budget (as revenues from taxes or fees for occupying a right-of-way) as well as the EU budget (areas qualified for area-related fees). This study had some weak points. The algorithms of achieving the LU-LC consistency were applied to the most common cases in an area. Probably, not all examples of solutions were included, but in the opinion of the manuscript authors, other cases can be fitted into the proposed solutions. Another limitation is the number of analysed cases of LU-LC discrepancies. Quantitative studies are more like case studies than a diagnosis of the LU-LC condition on national roads in Poland. The proposed synchronisation algorithms are universal and can be applied in an area with coherent laws. These limitations and weak points will be elaborated on in further studies.

Supplementary Materials: Supplementary 1. Data used for modelling http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/11/24/ 3053/s1. Author Contributions: Conceptualization, K.K.B.; methodology, K.K.B., A.D.; software, K.K.B.; validation, K.K.B., A.D.; formal analysis, K.K.B., A.D.; investigation, K.K.B.; resources, K.K.B.; data curation, K.K.B.; writing—original draft preparation, K.K.B.; writing—review and editing, K.K.B.; visualization, K.K.B.; supervision, K.K.B.; project administration, K.K.B.; funding acquisition, K.K.B. Funding: This research received no external funding. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to offer special thanks to the General Directorate for National Roads and Highways, Olsztyn Branch, for sharing the materials used for experiments and to Roman Grzelka for inspiring comments which helped to prepare this manuscript. Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

LU Land use LC Land cover S Synchronise land use with land cover LPR Land and Property Registry GDDKiA General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways (in Polish: Generalna Dyrekcja Dróg Krajowych i Autostrad) DK National road (in Polish: droga krajowa) WMS Web Map Service OGC Open Geospatial Consortium CLC Corine Land Cover

References

1. Noga, K.; Balawejder, M.; Matkowska, K. Dimensions of the destruction of road network providing access to cadastral parcels resulting from the motorway construction. Geomat. Environ. Eng. 2017, 11, 65–81. [CrossRef] 2. Kos, B. Directions for Improving the Eﬃciency of Road Network Management in Poland. Stud. Ekonom. 2013, 136, 149–164. 3. Krajczy´nska, E. Badanie: W Europie Wschodniej Dobra Wspólne to Wci ˛a˙zDobra Niczyje. Nauka w Polsce. Człowiek 12 April 2017. Ministerstwo Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wy˙zszego. Available online: http://scienceinpoland. pap.pl/aktualnosc (accessed on 15 October 2019). 4. Fan, Y.; Yu, G.; He, Z.; Yu, H.; Bai, R.; Yang, L.; Wu, D. Entropies of the Chinese Land Use/Cover change from 1990 to 2010 at a County level. Entropy 2017, 19, 51. [CrossRef] Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 24 of 27

5. Prus, B.; Gawroński,K.; Ulicka, K. Historical changes in land use in rural areas of southern Poland–case study. Studia 2018, 50, 9–24. 6. Foley, J.A.; DeFries, R.; Asner, G.P.; Barford, C.; Bonan, G.; Carpenter, S.R.; Chapin, F.S.; Coe, M.T.; Daily, G.C.; Gibbs, H.K.; et al. Global consequences of land use. Science 2005, 309, 570–574. [CrossRef] 7. Verburg, P.H.; van de Steeg, J.; Veldkamp, A.; Willemen, L. From land cover change to land function dynamics: A major challenge to improve land characterization. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 1327–1335. [CrossRef] 8. Falcucci, A.; Maiorano, L.; Boitani, L. Changes in land-use/land-cover patterns in Italy and their implications for biodiversity conservation. Landsc. Ecol. 2007, 22, 617–631. [CrossRef] 9. Grešlová, P.; Štych, P.; Salata, T.; Hernik, J.; Knížkovád, I.; Biˇcíka, I.; Jeleˇceka, L.; Prus, B.; Noszczyk, T. Agroecosystem energy metabolism in Czechia and Poland in the two decades after the fall of communism: From a centrally planned system to market oriented mode of production. Land Use Policy 2019, 82, 807–820. [CrossRef] 10. Sallay, A.; Jombach, S. Changing landscape values in Hungary. Probl. Ekol. Kraj. 2011, 30, 225–232. 11. Bogoliubova, A.; Tymków, P. Land cover changes and dynamics of the Yuntolovsky Reserve. Electr. J. Pol. Agric. Univ. 2014, 17, 3. Available online: http://www.ejpau.media.pl/volume17/issue3/art-03.html (accessed on 20 March 2019). 12. Kazak, J. The use of a decision support system for sustainable urbanization and thermal comfort in adaptation to climate change actions—the case of the Wrocław Larger Urban Zone (Poland). Sustainability 2018, 10, 1083. [CrossRef] 13. Lambin, E.F.; Turner, B.L.; Geist, H.J.; Agbola, S.B.; Angelsen, A.; Bruce, J.W.; Coomes, O.T.; Dirzo, R.; Fischer, G.; Folke, C.; et al. The causes of land-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond the myths. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2001, 11, 261–269. [CrossRef] 14. Lambin, E.F.; Geist, H.J.; Lepers, E. Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Ann. Rev. Environ. Res. 2003, 28, 205–241. [CrossRef] 15. Matson, P.A.; Parton, W.J.; Power, A.G.; Swift, M.J. Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Science 1997, 277, 504–509. [CrossRef] 16. Karimi, M.; Mesgari, M.S.; Sharifi, M.A.; Pilehforooshha, P. Developing a methodology for modelling land use change in space and time. J. Spat. Sci. 2017, 62, 261–280. [CrossRef] 17. Noszczyk, T. Is the obligation to monitor land use change in Poland complied with? Form. Circumiectus 2018, 17, 11–19. [CrossRef] 18. Kim, C. Land use classification and land use change analysis using satellite images in Lombok Island, Indonesia. For. Sci. Technol. 2016, 12, 183–191. [CrossRef] 19. Bagnicki, J.; Mika, M. Analiza niezgodno´scidanych opisowych działki (nieruchomo´sci)na przykładzie wybranego obr˛ebuewidencyjnego. Infrastrukt. I Ekol. Teren. Wiej. 2013, 2, 99–110. (In Polish) 20. Kocur-Bera, K. Data compatibility between the Land and Building Cadaster (LBC) and the Land Parcel Identification System (LPIS) in the context of area-based payments: A case study in the Polish Region of Warmia and Mazury. Land Use Policy 2019, 80, 370–379. [CrossRef] 21. Meha, M.; Khem, K.; Cake, M.; Sinani, Q.; Ahmetaj, K. Systematic Cadastral Registration Using UAV Technology; Kosovo Cadastral Agency: Pristina, Kosovo, 2016. 22. Salata, T.; Prus, B. Geodata modelling applied to the planning and land use of rural areas in conjunction with the Polish spatial information infrastructure. In Land Ownership and Land Use Development. The Integration of Past, Present and Future in Spatial Planning and Land Management Policies; Hepperle, E., Dixon-Gough, R., Mansberger, R., Paulson, J., Hernik, J., Kalbro, T., Eds.; vdf Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH Zürich; European Academy of Land Use Development: Zurich, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 195–208. 23. Harrie, L.; Hellström, A.K. A prototype system for propagating updates between cartographic data sets. Cartogr. J. 1999, 36, 133–140. [CrossRef] 24. Badard, T.; Lemarié, C. Propagating Updates between Geographic Databases with Different Scales; Chapter 10 of Innovations in GIS VII: GeoComputation; Atkinson, P., Martin, D., Eds.; Taylor and Francis: London, UK, 1999; pp. 135–146. 25. Willrich, F.Quality control and updating of road data by GIS-driven road extraction from imagery. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Geospatial Theory, Processing and Applications, Ottawa, Canada, 8–12 July 2002; pp. 1–7. Available online: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e07e/8050863dc7b8bc791b8a7547437834ccdb42.pdf?_ga=2. 70702480.1090911911.1559565628-257693347.1554364820 (accessed on 15 October 2019). Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 25 of 27

26. Hu, Y.G.; Chen, J.; Li, Z.L.; Zhao, R.L. Road data updating using tools of matching and map generalization. Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci. XXXVII Part B4 2008, 291–296. Available online: https://www.isprs.org/proceedings/XXXVII/congress/4_pdf/52.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2019). 27. Zampieri, A.; Charpiat, G.; Tarabalka, Y. Coarse to ﬁne non-rigid registration: A chain of scale-speciﬁc neural networks for multimodal image alignment with application to remote sensing. arXiv. 2018. Available online: https://hal.inria.fr/hal.01718263/document (accessed on 10 October 2019). 28. Girard, N.; Charpiat, G.; Tarabalka, Y. Aligning and Updating Cadaster Maps with Aerial Images by Multi-task, Multi-resolution Deep Learning. In Computer Vision–ACCV Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Jawahar, C., Li, H., Mori, G., Schindler, K., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 11365. [CrossRef] 29. Ghimbă¸san,A.C.; Vorovencii, I.; Că¸teanu,M. Using images acquired from a rural area with unmanned aerial vehicle in order to achieve the land and constructions cadaster. In Proceedings of the Biennial International

Symposium Forest and Sustainable Development, Bras, ov, Romania, 25–27 October 2018. 30. Klapa, P.; Mitka, B. Application of terrestrial laser scanning to the development and updating of the base map. Geod. Cartogr. 2017, 66, 59–72. [CrossRef] 31. Noszczyk, T.; Hernik, J. Modernization of the land and property register. Acta Sci. Pol. Form. Circumiectus 2016, 15, 3–17. [CrossRef] 32. Noszczyk, T.; Hernik, J. Understanding the cadastre in rural areas in Poland after the socio-political transformation. J. Spat. Sci. 2017, 64, 73–95. [CrossRef] 33. Kocur-Bera, K.; Stachelek, M. Geo-Analysis of Compatibility Determinants for Data in the Land and Property Register (LPR). Geosciences 2019, 9, 303. [CrossRef] 34. Hanus, P.; P˛eska-Siwik,A.; Szewczyk, R. Spatial analysis of the accuracy of the cadastral parcel boundaries. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 144, 9–15. [CrossRef] 35. Carrilho, J.; Marques, M.R.; Balas, M.; Macate, Z.; Lemmen, C.H. Addressing Fuzzy Boundaries in Community Delimitations for Systematic Cadastre in Mozambique. In Proceedings of the World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty, The World Bank, Washington, DC, USA, 25–29 March 2019. 36. Ch, R.; Shapiro, J.; Steele, A.; Vargas, J. Endogenous Taxation in Ongoing Internal Conflict: The Case of Colombia. Am. Political Sci. Rev. 2018, 112, 996–1015. [CrossRef] 37. Acta of 2 March 1985 on Public Roads (Journal of Laws 14, Item 60). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 16 October 2019). 38. Kotowski, W.; Kurz˛epa,B.; Kot, Ł. Drogi Publiczne. Budowa, Utrzymanie, Finansowanie; Wydawnictwo C.H. Beck Warszawa: Warsaw, Poland, 2014; p. 230. ISBN 978-83-255-6705-7. 39. Cybulski, B. Podstawowe Definicje z Kodeksu Drogowego. Available online: https://slideplayer.pl/slide/ 7605127/ (accessed on 12 August 2019). 40. Bennett, R.; Rajabifard, A.; Kalantari, M.; Wallace, J.; Williamson, I. Cadastral Futures: Building a New Vision for the Nature and Role of Cadastres. Article of the Month–June 2011; International Federation of Surveyors. Available online: https://www.fig.net/resources/monthly_articles/2011/june_2011/june_2011_ bennett_rajabifard_et_al.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2019). 41. Mika, M. An analysis of possibilities for the establishment of a multipurpose and multidimensional cadastre in Poland. Land Use Policy 2018, 77, 446–453. [CrossRef] 42. Geodetic and Cartographic Law of 17 May 1989 (Journal of Laws 30, item 163). Available online: http: //www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 14 October 2019). 43. Noszczyk, T.; Hernik, J. The necessity to keep land and property registers in an active manner. Instrastruktura I Ekol. Teren. Wiej. 2017, 2, 229–241. [CrossRef] 44. Facenoben, D. Kryteria oceny jako´scidanych i informacji, gromadzonych i udost˛epnianych z katastru nieruchomo´sci. Prz. Geod. 2011, 83, 11–17. 45. Hopfer, A.; Cegielski, S.; Pietrzak, L. Reformy katastru nieruchomo´sciw Polsce w skali lokalnej i globalnej, Cучaснi досягнення геодезичної нaуки тa виробництвa, Збiрник нaукових прaць Зaхiдного геодезичного товaриствa УТГК. КAДACТР 2012, 2, 12–25. Available online: http://ena.lp.edu.ua:8080/bitstream/ntb/ 16089/1/28_Hopfer_121_125_geodesy_24.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2019). 46. Regulation of the Minister of Regional Development and Construction on 29 March 2001 on the Registration of Land and Buildings. Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 3 March 2019). 47. Act of 20 July 2017 Water Law (Journal of Laws, Item 1566). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 14 July 2019). Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 26 of 27

48. Act of 21 August 1997 on Real Estate Management (Journal of Laws 115, Item 741). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 4 March 2019). 49. Amoureus, L.; Bomers, M.P.; Fuser, R.; Tosatto, M. Integration of LiDAR and Terrestrial Mobile Mapping Technology for the Creation of a Comprehensive Road Cadastre. In Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Mobile Mapping Technology, Padua, Italy, 29–31 May 2007, ISPRS Archives, XXXVI-5/C55. 50. Kołodziejski, J. Ekologiczne zasady gospodarowania przestrzeni ˛a.In W: Ekologiczne Podstawy Gospodarowania Srodowiskiem´ Przyrodniczym. Wizje-Problemy-Trudno´sci; Red, S., Mazur, W.Y.D., Eds.; SGGW-AR: Warszawa, Poland, 1991; pp. 244–254. 51. Adamus-Matuszyńska,A. Współczesne Teorie Konfliktu Społecznego; Wyd. Akademii Ekonomicznej im. Karola Adamieckiego w Katowicach: Katowice, Poland, 1998; p. 115. 52. Hackiewicz, M. Społeczne i prawne aspekty konfliktów na tle zagospodarowania przestrzennego na przykładzie budowy obwodnicy Milanówka i Grodziska mazowieckiego. Maz. Studia Reg. 2011, 6, 123–148. 53. Central Statistical Office. 2013. Available online: www.stat.gov.pl (accessed on 10 August 2019). 54. Road Transport in Poland in the 2013. Statistical Information and Elaborations. Available online: www.stat. gov.pl (accessed on 10 August 2019). 55. Google Maps. Available online: www.google.pl (accessed on 10 August 2019). 56. GDDKiA (General Direcorate for National Roads and Motorways). Klasy dróg Krajowych w Województwie Warmińsko-Mazurskim(Classes of National Roads in Warmińsko-MazurskieVoivodeship). 2019. Available online: https://www.gddkia.gov.pl/pl/a/126/klasy (accessed on 10 August 2019). 57. Noszczyk, T.; Rutkowska, A.; Hernik, J. Determining changes in land use Structure in Małopolska using statistical methods. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2017, 26, 211–220. [CrossRef] 58. Rosienkiewicz, M. Efficiency comparison of Akaike and Hellwig methods in constructing regression model. Wiadomo´sciStat. 2012, 10, 27–43. Available online: www.stst.gov.pl (accessed on 20 November 2019). 59. Malpezzi, S.; Gibb, K.; O’Sullivan, A. Hedonic Pricing Models: A Selective and Applied Review. J. Hous. Econ. 2003, 67–89. [CrossRef] 60. Baranzini, A.; Ramirez, J.; Schaerer, C.; Thalmann, P. Hedonic Methods in Housing Markets: Pricing Environmental Amenities and Segregation; Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 2008. [CrossRef] 61. Khalid, H. Spatial heterogeneity and spatial bias analyses in hedonic price models: Some practical considerations. Bull. Geogr. Socio Econ. Ser. 2015, 28, 113–129. [CrossRef] 62. de Haan, J.; Diewert, E. Handbook on Residential Property Price Indices. Eurostat, Methodologies and Working papers: Eurostat, Luxembourg, 2013; pp. 49–64. [CrossRef] 63. Wen, H.; Jia, S.; Guo, X. Hedonic Price Analysis of Urban Housing: An Empirical Research on Hangzhou, China. J. Zhejiang Univ. 2005, 6, 907–914. [CrossRef] 64. Sopranzetti, B.J. Hedonic Regression Analysis in Real Estate Markets: A Primer. In Handbook of Quantitative Finance and Risk Management. Theory, Methodology and Applications; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2010; pp. 1201–1207. [CrossRef] 65. Widłak, M. Dostosowanie indeksów cenowych do zmian jako´sci. Metoda wyznaczania hedonicznych indeksów cen i mo˙zliwo´sciich zastosowania dla rynku mieszkaniowego. Mater. I Studia 2010, 247, 1–28. Available online: http://www.nbp.pl (accessed on 1 October 2019). 66. Cebula, R.J. The Hedonic Pricing Model Applied to the Housing Market of the City of Savannah and Its Savannah Historic Landmark District. Rev. Reg. Stud. 2009, 39, 9–22. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254447595_The_Hedonic_Pricing_Model_Applied_to_the_Housing_ Market_of_the_City_of_Savannah_and_Its_Savannah_Historic_Landmark_District (accessed on 10 May 2019). 67. Directive 2007/2/ EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 Establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE). Available online: http: //data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2007/2/oj (accessed on 14 June 2019). 68. GDDKiA. Zestawienie wyników aktualizacji geodezyjnej pasa drogowego w 2019. Generalna Dyrekcja dróg Krajowych i Autostrad, oddział w Olsztynie (accessed in GDDKiA, Olsztyn). Available online: https://www.gddkia.gov.pl/pl/401/gddkia-olsztyn. 69. Geoportal, Interactive Map. Available online: www.mapy.geoportal.gov.pl (accessed on 4 July 2019). 70. Voivodeship Administrative Court in Lublin, III SA/Lu 53/12 z 29 Marca 2012 r. Available online: http: //orzeczenia.nsa.gov.pl (accessed on 10 July 2019). Remote Sens. 2019, 11, 3053 27 of 27

71. Act of 14 July 1960 Code of Administrative Procedure, (Journal of Laws 30, Item 168). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 6 September 2019). 72. Supreme Administrative Court of 13 September 2005, Sygn. Akt OSK 782/04. Available online: http: //www.orzeczenia-nsa.pl (accessed on 20 July 2019). 73. Vodministrative Court in Poznań,III SA/Po 280/18. 2018. Available online: http://orzeczenia.nsa.gov.pl (accessed on 10 July 2019). 74. Glicz, M.; Jamroz, K.; Mackun, T. Aktualny stan prawny w zakresie reklam widzianych z drogi i rekomendacje do zmian. Transp. Miej. Reg. 2013, 12, 1–15. 75. Act of 12 January 1991 on Local Taxes and Fees (Journal of Laws 9, Item 31). Available online: http: //www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 6 September 2019). 76. Act of 24 April 2015 on the Amendment of Some Acts in Connection with the Strengthening of Landscape Protection Tools (Journal of Laws, Item 774). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 6 August 2019). 77. Act of 16 April 2004 on Nature Protection (Journal of Laws, Item 627). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 6 August 2019). 78. Act of 13 October 1998 Introducing the Law Reforming Public Administration (Journal of Laws 136, Item 872). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 6 August 2019). 79. Act of 10 May 1990 Introducing the Act on Local Government and the Act on Local Government Employees (Journal of Laws 32, Item 191). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 16 August 2019). 80. SO w Łom˙zy, I Ca 439/17 z 08 Febrary 2018. Available online: http://orzeczenia.lomza.so.gov.pl/ (accessed on 5 August 2019). 81. Forman, R.T.T.; Sperling, D.; Bissonette, J.; Clevenger, A.P.; Cutshall, C.; Dale, V.; Fahrig, L.; France, R.; Goldman, C.; Heanue, K.; et al. Road Ecology: Science and Solutions; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2003; p. 504, ISBN 9781559639330. 82. Kocur-Bera, K.; Dudzinska, M. Roadside vegetation–the impact on safety. In Proceedings of the Conference Engineering For Rural Development, Jelgava, Latvia, 20–22 May 2015; Available online: http://www.tf.llu.lv/ conference/proceedings2015/Papers/097_ (accessed on 10 August 2019). 83. Sadowski, A.; Poczta, W.; Beba, P.; Szuba-Barańska,E. Productivity Diversification by Farm Category in the European Union. Village Agric. 2016, 170, 127–138. [CrossRef] 84. Pawlak, J. Role of Mechanization in the Development of Agriculture. Roczniki Nauk Rolniczych, G–97. 2010, pp. 165–175. Available online: http://www.wne.sggw.pl/czasopisma/pdf/RNR_2010_T97_z2.pdf (accessed on 13 September 2019). 85. Ka˙zmierczyk, A.; Michałowska, K. The evolution of ownership during the economic transformation of the turn of XX th and XXI st century. Res. Pap. Wroc. Univ. Econ. 2014, 362, 182–195. 86. Kocur-Bera, K. Determinants of agricultural land price in Poland–A case study covering a part of the Euroregion Baltic. Cah. Agric. 2016, 25, 25004. [CrossRef] 87. Bórawski, P.; Bełdycka-Bórawska, A.; Szymańska,E.J.; Jankowski, K.J.; Dunn, J.W. Price volatility of agricultural land in Poland in the context of the European Union. Land Use Policy 2019, 82, 486–496. [CrossRef] 88. Act of 7 July 1994 on Building Low (Journal of Laws, Item 1186). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 6 October 2019). 89. Modelska, K. Wybrane problemy aktualizacji u˙zytków gruntowych na przykładzie inwestycji drogowych. Infrastrukt. Ekol. Obsz. Wiej. 2013, 2/III, 59–70. 90. Regulation of the Minister of Infrastructure and Development on 12 April 2002 on the on the Technical Conditions to be Met by Buildings and Their Location (Journal of Lows, Item 1422). Available online: http://www.isap.gov.pl (accessed on 3 March 2019).

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).