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