Melvin B. Larson

Local Roads and Your Parks

By Melvin B. Larson

IN RECENT YEARS, man has become aware of preserving his environment and the need to protect our natural resources. In developing transportation plans and programs, measures must be included to maintain and enhance the natural beauty of the lands traversed. In line with this, Congress in enacting the Federal-aid Highway Act of 1968, included a Section 4(f) which stated in effect, "The Secretary shall not approve any program or project which requires the use of any publicly owned land or a public park, recreation area or wildlife refuge of National or State significance as determined by the Federal, State, or local official having jurisdiction thereof, or land from an historic site of National, State or local significance as so determined by local officials unless, (1) there is no feasible improvement alternative to the use of such land and (2) such program includes all possible planning to minimize harm to such park, recreational area, wildlife or waterfowl refuge, or historic site resulting from such use."

This Act applies to the expenditure of all Federal funds whether for highway projects or any other Federally funded project. While the prime responsibility for such planning, to minimize harm to the park, rests with the local agency for FAS; TOPICS or urban projects, the Bureau of Local Roads and Streets must review this proposal to see that everything has been done to minimize harm and there is no feasible and prudent alternative for the use of this land.

Local highway officials must consult with the local park boards, conservation agencies and planning groups along with the State in developing transportation plans, taking into consideration such elements as natural beauty, wildlife, waterfowl lands and waters, and the preservation of parks and historic sites. Coordination at the beginning of the project will assist in identifying natural and cultural areas of significance, agency and public concerns.

Just as no two living things are exactly alike, whether they be man, ants, dogs or trees, no two parks are exactly alike. The use of park land and the planning to minimize harm to the park may work in one situation and be totally wrong for another, therefore, it is necessary to analyze each situation carefully in order that we do not diminish one of our most important natural resources.

For each Federal project an environmental statement must be prepared where it is proposed to use park lands, even though the improvement to the park lands may be at the request of the local park board. In preparing the statement, it is necessary to describe the area taken and whether or not it is of National, State or local significance as determined by the Federal, State or local official having jurisdiction thereof. The statement must also include a determination of any feasible alternative to the use of such land (technologically possible). Also is the alternative prudent? What additional costs would the alternative entail (both in dollars and as a percent of the original cost), and do the advantages in the alternative warrant the additional expenditures? Among the alternatives that must be discussed, is the alternative to do nothing at all.

If there is no feasible alternative, the statement should discuss all possible planning to minimize harm to the protected area. The actions taken may include the location and design of a structure to blend in with surrounding area, use and type of cut or fill, treatment of embankments, screening by the planting of trees and shrubs, reconstruction of the remaining area, including pedestrian accesses, etc.

In developing a proposal to improve highway sections, the local agency is to coordinate in the very early stages with the Federal, State or local agency to get their input into the highway improvement. In some instances, it is possible to provide for replacement of park lands taken. Arrangements to compensate or replace the land or improvements thereon are determined. It is essential to determine if there are reversionary or property deed restrictions for land taken. If it is determined that the portion to be taken for highway purposes is of little or no value to the remainder, the local officials should include such findings in their determination.

While these rules and regulations only apply to Federally assisted projects at the present time, we in the Bureau of Local Roads and Streets have stressed that the local agency should apply these same criteria when financing an improvement with motor fuel tax funds or their own highway funds.

Highway improvements will not necessarily harm parks and recreation areas. In most instances, the highway improvement will be of benefit by opening up new recreational areas

Melvin B. Larson is Supervisor of Local Roads and Streets, Illinois Dept. of Transportation.

Illinois Parks and Recreation 12 July/August, 1972

or providing better access to present parks and recreational areas. By working together, we can develop adequate transportation systems and still preserve our parks and recreational areas.

Not too long ago, those advocating spending of highway money for beautification were looked upon as heartless idealists. Money should go for safety not shrubbery—the Conservationists were told. The environmentalists were told, "highway money is for safe speeds, not scenery."

Gratefully, times and attitudes change. People today are convinced that aesthetic and safety goals are not necessarily in conflict. We have learned, often the hard way, that we can have the best of both worlds; function and beauty.

Today we are faced with a new challenge. That challenge is, as highway designers, we consider the multitude of ways in which highway travel can be an enjoyable end in itself rather than simply a means of getting from one place to another. Accepting the challenge means arming ourselves with new ideas and a flexible approach to our problems. President Nixon has said: "The battle for the quality of the American environment is a battle against neglect, mismanagement and poor planning, and a piecemeal approach to the problems of natural resources." Highways can contribute to our well-being in a number of ways. The challenge is to see that they serve the broadest possible range of public needs.

I believe that we can plan and design recreation areas and transportation programs which compliment each other and enhance our environment.

Illinois Parks and Recreation 13 July/August, 1972