Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.' <br /> <br />001222 <br /> <br />:2 <br /> <br />t.4 ., - 't" <br /> <br />r <br /> <br />>" <br /> <br />TilE USE OF SCI-:NJr. EASI.:MENTS <br />by 1I11rrison Loesch, Assist:mt Secretllry <br />of the Department or the Inter'ior <br />Washington, D. C" U. S. A. <br />for the Committee on Challenr,es to Modern Society, <br />Regional Planning and Development Project, <br />Paris, France, , September 10, 1971 <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />During the past decade land values have been soaring in practically all <br />parts of the United States. At the Same time, lands are being intensively <br />used or developed where only a few years ago little or no utilization was <br />under serious consideration. These development pressures and associated <br />increased procurement costs, coupled with sizeable acquisi don programs <br />for recreational, conservation and scenic preservation, have generated <br />increased local concern over removal of lands from tax rolls. Such <br />actions place a heavy tax burden on the remaining landowners in the area. <br /> <br />In an effort to (1) reduce overall acquisition costs, (2) prevent scenically <br />nonconforming or objectior,able types of development, and (3) retain lands <br />on tax rolls where full ownership by a local, State or Federal govern- <br />mental agency is not a necessity, planners and legislators increasingly in <br />recent years have urged the use of scenic easements. In proper circum- <br />stances, such a compromise may be mutually beneficial to the acquiring <br />governmental agency, the landowner, and the local community. <br /> <br />The scenic easement, however, is only one of a number of less-than-fee-title <br />devices available to the administr'ator to obtain rights in property, A key <br />selling point for all such devices is the flexibility which mav be achieved' <br />by si~ply v3"Ying their terms to fit the special requirements of the govern- <br />~en:al agency and the lando~~er in question. Obviously, the freedom to <br />taiLor the contr'act helps insur'e receptivity by landowners and results in <br />much wider participation. However, flexibility and resulting diversity may <br />make administration and management costly and difficult. <br /> <br />Examples of some of the standard less-than-fee-title devices most often used <br />arc: : <br /> <br />I. Saleback--The full fee simple title is purchased or condemned, and <br />then the land is resold by a quitclaim deed. The deed reserves <br />those interests desired, such as the retention of woodlands, absence <br />or billboards, etc, <br /> <br />2, k:\seh;\ck--The full title is purchased or condemned: and then the <br />land is leased, usually for a long t"rm, consistent with the use <br />desired. The leMe is subject to the desired ,testrictions. <br /> <br />. <br />