Read Ebook: American Rural Highways by Agg T R Thomas Radford

Font size: 10 px 15 px 20 px 25 px 30 px 35 px

Background color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Text color: BlackWhiteGrayLight GrayDark GrayDim Gray

Apply/Save settings

Ebook has 483 lines and 48633 words, and 10 pages

In view of these facts it seems reasonable to suppose that motor vehicles for use on the public highways are more likely to be employed to supplement the rail transport than to compete with it. To the actual cost of operation of motor trucks given in Table 2, there should be added the proportionate cost of maintaining the highway for the use of the truck, which is partly covered by the item "License Fee" in the table. The license fee would necessarily be considerably larger if it were to compensate adequately for the wear on the highways over which the trucks operate. This will still further increase the cost of hauling by motor truck.

Motor trucks are employed for many kinds of hauling where their speed and consequently their daily capacity is an advantage over team hauling that is decidedly worth while. It probably could be shown that for many kinds of hauling, teams are more economical than motor trucks, but when promptness and speed and the consequent effect on dependent activities are considered, the motor truck often has a distinct advantage, and the use of the truck to replace horse drawn vans is progressing rapidly. This is true not only in the cities, but also in the smaller towns and in the country. Motor trucks have been adopted in a great many communities for delivery of farm products to market, and this use of the truck is certain to increase rapidly. But trucks in this service will use the secondary roads as well as the main or primary roads.

These observations emphasize the extent to which the highway policy of the nation must be predicated on the use of the highways by motor vehicles.

HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

The systems of highway administration extant in the various political units in the United States present a patchwork of overlapping authority and undetermined responsibility. Highway laws are being constantly revised by state legislatures and with each revision there is some change in administrative methods and often the changes are revolutionary in character. In most states, the trend is away from county and township administration and toward state administration, with provision for considerable participation by the federal government.

It will be pertinent to consider briefly the present functions of each of the administrative authorities having duties in connection with highway work in the United States, although these duties vary greatly in the several states and change periodically with the action of legislatures.

The township highway commissioners or trustees have jurisdiction over certain of the roads in the township, usually best described as all roads not by law placed under the jurisdiction of some other authority. In certain instances, the township authorities have charge of all of the roads in the township, which would mean that no "county" or "state" roads happened to be laid out in that township. It is a matter of general observation that the trend of legislation is toward removing from the jurisdiction of the township officials all roads except those upon which the traffic is principally local in character. The actual mileage of roads in the United States that is at present administered by township officials is large, probably constituting not less than seventy per cent of the total mileage.

In most states the township officials are responsible for the maintenance of the roads under their jurisdiction and also supervise such new construction as is undertaken. This includes the construction of culverts and bridges as a rule, but in some states the county board of supervisors is responsible for all of the bridge and culvert work on the township roads. In other states, the township board is responsible only for bridges or culverts that cost less than a certain amount specified by law and the county board provides for the construction and upkeep of the more expensive bridges and culverts.

Funds for the work carried out by the township road officials are obtained by general taxation, the amount that may be levied being limited by statute and the actual levy being any amount up to the maximum that the township board deems necessary for its purposes. It is the general observation that the tax levy is usually the maximum permitted by law.

In many states, township officials are permitted to issue bonds for road construction, almost invariably, however, with the restriction that each issue must be approved by the voters of the township. There is always a provision that the total amount of bonds outstanding must not exceed the constitutional limit in force in the state. In several states, the townships have large amounts of road bonds outstanding.

The county board has jurisdiction over all of the highways in the county in some states, and in others it has charge of only the more important highways. In most states, the laws set forth specifically what highways shall be under the jurisdiction of the county authorities.

In addition to having direct supervision of the improvement and maintenance of the roads assigned to county administration, the county boards in some states arrange for the construction of all culverts and bridges on the roads that are under township supervision, or at least the more expensive bridges and culverts on such roads. Sometimes this is accomplished by granting county aid for township bridges, under which system the county pays a part of the cost of the construction of bridges on the township roads. The amount of aid varies, but is generally about one-half of the cost, and the township and county officials jointly assume the responsibility of arranging for the construction by contract or otherwise.

The county board obtains funds for road work through a direct tax on all property in the county, the maximum rate being limited by statute. County boards are also authorized to issue bonds for road construction under statutory restrictions and limitations similar to those effective in the township as to total amount issued, and many millions of dollars' worth of highway bonds have been issued by county authorities in the United States.

The authority of the state highway department varies in the several states, but in general the departments serve in the dual capacity of general advisers to the county and township authorities on road matters and as the executive authority responsible for the construction of those highways that are built entirely or in part from state or federal funds.

State highway departments consist of the commission or commissioner, and the technical and clerical staff required to perform the duties imposed on the state organization. To some extent the state highway departments are able to encourage economical and correct construction of highways by the township and county authorities by furnishing them standard plans and specifications and by formulating regulations to govern the character of construction, but such efforts are likely to be more or less ineffective unless the state authority has supervision of the allotment of state or federal funds to the various counties and townships. Nevertheless, most state highway departments do a great deal of advisory work in connection with the highway construction carried out by county and township authorities.

State highway departments are supported by funds obtained in various ways, laws differing greatly in this respect. The necessary support is in some states appropriated from funds obtained by general taxation, and is in others obtained from automobile license fees. In still others, the funds are secured by a combination of the two methods mentioned above. In addition to these support funds, a certain part of the money obtained as federal aid may be employed for the engineering and inspection costs on federal aid roads. The above mentioned funds are required to maintain the state highway department. In addition, the departments have supervision of the expenditures of construction funds which can be used for road construction and maintenance, and may not be expended for salaries or other overhead expense.

In a number of states, automobile license fees are set aside for financing road construction and maintenance, and the work paid for from the fees is carried out under the supervision of the state highway department.

In a number of instances, state bonds have been issued for road construction, and the expenditure of the proceeds of the sale of road bonds has usually been supervised by the state highway department.

All federal aid funds allotted to a state must be expended under the direction of the state highway department.

Funds for the support of the Bureau of Public Roads are obtained from congressional appropriations to the Department of Agriculture and from a percentage of the funds appropriated for federal aid.

Federal aid is money appropriated by Congress to be distributed to the various states to stimulate road construction. It is granted to the states on the condition that the states will expend at least an equal amount on the projects involved. The states in turn usually give a suitable part of the state allotment to each county. There are various limitations as to the amount of federal aid per mile of road and the type of construction that may be employed, but these are matters of regulation that change from time to time.

It will be seen that each of the administrative authorities, except the Bureau of Public Roads, is to some extent subservient to a higher authority, and the Bureau of Public Roads is supervised by the United States Congress. Considerable diplomacy is required on the part of any administrative authority if his contact with other officials is to be without friction. This is especially true in connection with the formulation of a policy regarding the types of construction to be adopted for an improvement. The responsibility for the selection is variously placed on the township, county or state authority, the laws not being uniform in this respect. If state or federal funds are allotted to an improvement, the state authority either makes the selection of the type of construction or the selection is made by some subordinate authority subject to the approval of the state highway department. Where the improvement is paid for exclusively with township or county funds, the selection is often made by the township or county authority without review by higher authority. Many abuses have crept into highway administration through the unscrupulous methods of promoters of the sale of road materials or road machinery. A great deal of the selling activity of the agents for these commodities is entirely irreproachable, but it is well known that such is not always the case. As a result, the tendency of legislation is to require the state highway department to approve contracts for materials or construction entered into by the township or county authorities. The state highway departments can secure the requisite technical experts to determine the merits of materials and equipment and, in spite of some glaring examples of inefficiency or worse, have made a good record for impartiality and integrity as custodians of the funds for which they are responsible.

HIGHWAY FINANCE

The paramount problem in highway administration is the development of an adequate financial plan for carrying on road improvement. The necessary expenditures are enormous, although the money so expended is probably much less than the actual benefit resulting from the improvements.

The principle of paying for public improvements by a special assessment upon private property has been long established and a large proportion of the public improvements in the cities and towns have been made financially possible through the medium of special assessments on abutting and adjacent property. The same principle has been applied to the financing of drainage projects for reclaiming farm lands. Recently the special assessment method has come into limited use in financing rural highway improvements. The policy in such cases is to assess the abutting and adjacent property in a zone along the improved road for a percentage of the cost of the improvement. The amount so assessed does not ordinarily exceed one-fourth of the total cost of the improvement and may be considerably less. The assessment is spread over an area extending back from one to six miles from the improved road. The assessment area is generally divided into about four zones parallel to the road. The zone next the road is assessed at a rate arbitrarily determined as a fair measure of the benefit, and each succeeding zone is assessed at a somewhat lower rate. Generally about three-fourths of the total assessment is placed on the half of the assessment area lying next to the road.

Many systems of making assessments have been proposed which are mechanical in application after the area and rate of distribution of benefit have been established, but in practice it is always found necessary to make adjustments on individual parcels of land because of variation in benefits received and it is impossible to eliminate the exercise of human judgment in equalizing the assessments.

When a road, for the improvement of which an assessment is being made, lies on two or more sides of a parcel of land all of which is within the assessment area, the rate is arbitrarily reduced to relieve that parcel of land somewhat, or the assessment is first spread as above outlined and afterward equalized as judgment dictates.

In applying the zone method some difficulty is encountered in determining an equitable distribution on those parcels of land lying partly in one zone and partly in another, but the rate may be arrived at with reasonable accuracy by pro-rating in accordance with the exact conditions.

In. Fig. 1, let it be assumed that the assessment area is to be two miles wide, one mile on each side of the road and the various ownerships to be indicated by the parcels of land numbered 1 to 8, as shown. Each zone for the assessment of the 3-1/4 mile section is 1/4 mile wide and the rates for the several zones are 50, 25, 15 and 10 per cent respectively. Let it be assumed that the portion of the cost of the 3-1/4 miles of road to be assessed on the area shown is ,000. The assessment would then be as follows:

The assessment per unit is obtained by dividing the total assessment by the total of column three.

On these two parcels, it is decided that more than half of the zone rate should apply to the half of the zone toward the improved road, but some modification of the rates adopted might be justified.

The assessment of the cost of the east and west one-mile section of road is made up in like manner, and let it be assumed that the portion of the cost of this road that is to be assessed on the area shown is 00. The assessment area will be one mile wide and each zone one-fourth mile in width and the rates for each zone the same as before.

It will be noted that the combined assessment for the two sections of road is especially heavy on parcels 1, 2 and 3. In order to prevent unjust charges against such properties, laws usually limit the total assessment against any parcel of land to a fixed percentage of a fair market value or of the assessed value. The assessment on these parcels would be reduced as seemed expedient and the deficit would be distributed over the remainder of the area in the same manner as the original assessment was spread. In practice such re-distribution is ordinarily made by the arbitrary adjustment in accordance with what the authorized officials consider to be fair and equitable. The method outlined is merely a mechanical means of securing distribution and must not be considered as an infallible method of making the assessment. It is always necessary to review the results in the light of the actual benefits to be presumed for each parcel of land. Nevertheless, the method outlined will prove equitable in a majority of cases.

A considerable portion of the current expense of maintaining the township and county highway work and at least a part of the cost of maintaining state highway activities is met from funds obtained by general taxation. Likewise, the funds required for the amortization of bond issues are often obtained from general taxation although vehicle license fees are sometimes used for that purpose.

General taxes are levied on all taxable property in a political unit under statutory provisions regulating the amount of the levy and the purpose for which the revenue is to be used. In the aggregate, the road taxes are large but in the township or county the rate is generally small compared to some other taxes, such as the school tax.

The rate of the fee for motor vehicles should be based on their destructive effect on the road so far as that is possible. The scale of fees should therefore take account of weight and speed of vehicle and if the license is in lieu of all other taxes, it should also be graduated with the cost of the vehicle.

When funds are thus derived, every precaution should be taken to insure that the money is used judiciously for construction and especially for maintenance on those roads most useful to motor traffic.

Highway bonds are of three classes known as Sinking Fund, Annuity and Serial Bonds, respectively. The earlier bonds issued were almost all of the sinking fund class, but in recent years the serial bond has been widely employed and is probably the most satisfactory to administer.

For a more detailed discussion of highway bonds see Bulletin 136, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture, which is the basis of this discussion.

The success of this method of financing depends upon the proper administration of the sinking fund. It must be invested with fidelity and the fund be kept intact. Usually the sinking fund cannot be invested at as high a rate of interest as the bonds bear and there is some loss as a result. Road bonds bearing 5 per cent interest can usually be sold at par while the sinking fund will usually net about 3 or 3-1/2 per cent interest. The total cost of a bond issue will be greater by the sinking fund method than by either of the other methods described.

This method is convenient in that the amount of the tax to be levied each year remains constant.

For comparative purposes, some typical examples are given in Table 3. These illustrate the differences in total cost of securing 0,000 by each of the three methods at various interest rates.

TABLE 3

TOTAL COST OF A LOAN OF 0,000 FOR 20 YEARS, INTEREST COMPOUNDED ANNUALLY

DRAINAGE OF ROADS

The degree to which lack of drainage provisions affect the serviceability of the road surface varies with the amount of precipitation in the locality and the manner in which it is distributed throughout the year. In the humid areas of the United States, which are, roughly, those portions east of a north and south line passing through Omaha and Kansas City, together with the northern part of the Pacific slope, precipitation is generally in excess of 30 inches per year and fairly well distributed throughout the year, but with seasonal variations in rate. In these areas, the effect of the precipitation, both as regards its tendency to lower the stability of soils and as an eroding agent, must be carefully provided against in highway design.

Outside of the areas mentioned above, the precipitation is much less than 30 inches per year and its effect as an agent of erosion is of greatest significance, although in restricted areas there may be short periods when the soil is made unstable by ground water.

The basic principle of road drainage is to minimize the effect of water to such an extent that there will always be a layer of comparatively dry soil of appreciable thickness under the traveled part of the road. This layer should probably never be less than two feet thick and for soils of a structure favorable to capillary action it should be at least three feet thick. The means employed to accomplish the requisite drainage will be as various as the conditions encountered.

It is almost universally true in the United States that precipitation at a very high rate will be for a relatively short duration, and during these short periods, which usually do not exceed thirty minutes, a portion of the water that falls on the areas adjacent to the road and that drains to the road ditches will soak into the soil and therefore not reach the ditches along the road. The extent to which the water is taken up by the soil will vary with the porosity and slope of the land and the character of the growth thereon. Cultivated land will absorb nearly all of the water from showers up to fifteen or twenty minutes duration; grass land a somewhat smaller percentage; and hard baked or other impervious soil will absorb a comparatively small amount. Rocky ground and steep slopes will absorb very little storm water.

The surface of the road is designed to turn water rapidly to the ditches, but when the material is the natural soil, there is always considerable absorption of storm water. Surfaces such as sandclay, gravel and macadam do not absorb to exceed 10 per cent of the precipitation during short showers. Bituminous surfaces, brick and concrete pavements, do not absorb an appreciable amount of storm water.

Generally it is best to assume that if a rain lasts for forty-five minutes or more, all of the water will run off, as the soil will reach a state of saturation in that time. This is not true of deep sand, but is for nearly all other soils.

Share on: WhatsApp @Hash Facebook Tweet