Why the near-perfect CR grid in OK, KS, but not other areas?

[Brian556]

I've been wondering: Why do Oklahoma and Kansas have such good county road grids, while other area's county roads are just a random hodge-podge that is difficult to navigate.

Around here, in Denton County, and surrounding rural areas, the county roads are very random, and poorly laid out. This becomes a huge problem when an accident blocks a major highway in a rural area.

There are large areas that are completely devoid of roads.

So, how were they able to get the grid established in OK and KS, considering that in general old roads are laid out on the principal of property preservation first, roads second?

Did these areas have leadership that was more concerned with roads than in my area? When were these grids established? Was property ownership significantly changed by the establishment of these grids?

[briantroutman]

Isn't that just the result of the Public Land Survey System–and the lands that either were or were not a part of it?

[Brandon]

Isn't that just the result of the Public Land Survey System–and the lands that either were or were not a part of it?

Yes, it is.  Texas, the original 13, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Maine, parts of Ohio, and Hawai'i were never part of the PLSS.

[usends]

Texas, the original 13, West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Maine, parts of Ohio, and Hawai'i were never part of the PLSS.

True; the Wiki page has a good map that shows the states that were part of the PLSS, and also uses color to group them into areas that have a common baseline and principal meridian:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Land_Survey_System
I mapped out the locations of the initial points here:
http://www.communitywalk.com/initial_points/map/1485337

However, topography also played a part.  Although most of the central and western US was surveyed under the PLSS, not all areas have roads running along the section lines.  In areas that have any kind of topographical relief, roads were generally built along valleys, ridgelines, or whatever made sense given the terrain.

It's hard to figure out how Texas was surveyed.  Obviously it's a big place, and it appears to be hodgepodge of several different surveys.  South and east of DFW, you get into an area with county lines and roads that are on a diagonal.  I suspect that had something to do with the direction the rivers run, and/or the angle of the Gulf coast.  Also, there's a vast region of West TX that was surveyed on an angle about 14 degrees off the cardinal points (see this map: http://www.communitywalk.com/the_texas_angle/map/1609687 ). I think that angle was determined by railroad surveyors, but I don't have much info about it.  A very interesting topic, in my opinion.

[NE2]

[usends]

Thanks for the map: it's interesting, although I disagree with some of the info.  The area in West TX I was referring to is mostly in the yellow "rigid rectangular survey" area.  While the county lines in this area are indeed aligned with the cardinal points, the roads are not, and more importantly, the property boundaries are not either.  That's why I consider it such an odd area, and worthy of an effort to map it out: http://www.communitywalk.com/the_texas_angle/map/1609687 .  If you zoom in a bit from the default view, you can see what I mean (turning on satellite mode will show some of the fencelines and property boundaries).

[NE2]

I think the map is using "rigid rectangular" to mean any grid, whether or not it's aligned to the compass.

[jeffandnicole]

Here in NJ...and probably for many other states...we have a lot of small hills and such.  Back in the early, early days of settlements (1400, 1500, 1600, etc), when people were first inhabiting such an area, they would need to go to local streams to get water, creating little paths.  And people don't tend to just walk straight up & down hills because it'll just be too steep, but they walk back and forth a bit, or on a slant or curve. Over the years, the pathways became more used.  As people started using carts, horses, whatever, the paths became wider still.  People started living along those paths.  Those pathways became dirt roads.  And today, they are paved roadways.

So, today's main roads may have easily started many centuries ago as a little pathway.  As they were improved, no one had any desire or reason to discontinue the path that was already there.

Since the east coast was settled early on, and due to the hills/mountainous terrain found in the east, you don't have much of a grid pattern except in cities, which tend to be flat anyway.  Once your in the Midwest/central region of the country, the land is much flatter, allowing for straighter lines over longer distances, which ultimately form the grid pattern you're referring to, whether it be paved surfaces, boundaries or the like.

[vtk]

The roads follow property lines if topology doesn't dictate otherwise. The key difference is how the property lines were initially decided.

[Brandon]

It's quite interesting to read a property description in a place like Texas as opposed to Illinois.  A Texas description is all metes and bounds and can go very long.  And Illinois description may be like this:

"LOT 2 IN JOE BLOW'S SUBDIVISION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 43 NORTH, RANGE 8 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS."

[NE2]

It's quite interesting to read a property description in a place like Texas as opposed to Illinois.  A Texas description is all metes and bounds and can go very long.  And Illinois description may be like this:

"LOT 2 IN JOE BLOW'S SUBDIVISION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE SE 1/4 OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 43 NORTH, RANGE 8 EAST OF THE THIRD PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN IN COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS."

At least in Florida, newer lots will simply say "LOT 2 IN JOEBLOW FOREST SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 597 PAGE 54". But the older subdivisions are not always officially named, simply filed as subdivisions of land by Blows.

But PLSS land descriptions can also be wicked long. For example, this one is too long for the system:
http://www.ocpafl.org/searches/ParcelSearch.aspx?pid=272411000000004

PARCEL OF LAND DESC AS THE FOLLOWING PT OF SEC 01-24-27 THE S1/4 & THE N1/2 OF SW1/4 & THE E 25 FT OF SE1/4 OF SW1/4 OF NW1/4 LYING S OF CLAY RD & BEG 420 FT N OF SW COR OF NW1/4 OF SE1/4 RUN N 900 FT M/L TO NW COR OF NW1/4 OF SE1/4 E 90 FT SWLY 904 FT M/L TO POB & BEG SW COR OF SE1/4 OF NW1/4 RUN E 373 FT N 26 FT W 229 FT N 49 FT W 52 FT N 528 FT M/L TO RD W 75 FT TO W LINE OF SE1/4 OF NW1/4 S 603 FT TO POB (LESS N 120 FT OF E 2882.73 FT OF S1/4 OF SEC & LESS BEG W1/4 COR OF SEC RUN E 1297.13 FT S 200 FT W 1296.95 FT N 200 FT TO POB & LESS PARCEL KNOWN AS BAY COURT) & SEC 02-24-27 (LESS LAND DESC IN 2016/1015 & 3174/2254 & 3937/1999 & 5128/2341 & 5741/3885 & 7353/0646 & LESS PARCELS KNOWN AS KINDER CARE & NORTH SERVICE AREA) & THAT PART OF THE S1/2 OF SEC 03-24-27 LYING S & E OF A 200 FT WIDE RCID CANAL & ALL OF SEC 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 & 15 OF TWP 24 S, RNG 27 E & THE W 1467.38 FT OF SEC 7-24-28 & THAT PART OF THE W 1467.38 FT OF THE NW1/4 OF SEC 18-24-28 LYING NLY OF RCID CANAL & THE SE1/4 OF SEC 18-24-28 & THAT PT OF NE1/4 & SE1/4 OF SEC 16-24-27 LYING ELY OF A 150 FT WIDE RCID CANAL & THAT PT OF THE SE1/4 OF 16-24-27 LYING E & N OF 200 FT WIDE RCID CANAL & LYING SLY OF A 150 FT WIDE CANAL & THAT PT SEC 22-24-27 LYING ELY OF A 200 FT WIDE RCID CANAL & LYING NLY OF RCID R/W PER 7233/4340 (LESS 150 FT WIDE RCID CANAL) & SEC 23-24-27 & THAT PT OF SEC 24-24-27 LYING NLY OF EPCOT CTR DR & THOSES PTS OF SEC 19-24-28 & 20-24-28 LYING NLY OF EPCOT CTR DR & WLY OF A 250 FT WIDE RCID CANAL & THAT PT OF NW1/4 OF 29-24-28 LYING WLY OF A 250 FT WIDE CANAL & NLY OF RCID OWNED LAND & THAT PT OF 25-24-27 LYING WLY OF EPCOT CTR DR & WLY OF WORLD DR & NLY OF W BUENA VISTA DR & IN SEC 26-24-27 THE NE1/4 & E1/2 OF NW1/4 & SE1/4 LYING NLY OF R/W PER 7233/4358 & THAT PT OF THE NE1/4 OF SEC 35-24-27 LYING NLY OF R/W PER 7233/4358 (LESS MAGIC KINGDOM & BUS DROP & MAIN ENTRANCE PARKING LOT & TOLL BOOTH / ENTRANCE AND EXIT ROADS & CONTEMPORARY RESORT & GRAND FLORIDIAN RESORT & WEDDING PAVILION & POLYNISIAN RESORT & SHADES OF GREEN RESORT & MAGNOLIA AND PALM GOLF COURSE AND CLUBHOUSE & BONNET CREEK GOLF COURSE & FORT WILDERNESS & FORT WILDERNESS LODGE AND VILLAS & INDY 200 & CAR CARE & SERVICE AREA & EXONN LEASE & TTC & CORONADO SPRINGS RESORT & L-403 MITIGATION AREA PER 3978/306 & RCID PARCELS 22-24-27-M&B7 & 23-24-27-0000-00-002 AS PER 4674/0542 & LESS PARCEL 19-24-28 M&B5 PER 4747/4607 & 19-24-28-M&B6 PER 6194/4392) & (LESS PARCEL 02-24-27-M&B21 PER 7621/4739) & THAT PART OF THE SE1/4 OF SEC 22-24-27 DESC IN OR 7435/2865 (LESS THAT PART DESC IN OR 9244/4167) & (LESS PT DESC IN 9795/6214) & (LESS RE-CONFIG GRAND FLORIDIAN RESORT PER FILE 04MF02161) & (LESS RE-CONFIG TTC PER FILE 06AM08138) & (LESS COMM AT THE SW CORNER OF SEC 22 RUN ALONG W LINE OF SW 1/4 OF SEC 22 N00-11-18E 802.20 FT TH N90E 818.08 FT TO POINT ON THE ELY R/W LINE OF BONNET CREEK PKY AS DESC IN 7233/4340 AND THE POB TH RUN ALONG R/W LINE THESE 4 COURSES S00-09-50E 21.97 FT N89-50-10E 133.83 FT TO A POC OF A CURVE CONCAVE SLY WITH RAD OF 1489.51 FT AND A CENT ANGLE OF 22-39-10 RUN ELY ALONG ARC OF SAID CURVE 588.90 FT N22-29-19E 21.97 FT TO POINT ON NON-TAN CURVE CONCAVE SLY WITH RAD OF 1511.48 FT AND CENT ANGLE OF 22-39-10 TH DEPARTING SAID R/W LINE FROM TAN BEARING OF N67-30-40W RUN WLY ALONG ARC OF SAID CURVE 597.59 FT TH S89-50-10W 133.83 FT TO THE POB CONT 15972 SQ FT) & (LESS THAT PART N/K/A VILLAS AT DISNEYS GRAND FLORIDIAN RESORT COND PH 1-4 PER 10545/3964) & (LESS CONTEMPORARY CHILLER PER 10478/9310) & (LESS COMM AT THE NE CORNER OF SAID SEC 11 RUN ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NE 1/4 OF SAID SEC11 S00-07-03E 1485.66 FT TH N90W 902.56 FT TO POB TH S00E 96.73 FT TH N90W 80.55 FT TH N00E 96.73 FT TH N90E 80.55 FT TO THE POB) & (LESS LIFT STATION 8, WELL 13, CANAL L-405 PART A, B, & C, CANAL C-4 EXTENSION, CANAL L-403, CANAL L-404 PART E, CANAL L-404 PART A-D AND BACK OF HOUSE NORTH SERVICE AREA PER 10478/9310) & (LESS PT KNOWN AS DISCOVERY ISLAND FURTHER DESCRIBED AS COMMENCE

And this already has one level of abstraction by referring to other parcels and their entries in the official record books.

[Mr Downtown]

For such a prominent part of the geography of the US, there's a frustrating lack of historic resources regarding section-line roads. The section lines came first, as that's how the land was surveyed and sold. In general, most states in the 1860s passed laws enabling counties to declare that a right of way 66 feet wide (33 feet taken from the adjacent land on both sides) along all section lines was a public road.  Attitudes apparently differed quite a bit from county to county: in the Chicago region you'll find a pretty complete grid in Cook and Will counties, but hardly any section-line roads at all in Kane or Lake counties.

Parts of north Texas were surveyed and sold using a rectangular system like the PLSS.  In east-central Texas, the original Spanish land grants nearly all had angles that matched the general course of the rivers.  The two systems collide along the south edge of Tarrant County, in the Arlington-Mansfield area, as can easily be seen on an arterial map.

To return to the original question, by the time of Oklahoma's opening for white settlement, the usefulness of section-line roads was well-known, and they advanced along with land sales.  By the time of statehood in 1907, section-line roads were already being traversed by automobiles.

[bugo]

I've wondered about this for a long time:



See the 2 sections that don't line up with the rest of them? What's up with that? There are many examples like that in southeastern Arkansas.

[NE2]

Those are land grants that predate the PLSS.

[bugo]

How were the baselines and meridians chosen? Some of them are odd. For example: the 5th Principal Meridian serves both Missouri and Arkansas. Missouri doesn't have a baseline according to this map. Oklahoma's and Arkansas' baselines nearly line up. The 6th Principal Meridian serves Nebraska and Kansas but the Indian Meridian in Oklahoma is just a few degrees off.
Iowa, Minnesota, and North Dakota don't have baselines and Iowa barely has a meridian. Why isn't Oklahoma's panhandle on the same grid as the rest of the state? Wyoming has a short meridian and baseline but they don't stretch the length/width of the state.

[NE2]

Probably first-come-first-serve with some poolitics thrown in.

There's a bit of info here, but not as much as one might like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_principal_and_guide_meridians_and_base_lines_of_the_United_States

[Duke87]

I'm guessing the Oklahoma panhandle being separate may have something to do with the fact that it was not part of the Indian Territory (it was initially part of Texas), so when that was surveyed it would have not been included.

[bugo]

Most of Oklahoma wasn't part of Indian Territory.

[Perfxion]

Simple answer for a lot of older states and areas is water. It generally is the border between states/counties/towns/private land.

[corco]

I'd assume the establishment of baselines and meridians just had to do with when things were surveyed. For instance, when the 6th PM was developed, those parts of KS/CO/NE/WY/SD in that area would have been surveyed, possibly under the oversight of one lead surveyor. Montana would have been surveyed later, and at that point a new baseline/meridian would have been established.

The big reservations weren't surveyed until much later, which would explain why they would have their own baselines/meridians.

That's my thought- which areas follow which baselines is really just a function of when things were surveyed and under whose oversight, tied generally to when these areas were surveyed. No specific reason, necessarily, just happenstance to make things most convenient at the time of surveying.

Note that that's an educated guess though, and if somebody knows otherwise that'd be neat.

What I do know for sure is that the medians/baselines do stretch infinitely but on this map they do not to minimize confusion- each color coded region is part of one baseline/meridian, so if the baseline/meridian stretches into another color coded region they chose not to reflect it on this map, but in practice it is there. For instance, Bismarck would be surveyed off the baseline that runs horizontally across Arkansas because it is in the green region (and ND indeed has hilariously high township numbers- Township 159 North would be 954 miles north of that horizontal line). They don't extend the line into Oklahoma purely as a cartographic decision.

[vdeane]

Most of Oklahoma wasn't part of Indian Territory.

Textbook maps of Indian Territory look suspiciously like Oklahoma without the panhandle.

[NE2]

1885:


1891:


Oklahoma Territory was split out (along with the panhandle) in 1890. In 1907 the two were joined as the state of Oklahoma.

[rarnold]

The Oklahoma Panhandle, aka No Man's Land, aka the Public Land Strip, was never part of the State of Texas, as it was surrendered in the Compromise of 1850. It was, however, part of the Republic of Texas.

[bandit957]

I read a book titled 'American Boundaires' that describes the PLSS in detail.