Robinson v. State

This memorandum is in amplification of the conclusion that the appropriation, pursuant to section 676-a of the Conservation Law, did not landloek claimant’s remainder and did not deny him access to and from his property. In addition to the appropriation of two unlocated easements on the parkway proper, the taking, which is more fully described in the *326findings, also included a triangular strip of land fronting both on the parkway and on Underhill Road, a town highway which is not a controlled access highway (Highway Law, § 3, subd. 2). The fee part was taken to accomplish a separation of…