Compensation
A project can change how vehicles reach a property without taking much land at all. For some properties, access is most of the value.
An owner whose land abuts a public road has a right of reasonable access to it. That right is part of the property. Where a public project substantially impairs it, the loss can be compensable, either as severance damages in a condemnation case or as an inverse condemnation claim where no land is taken at all.
Not every change is compensable. California distinguishes a substantial impairment of the right of access, which can be compensable, from a mere inconvenience or a diversion of traffic, which generally is not. The distinction turns on facts: what access remains, how it functions, and what the property needs.
Photographs, traffic counts and delivery routes recorded before construction are the strongest evidence of what the access actually was.
For a fuel station, a drive through, a motel or a retail site with impulse traffic, access is not a convenience but the business model. Where a change in access causes a loss of business goodwill, Code of Civil Procedure section 1263.510 may provide a separate route to compensation.
Start with your situation
Related resources
More resources are on the way. New guides publish every week.
Questions owners ask
Circuity of travel on the public road system is usually treated as non compensable. A substantial impairment of the access to your own frontage is different.
That is the classic inverse condemnation situation. Claims against a public entity are subject to the six month presentation deadline in Government Code section 911.2.
It can. A median that removes turning movements into a site is a common source of access disputes, and its effect depends on what access remains.
California compensates loss of business goodwill under section 1263.510 rather than lost profits as such. Financial records are the evidence either way.
Next step
Review how the project changes the approach to your property.