Bannock County approves vacation of easement in Chilton Subdivision

At a public hearing, the Bannock County Board of Commissioners approved a petition to vacate a road and utility easement across lots in the Chilton Subdivision, removing county ownership of the 50-foot strip and restoring the land to the adjoining property owners.

Public works director Kyle Burmester presented the staff report and said the application included a site plan, warranty deed, petition letter, legal descriptions, written consent from affected parties and the required staff report. "As I reviewed this, everything that was required was there," Burmester said. He told commissioners staff reviewed the request under the cited state statute and found the easement met the statutory criteria for vacation, including that it had not been used or maintained by the public for at least three of the previous 15 years and was never constructed.

Burmester said staff relied on "bridal statute title 40, chapter 2 42 o dash 2 0 3" (as cited in the staff report) addressing abandonment and vacation of county and highway district rights of way. He told the board the easement is not on land owned by the United States or the state of Idaho and does not provide the only means of access to public lands, criteria the statute requires staff to check.

Commissioners heard that Bannock Transportation submitted a letter opposing the vacation, but Burmester said he had spoken with another staff member, Tristan, who reviewed the request and recommended approval because staff had no statutory basis to deny it. The transcript records a speaker summarizing Tristan's view rather than a direct statement by Tristan at the hearing.

Applicant Mike Heller, who identified himself as a Chilton Subdivision resident and a professional land surveyor, said the easement lies entirely within the Chilton Subdivision and crosses individual parcels. "It is wholly and solely on the Chilton Subdivision," Heller said. He described that vacating the easement will leave the 50-foot strip as part of the adjacent lots; owners already pay taxes on the full parcels and the servitude would end the county's ownership.

Commissioners asked whether any utility easements or irrigation canals exist in the right-of-way and whether future roadway expansion could be affected. Burmester said the application included letters from the gas company and the power company indicating there are no utility easements in the roadway being considered and that planning staff did not identify a conflict with future growth. Heller said the area had not been touched for about 47 years.

A commissioner moved to accept the recommendation of Road and Bridge and Planning to vacate the right-of-way as described in the petition. The board approved the motion by voice vote; an exact roll-call tally is not specified in the meeting record.

The action vacates county ownership of the 50-foot road and utility easement in the Chilton Subdivision as described in the application and staff report. The transcript does not specify an effective date for the vacation or further administrative steps required for recording the change.

Details that remain unspecified in the meeting record include the exact legal citation text for the statute as printed in county files and the numerical vote tally on the motion.