Bannock County denies request to validate ‘dogleg’ access on Lower Rock Creek Road

Bannock County commissioners voted to deny a landowner request to validate a short spur — described at the hearing as a “dogleg” — off Lower Rock Creek Road that an agent said is the only recorded access to a 60-acre parcel near Inkom, Idaho.

The decision followed a public hearing in which county staff, an agent for the seller and an adjacent landowner described conflicting records: county maps and maintenance logs show the main Lower Rock Creek route as county-maintained, but maintenance records and other documents do not clearly verify county maintenance of the dogleg that leads to the Powers family parcel.

Kyle Burmister, Bannock County public works director, told commissioners that the county has maintenance records for the stretch “going to the east” but not for the spur that reaches the 60-acre parcel. Burmister said some county roads are lightly maintained “once a year” or not maintained in winter, and that the county uses traffic and usage data to set maintenance levels.

Renee Spurgeon, a real estate agent representing the seller, said the parcel has been accessed historically and that she needs a validated public access to complete a pending sale and allow the buyer to obtain building permits. “We need to gain access to the property because it’s essentially landlocked right now,” Spurgeon said. She told the board the buyer intends to build a single-family home and is not seeking to subdivide the 60-acre parcel.

Adjacent landowner Mike McNabb said the existing dirt track has long been used and that the county has at times graded the area, but he opposed extending formal county maintenance into what he described as farm field and private access. “We don’t deny that there’s access to the property. We feel like they can use that dirt road how they want,” McNabb said, and he warned that formalizing maintenance could impose obligations on the county.

Several commissioners said the county should avoid taking on maintenance responsibilities that would effectively make private driveways public. Commissioner Moser said he did not want the county “in the business of plowing driveways,” and Commissioner Mogler said, “I don’t wanna start doing driveways. It’s kinda where I’m at.” Commissioners discussed the county’s practice when considering vacation of roads — noting that the county reviews whether roads have been built or maintained in the past 15 years — and agreed they had no precedent for extending maintenance down the dogleg into private property.

After discussion a motion to deny validation of the dogleg from Lower Rock Creek Road to the landowner’s property was made, seconded, and approved by voice vote. The board clarified that the county continues to maintain the portion of Lower Rock Creek Road up to where the spur begins, but it will not validate or assume maintenance responsibility for the spur that leads into private property.

The hearing clarified that the county’s current practice is to limit routine winter maintenance to road segments that meet occupancy and distance thresholds; the spur in question receives no winter maintenance and has had only very limited grading or surface work. Commissioners and staff advised the property owner and agent to pursue an easement or private agreement with neighboring landowners if they wish to secure recorded access.

The denial resolves only the validation request; it does not vacate any mapped segments nor does it establish a private easement. The county did not record a roll-call vote tally in the public hearing transcript.