Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads Rights Of Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners flag inconsistent road names on telecom easement requests, ask staff to seek corrected descriptions
Summary
Commissioners on June 17 questioned telecommunications easement paperwork that uses subdivision street names such as “K Street” and “Kenwood Drive,” which county records show as parts of Cantel (Camptel/Camfield) Drive and Painted Hills, and directed staff to obtain corrected legal descriptions before granting easements.
Weston County commissioners discussed telecommunications company requests for utility right‑of‑way easements that list road names inconsistent with the county's road records and assessor maps.
At issue were easement forms submitted to the chairman for signature listing “K Street” and other names the county does not recognize in the county road book. One commissioner said, “K Street isn't listed on our county roads as a road. It's part of Cammtell Drive, so it should probably be marked as Cammtell Drive.” Commissioners noted the assessor's map and public mapping layers sometimes label the same right‑of‑way differently and that subdivision platting can preserve local street names (the transcript references a “Historic Park subdivision” and Painted Hills/’Kenwood Drive’). A commissioner suggested the application include both the county‑recognized county‑road designation and the subdivision street name to avoid granting an easement on an incorrectly described right‑of‑way.
County staff and commissioners discussed mapping layers the applicant may have used (assessor layer, Google Maps) and a practical approach: allow the applicant to request permission for the county right‑of‑way while noting the local street name in the application. Commissioners asked staff to return the paperwork to the applicant (Jim) with instructions to correct the descriptions and to break out the specific segments being requested rather than requesting blanket access to an unnamed area. One commissioner said they would “have to send it back to Jim to send it back” for correction.
No formal vote was recorded on the easement descriptions; the commission provided direction to staff to obtain corrected legal descriptions and resubmit the easement application.
Ending: Staff will ask the telecommunications applicant to clarify which county right‑of‑way segments are requested and to provide legal descriptions consistent with the county road book and assessor records before the chairman signs any easements.
