Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors contest Uinta County road-vacation request in Dry Fork Canyon
Summary
A road-vacation request for 6500 West in Dry Fork Canyon prompted a contested public hearing after a property owner objected, saying the vacation would block an accessory-dwelling permit and affect a boundary dispute; commissioners took public comment and did not make a decision at the hearing.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Uinta County commissioners held a public hearing May 20 on a request by Gayla and Kenny Morris to vacate a portion of Class B Road 6500 West in Dry Fork Canyon. The application sought to convert the county-designated lane to private control; four of six adjacent parcels are owned by the Morris family.
Katrine (spelled "Katrin" in the submitted email) Myers submitted a written objection that was read into the record. Myers wrote that she refused to sign the original vacation form because of a “history of tense relationships concerning the road” and that she later learned the vacation could make her lot legally nonconforming and prevent an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) from being permitted. "I would be irreparably harmed if you and the county were to vacate 6500 West," Myers wrote in the letter as read into the record.
Gayla Morris, speaking at the hearing, said neighbors have historically treated the lane as private and that the county has not maintained the road. Morris said a recorded right-of-way exists for the Myers property and described disagreements with the Myers family over a fence line and sewer work. "I really feel like with the way it was done... there should be no problem in releasing this county road that the county has never maintained," Morris said.
County staff noted the application was noticed on county and state websites and that property owners were notified. Staff also reported they have a recorded easement for the Myers property and that the road does not access public lands. Commissioners emphasized this was a public hearing and that no decision would be made that day; the matter remains under consideration pending review and additional information.
The commission did not vote on the vacation at the hearing.

