Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Roads topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges Trinity County to restore access to Lacey 3 road; staff outlines petition process
Summary
A Groveland-area resident told the Commissioners Court the county stopped maintaining a road shown in a 1975 declaration as a public road; staff said the road was removed from the county map in the 2011–2013 update and that landowners must petition to reopen and bring the road to county standards.
A resident told the Trinity County Commissioners Court on Oct. 28 that a previously maintained road commonly called Lacey (appearing in the record as 'Lacey 3' or 'Lace Veil 3') ends at a curve and leaves a newly purchased 5-acre parcel without practical access, and asked the county to restore maintenance.
The resident (Speaker 7) said the property buyer cannot access the land and cited a 1975 commissioners-court declaration listing the way as a public road. "It was voted on in commissioner's court declaring this ... it says a public road," the resident said, adding that clearing and repairs would cost about $15,000.
County staff (Speaker 3) and staff attorney/road official (Speaker 6) told the court the road had been left off the county road map adopted during the 2011–2013 update and described a formal petition process. "If you want a road that's been abandoned, opened up, you need to bring it back up to county standards," Speaker 6 said, explaining petition and signature requirements before the court will adopt a road for maintenance. Staff and commissioners urged the resident to coordinate with neighbors and gather signatures; staff said the court would research historical records and bring the matter back at a later date.
Why it matters: Whether the county is legally responsible for clearing and maintaining a route can determine whether private owners must bear the cost to restore access or whether the county will assume long-term maintenance. The resident said lack of access has hindered property sale prospects.
Court reaction and next steps: Commissioners and staff repeatedly emphasized that reclaimed or reopened roads must meet county standards (culverts, ditch work, rock) before county crews will maintain them and that the initial step is landowners petitioning the court. Staff said they would research the road's history and reported records (including a 1975 declaration and a county road map adopted around 2011–2013) and return with findings at a future meeting.
The comment was part of the public-comment period; the court made no decision at the meeting. A staff-led follow-up and possible agenda item was promised for a later session.
