Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Bridge Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges Atchison County to fix access at closed Bridge 29.8; commissioners plan follow-up
Summary
A resident told the Atchison County Commission that Bridge 29.8 has been closed for nearly a year, argued the county is required to provide access, and urged installing a culvert rather than rebuilding a bridge. Commissioners said they will brief the new county counselor and aim to follow up in early February.
A local landowner, identified in the record as “Mister Funk,” told the Atchison County Commission on Jan. 13 that Bridge 29.8 (C Dot 5) has been out of service for almost a year and that the closure has forced him to spend thousands of dollars to maintain access across his property.
"This bridge has been out now for almost a year," Mister Funk said during the public-comment period, describing multiple expenses to haul rock and use tractors to move crops and access family properties. He said the county "shall provide a way in" when a bridge is out of service and referenced a past court ruling in Jefferson County that he said favored a landowner in a similar case.
Funk urged the commission to consider installing a culvert instead of rebuilding a full bridge, saying a culvert would be far cheaper and would allow the loads the landowner needs to move. Commissioners acknowledged the complaint, said they have prior counsel correspondence (including earlier contact with a Mr. Kuckelman) on the matter, and said they will bring the county's newly hired county counselor, David Van Paris, up to speed.
Commissioners discussed scheduling a follow-up meeting to review options and said they would aim to meet with the landowner and relevant staff on or around Feb. 3 to review prior offers, any counterproposals, and details for a potential culvert installation. Commissioner comments during the meeting noted that emergency services have UTVs and other means to reach rural properties when roads are not passable.
The commission did not adopt a formal remedy during the Jan. 13 meeting; instead, members agreed to gather existing documentation, review prior offers and counteroffers, and return with recommendations to the landowner and to the board in the coming weeks.
