Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Roads Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears access dispute, bridge update and state bills that could affect county roads
Summary
The commission heard a property access dispute that may require a prescriptive easement, an update that WYDOT will design a bridge at Shell Creek, and a briefing on two state bills (SF 22 and HB219) the county official said could change speed‑limit practice and increase easement survey costs.
The Big Horn County Commission on Feb. 18 heard from a landowner and county road staff about a disputed approach and broader updates on bridges and proposed state legislation affecting county roads.
J. Keele raised concerns about his property approach after a neighboring owner, identified in the minutes as Sopy, indicated an intent to fence along the county road. Road and Bridge staff member Bridges said the road crosses Sopy’s property and that a granted approach was issued in 2018 where the county road goes. Bridges said issues outside the county road easement fall outside county jurisdiction. Deputy County Attorney Jennifer Kirk said the access "might be eligible for a prescriptive easement," adding that obtaining one would be a civil action for private landowners to pursue.
Bridges updated the commission that WYDOT will proceed with design for a bridge (instead of the originally considered box culvert) at Shell Creek, and that permitting and fence relocation with affected landowners will be addressed when design details are available. He said the Reirden Lane bridges work is likely six to seven months behind the Shell Creek schedule.
Bridges also briefed commissioners on proposed state legislation. He summarized SF 22 as an effort that could remove the requirement for speed studies to set unpaved road limits, which he said could offer Commissions additional options in problem areas. He described HB219 as a bill that could expand easement and survey requirements on county and state lands, potentially requiring multiple surveys in Big Horn County and creating cost concerns; the minutes note Rep. Banks as one sponsor.
The commission did not take formal action on the legal access question and Bridges said he would review documents and follow up with the concerned landowner. Deputy County Attorney Kirk’s comment that a prescriptive easement "might be eligible" was presented as legal context rather than a direction from the commission.
Next steps: Bridges will review records and follow up with J. Keele; any civil claim about a prescriptive easement would need to be filed by the landowner.
