Planning staff outlines draft process for access easements across county-owned land
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Staff presented a draft two-step process to evaluate requests for legal access across county-owned property, emphasizing alignment of physical driveway permitting and legal easement approvals, early review to avoid costly engineering before county approval, and the potential for fees or compensatory terms for granting easements.
Planning staff told commissioners that several recent requests from private landowners to obtain legal access across county-owned parcels revealed the county lacked a consistent, transparent process for considering easements. Staff proposed a two-step approach: an early preliminary review to identify major site or resource conflicts and avoid unnecessary applicant expense, followed by a final plan and site-development (driveway) permitting process that would include engineering and public-land routing.
The draft process aims to ensure the county does not grant legal easements where physical access is impractical or where significant natural-resource impacts (critical wetlands, habitat) would be harmed. Commissioners raised policy questions about whether the board should see preliminary applications, whether county land should be sold or leased versus easement-only permissions, whether applicants should be charged for easement rights, and whether approvals should be conditioned on securing all other private easements required for legal access. Staff said they will vet the draft with the road-research team and open-space commission and return with final recommendations.
No vote was taken. Commissioners asked staff to ensure early-board notification and to include the open-space commission's input when property affected is open-space acreage.