County settles trail easement case
by Rose Egelhoff
The Times-Independent
May 17, 2018 | 951 views | 0 0 comments | 70 70 recommendations | email to a friend | print


Grand County has settled with defendants in the case of disputed ownership over a piece of land near Cinema Court. The case began in 2015, but the dispute goes back to 1974, when property-line changes in the Grand-Vu Park subdivision created “waste parcels” in between the subdivision and what would eventually become Cinema Court apartments.

The dispute became an issue when the city and county wanted to develop a trail that would end on San Miguel Avenue. The trail was to be a connection from Cinema Court to other trails and into town.

The county “planned and developed a trail through the parcel to provide safe access for pedestrians and cyclists to downtown Moab,” attorneys for Grand County stated in a court memorandum. “The county funded and assisted in development and improvement of the trail, which was publicly used on a regular basis for years.”

The defendants in the case however, Andrew Roots and Virginia Shuey, blocked access to the property and the county eventually responded with legal action.

However, before the case went to trial the landowners decided they wanted to settle, Grand County Attorney Andrew Fitzgerald told The Times-Independent.

“Two weeks ago we went to formal mediation and worked out the details of the trail connector there ... the pathway corridor will be 12 feet wide ... the county has agreed to build some fencing where [Shuey] wanted it ... to funnel the public onto the trail rather than onto her property,” Fitzgerald said.

The landowners agreed not to cut a shade tree down on the edge of the corridor and the county agreed to grant the landowners easements to use those waste properties for a picnic table or parking in ways that wouldn't interfere with the trail, Fitzgerald said.

“The county and the city, it's part of their master trail plan to connect the city and the county and make sure that that neighborhood on the San Miguel [Avenue] side is connected into the bike path ... this was kind of our only viable option to connect that neighborhood,” Fitzgerald added. “It is important that it allows kids on bikes and families and individuals to connect into the paved trail system without having to bike on the highway. I think it will save lives, children’s lives ... so despite the costs and efforts I think those benefits far outweigh the costs of [the case]. I think that connector will be really beneficial for that neighborhood and the community as a whole.”

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect a correction. The original story erroneously reported that the city, not the county, had settled with the defendants.


Copyright 2013 The Times-Independent. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

report abuse...

Express yourself:

We're glad to give readers a forum to express their points of view on issues important to this community. That forum is the “Letters to the Editor.” Letters to the editor may be submitted directly to The Times-Independent through this link and will be published in the print edition of the newspaper. All letters must be the original work of the letter writer – form letters will not be accepted. All letters must include the actual first and last name of the letter writer, the writer’s address, city and state and telephone number. Anonymous letters will not be accepted.

Letters may not exceed 400 words in length, must be regarding issues of general interest to the community, and may not include personal attacks, offensive language, ethnic or racial slurs, or attacks on personal or religious beliefs. Letters should focus on a single issue. Letters that proselytize or focus on theological debates will not be published. During political campaigns, The Times-Independent will not publish letters supporting or opposing any local candidate. Thank you letters are generally not accepted for publication unless the letter has a public purpose. Thank you letters dealing with private matters that compliment or complain about a business or individual will not be published. Nor will letters listing the names of individuals and/or businesses that supported a cause or event. Thank you letters about good Samaritan acts will be considered at the discretion of the newspaper.