1     
DEDICATION OF PUBLIC HIGHWAYS

2     
2020 GENERAL SESSION

3     
STATE OF UTAH

4     
Chief Sponsor: Todd Weiler

5     
House Sponsor: Merrill F. Nelson

6     

7     LONG TITLE
8     General Description:
9          This bill modifies the Transportation Code by amending provisions relating to the
10     dedication of public highways.
11     Highlighted Provisions:
12          This bill:
13          ▸     modifies the requirements for an interruption of continuous use of a highway as a
14     public thoroughfare;
15          ▸     provides that a property owner's interruption of continuous use of a highway as a
16     public thoroughfare restarts the running of the 10-year period of continuous use
17     required for the dedication of a public highway;
18          ▸     provides that a property owner's interruption of a right-of-way created after
19     dedication has no effect on the validity of the state's or local highway authority's
20     claim to the right-of-way;
21          ▸     removes certain limitations regarding the applicability of the dedication and
22     interruption provisions; and
23          ▸     removes language providing legislative intent.
24     Money Appropriated in this Bill:
25          None
26     Other Special Clauses:
27          None
28     Utah Code Sections Affected:
29     AMENDS:
30          72-5-104, as last amended by Laws of Utah 2014, Chapter 107
31     

32     Be it enacted by the Legislature of the state of Utah:
33          Section 1. Section 72-5-104 is amended to read:
34          72-5-104. Public use constituting dedication -- Scope.
35          (1) As used in this section,"highway," "street," or "road" does not include an area
36     principally used as a parking lot.
37          (2) [(a)] A highway is dedicated and abandoned to the use of the public when it has
38     been continuously used as a public thoroughfare for a period of 10 years.
39          [(b) Dedication to the use of the public under Subsection (2) does not require an act of
40     dedication or implied dedication by the property owner.]
41          (3) The requirement of continuous use under Subsection (2) is satisfied if the use is as
42     frequent as the public finds convenient or necessary and may be seasonal or follow some other
43     pattern.
44          (4) Continuous use as a public thoroughfare under Subsection (2) is interrupted [only]
45     when:
46          [(a) the regularly established pattern and frequency of public use for the given road has
47     actually been interrupted for a period of no less than 24 hours to a degree that reasonably puts
48     the traveling public on notice; or]
49          [(b) for interruptions by use of a barricade on or after May 10, 2011:]
50          [(i)] (a) [if] the person or entity interrupting the continuous use gives not less than 72
51     hours advance written notice of the interruption to the highway authority having jurisdiction of
52     the highway, street, or road; [and]
53          [(ii) the barricade is in place for at least 24 consecutive hours, then an interruption will
54     be deemed to have occurred.]
55          (b) the property owner undertakes an overt act which is intended to interrupt the use of
56     the highway, street, or road as a public thoroughfare; and
57          (c) the overt act described in Subsection (4)(b) is reasonably calculated to interrupt the
58     regularly established pattern and frequency of public use for the given highway, street, or road
59     for a period of no less than 24 hours.
60          (5) Installation of gates and posting of no trespassing signs are relevant forms of
61     evidence but are not solely determinative of whether an interruption under Subsection (4) has
62     occurred.
63          [(6) If the highway authority having jurisdiction of the highway, street, or road
64     demands that an interruption cease or that a barrier or barricade blocking public access be
65     removed and the property owner accedes to the demand, the attempted interruption does not
66     constitute an interruption under Subsection (4).]
67          (6) A property owner's interruption under Subsection (4) of a highway, street, or road
68     where the requirement of continuous use under Subsection (2) is not satisfied restarts the
69     running of the 10-year period of continuous use required for dedication under Subsection (2).
70          (7) (a) The burden of proving dedication under Subsection (2) is on the party asserting
71     the dedication.
72          (b) The burden of proving interruption under Subsection (4) is on the party asserting
73     the interruption.
74          (8) (a) The dedication and abandonment creates a right-of-way held by the state or a
75     local highway authority in accordance with Sections 72-3-102, 72-3-103, 72-3-104, 72-3-105,
76     and 72-5-103.
77          (b) A property owner's interruption under Subsection (4) of a right-of-way claimed by
78     the state or local highway authority in accordance with Subsection (8)(a) or R.S. 2477 has no
79     effect on the validity of the state's or local highway authority's claim to the right-of-way and
80     does not return the right-of-way to the property owner.
81          (9) The scope of [the] a right-of-way described in Subsection (8)(a) is that which is
82     reasonable and necessary to ensure safe travel according to the facts and circumstances.
83          (10) [(a)] The provisions of this section apply to any claim under this section for which
84     a court of competent jurisdiction has not issued a final unappealable judgment or order.
85          [(b) The Legislature finds that the application of this section:]
86          [(i) does not enlarge, eliminate, or destroy vested rights; and]
87          [(ii) clarifies legislative intent in light of Utah Supreme Court rulings in Wasatch
88     County v. Okelberry, 179 P.3d 768 (Utah 2008), Town of Leeds v. Prisbrey, 179 P.3d 757
89     (Utah 2008), and Utah County v. Butler, 179 P.3d 775 (Utah 2008).]