Source: https://kansas.lexroll.com/attorney-general-opinion-no-2006-15/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 03:17:12+00:00

Document:
Neither K.S.A. 68-104 nor 68-106 requires a survey or the assistance of a surveyor prior to a county taking action to vacate a county road in every instance. However such a survey may be required if the actual location of the public road being vacated is not known or is at issue, or may discretionarily be performed if a county wishes to provide abutting landowners or the general public with additional or actual notice as to the precise site of the vacated road. Cited herein: K.S.A. 19-212; 19-1420; K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 68-101, as amended by L. 2006, Ch. 76, § 1; K.S.A. 68-102; 68-102a; 68-104; 68-106; 68-116; K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 68-124.
You indicate that these questions have arisen, in part, because language in K.S.A. 68-106 seems to imply that a survey is not required unless it is directed by the county commission.
“Upon presentation of any petition for a road, or for the alteration or vacation of any road, to the county commissioners, at any regular session of their board, it shall be the duty of said commissioners, if they find the petition to be a legal one, and that the proper bond has been filed, to appoint three disinterested householders of the county as viewers with said commissioners, who may act as viewers of said road, and the county clerk shall give notice by advertisement . . . and by publication. . . .
“It shall be the duty of the commissioners or said viewers or a majority of them, and the county surveyor to meet at the time and place specified in the notice aforesaid, or on the following day thereafter, and they may, if they deem it necessary, take to their assistance two suitable persons as chain carriers and one as marker, and then proceed to view, survey, lay out, alter or vacate the road as prayed for in said petition, or as nearly so as a good road can be made at a reasonable expense, taking into consideration the utility, convenience and inconvenience, and expense which will result to individuals as well as to the public, if such road, or any part thereof, shall be established and opened or altered.
“If the commissioners or viewers, after viewing such proposed road, shall so direct, the county surveyor shall survey the said road under their direction, and cause the same to be conspicuously marked throughout, noting the courses and distances.
or if it is declared to be a public road or highway by the board of county commissioners pursuant to K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 68-124.
K.S.A. 68-104 and 68-106 provide some of the procedure by which counties may open or close roads. Both statutes were enacted in 1911 and have not been amended since that time. Moreover, it does not appear that the issue of whether the presence of a surveyor or an actual survey is legally required in order to vacate a road has ever been the subject of a reported case. Case law citing to these two statutes and the creation of a new county road generally only mention surveys in connection with laying out or changing the course of a road.
Thus, in opening or laying out or even arguing about the actual location of a public road, a survey appears to be necessary and a common practice.
However, vacation of a county road may not always require a survey. While challenges to the process of vacation occur, it does not appear that such challenges have been based upon lack of a survey. Rather, such challenges are typically based upon notice or factual issues.
In reading K.S.A. 68-104 and K.S.A. 68-106, together with reported case law citing to the two statutes, it appears that the services of a surveyor are only required for vacating a road when the county commission decides that it is actually necessary to determine (or re-determine) the actual physical location and legal description of the road in question. This is a factual issue which must be determined on a case-by-case basis.
Taking all this authority into consideration, we find no legal requirement that a surveyor be present, or a survey be conducted, in connection with every vacation of a county road. There may be fact specific circumstances wherein such a survey or the assistance of a surveyor would prove helpful or advisable in connection with vacating a specific public road. However, we have found no legal requirement that imposes a duty upon a county to involve a surveyor in every county road vacation decision or process.
Therefore, It is our opinion that neither K.S.A. 68-104 nor 68-106 requires a survey or the assistance of a surveyor prior to a county taking action to vacate a county road, however, such a survey may be factually required if the actual location of the public road being vacated is not known or is at issue or discretionarily performed if a county wishes to provide abutting landowners or the general public with additional or actual notice as to the actual site of the vacated road.
 Attorney General Opinion No. 2000-30.
 Attorney General Opinion No. 91-163.
 See, e.g., Barrett v. Ninnescah Bow Hunters Association, 15 Kan.App.2d 241 (1991) (when road viewers’ report, survey and plat have been recorded, everything essential to legal establishment of road is considered as having been done; recording of a survey and plat is not required when road to be opened is located upon or along a section line); State v. Board of Commissioners of Jefferson County, 135 Kan. 7 (1932) (road opened for public travel; the board of county commissioners ordered that the road survey and plat be recorded in the office of the county surveyor); Wyandotte County Commissioners v. Abbot, 52 Kan. 148 (1893).
 Gehlenberg v. Saline County, 100 Kan. 487, 491 (1917) See also Attorney General Opinion No. 91-140.
 See e.g. England v. Duncan, 10 Kan.App. 577 (1900).
 123 Kan. at 77, 78 (1927).

References: § 1
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.