CO Code § 43-2-303 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 43 - Transportation|Article 2 - State, County, and Municipal Highways|Part 3 - Vacation Proceedings: Roads, Streets, and Highways|§ 43-2-303. Methods of Vacation

  All right, title, or interest of a county, of an incorporated town or city, or of the state or of any of its political subdivisions in and to any roadway shall be divested upon vacation of such roadway by any of the following methods:   The city council or other similar authority of a city or town by ordinance may vacate any roadway or part thereof located within the corporate limits of said city or town, subject to the provisions of the charter of such municipal corporation and the constitution and statutes of the state of Colorado.    The board of county commissioners of any county may vacate any roadway or any part thereof located entirely within said county if such roadway is not within the limits of any city or town.    If such roadway constitutes the boundary line between two counties, such roadway or any part thereof may be vacated only by the joint action of the boards of county commissioners of both counties.    If said roadway constitutes the boundary line of a city or town, it may be vacated only by joint action of the board of county commissioners of the county and the duly constituted authority of the city or town.         No platted or deeded roadway or part thereof or unplatted or undefined roadway which exists by right of usage shall be vacated so as to leave any land adjoining said roadway without an established public road or private-access easement connecting said land with another established public road.    If any roadway has been established as a county road at any time, such roadway shall not be vacated by any method other than a resolution approved by the board of county commissioners of the county. No later than ten days prior to any county commissioner meeting at which a resolution to vacate a county roadway is to be presented, the county commissioners shall mail a notice by first-class mail to the last-known address of each landowner who owns one acre or more of land adjacent to the roadway. Such notice shall indicate the time and place of the county commissioner meeting and shall indicate that a resolution to vacate the county roadway will be presented at the meeting.    If any roadway has been established as a municipal street at any time, such street shall not be vacated by any method other than an ordinance approved by the governing body of the municipality.    If any roadway has been established as a state highway, such roadway shall not be vacated or abandoned by any method other than a resolution approved by the transportation commission pursuant to section 43-1-106 (11).    Paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this subsection (2) shall not apply to any roadway that has been established but has not been used as a roadway after such establishment.    If any roadway is vacated or abandoned, the documents vacating or abandoning such roadway shall be recorded pursuant to the requirements of section 43-1-202.7.       In the event of vacation under subsection (1) of this section, rights-of-way or easements may be reserved for the continued use of existing sewer, gas, water, or similar pipelines and appurtenances, for ditches or canals and appurtenances, and for electric, telephone, and similar lines and appurtenances.    Any written instrument of vacation or a resubdivision plat purporting to vacate or relocate roadways or portions thereof which remains of record in the counties where the roadways affected are situated for a period of seven years shall be prima facie evidence of an effective vacation of such former roadways. This subsection (4) shall not apply during the pendency of an action commenced prior to the expiration of said seven-year period to set aside, modify, or annul the vacation or when the vacation has been set aside, modified, or annulled by proper order or decree of a competent court and such notice of pendency of action or a certified copy of such decree has been recorded in the recorder's office of the county where the property is located.      History. Source: L. 49: P. 621, § 3. CSA: C. 143, § 69(3). CRS 53: § 120-1-13. C.R.S. 1963: § 120-14-3. L. 88: (2) amended, p. 1122, § 2, effective April 20. L. 93: (2) amended, p. 615, § 2, effective April 30. History. Source: L. 49: P. 621, § 3. CSA: C. 143, § 69(3). CRS 53: § 120-1-13. C.R.S. 1963: § 120-14-3. L. 88: (2) amended, p. 1122, § 2, effective April 20. L. 93: (2) amended, p. 615, § 2, effective April 30.    ANNOTATION   Law reviews. For article, “Resubdividing and Replatting”, see 28 Rocky Mt. L. Rev. 529 (1956).   Section not authority to declare road public. This section does not vest the board of county commissioners with the authority to declare that a road has become public by adverse use; rather, this section only gives commissioners the authority to relinquish any claims the public may have in a road. Williams v. Town of Estes Park, 43 Colo. App. 265, 608 P.2d 810 (1979).   Subsection (2)(a) requires a party seeking to establish vacation of a roadway to demonstrate that vacation will not create parcels without access. Bd. of County Comm'rs of Morgan County v. Kobobel, 74 P.3d 401 (Colo. App. 2002).   Subsection (2)(a) cannot be construed to mean that an abutting landowner has a title interest in any public road such that they can maintain an action under the federal Quiet Title Act. Staley v. United States, 168 F. Supp. 2d 1209 (D. Colo. 2001 ).   “Private-access easement” as used in subsection (2)(a) means reasonable access. This is a question of fact to be determined on a case-by-case basis. Adelson v. Bd. of County Comm'rs, 875 P.2d 1387 (Colo. App. 1993).   Municipal ordinance purporting to vacate road merely transferred control over the road to the county where ordinance did not meet vacation requirements set forth in statute at the time of the adoption of the ordinance. Martini v. Smith, 42 P.3d 629 (Colo. 2002).   The strict requirements of this section only apply if the roadway has been established and used as a public road. Martini v. Smith, 42 P.3d 629 (Colo. 2002).   If a road is a public road that has been used as such, then a disclaimer of interest filed by a county under the procedural provisions of C.R.C.P. 105(c) cannot operate to vacate the road. Rather, the county must comply with the mandates of this section in order to effect the vacation of the road. Martini v. Smith, 42 P.3d 629 (Colo. 2002).   Under subsection (2)(a), county cannot, without compensation, formally abandon a public road if such action would deprive abutting landowners of access to their property. Heath v. Parker, 30 P.3d 746 (Colo. App. 2000).   For vacation by nonuser following admitted statutory dedication and acceptance, see Crane v. Beck, 133 Colo. 325 , 295 P.2d 222 (1956), and Uhl v. McEndaffer, 123 Colo. 69 , 225 P.2d 839 (1950).   Applied in LeSatz v. Deshotels, 757 P.2d 1090 (Colo. App. 1988).