HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Engineer's Report - Mitchell St and Duffy AveCounty Engineer’s Report – Petition to Vacate Portions of Mitchell St and Duffy Ave rights-of-way July 1, 2024 Page 2
joined in the petition to vacate. See Exhibit C (petition). Zimmermann is the Principal
Petitioner.
4. Although Rayonier and Zimmermann parcels potentially benefit from the subject rights-of-way, only the Zimmermann property is within the plat of Goodfellow’s Manhattan Beach Tracts. Subject to any evidence that the original dedicator (John A. Goodfellow)
owned any of the abutting property now owned by Rayonier at the time of platting, the
presumption is that the entire width of these rights-of-way would revert to and attach by operation of law to the Zimmermann parcel upon vacation. 5. According to the Petition, the purpose of the requested vacation is to allow for a future
boundary line adjustment along the Zimmermann northern property boundary to settle
boundary line issues 6. Neither of the subject rights-of-way have ever been opened as a public road or been maintained by Jefferson County. The subject rights-of-way meet the definition (in JCC
12.10.020) of “Class A” road, namely a road “established, dedicated to, deeded to, or
otherwise established by the county for which no public expenditures have been made in
the acquisition, improvement, or maintenance of same except those roads platted prior to March 12, 1904, which remained unopened for public use for a period of five years after authority was granted for opening them.”
7. The subject rights-of-way do not provide for overall area or neighborhood circulation for the general public, nor is there any anticipated future need for this right-of-way to serve the general public. The southern portion of Duffy Avenue right-of-way has steep slopes and benches indicating possible past landslide activity. See Exhibit D (contour/lidar
map).
8. RCW 36.87.040 and JCC 12.10.050(2)(e) require the County Engineer to give an opinion as to whether the public will benefit by the vacation; however, neither provide guidance as to what might be considered a “public benefit” when vacating a public right-of-way.
The legislative body is held to be the proper entity to weigh public benefit, and there is a
presumption that an ordinance approving a street vacation was validly enacted for a public purpose (London v. Seattle, 93 Wn.2d 657 (1980)). In the absence of any need for a road right-of-way for the benefit of the general public (circulation, trails, utilities, etc.), typically any benefit would accrue to the property owners with frontage on the vacated
right-of-way. These benefits might include additional building space, room for septic
systems, green-belt buffer, the ability to keep the public from trespassing on their property, or other benefits. Benefits to the public and County could include reduced road maintenance costs, reduced liability for managing public right-of-way (such as garbage dumping, timber theft, danger trees, or abandoned vehicles), and increased property tax.
All of these reasons have been used in the past to support road vacations and could
support a finding of public benefit for the vacation of the subject rights-of-way.
County Engineer’s Report – Petition to Vacate Portions of Mitchell St and Duffy Ave rights-of-way July 1, 2024 Page 3
9. JCC 12.10.110(1) requires that the proposed road vacation be reviewed for compliance
with the Jefferson County comprehensive plan and any other applicable plans, policies or
ordinances. JCC 12.10.110(2) provides that roads should not be closed or vacated when land uses, development plans, or occurring patterns indicate their usefulness to area circulation. In accordance with JCC 12.10.060, the Department of Community Development (DCD) reviewed the proposed road vacation and any environmentally
sensitive areas that might be affected by the road vacation. [[DCD conclusions and report
(Exhibit E).]] 10. JCC 12.10.110(3) provides that the effectiveness of fire, medical, law enforcement, or other emergency services should not be impaired by a road vacation. The effectiveness of
emergency services will not be impaired by this road vacation. No opposition to the
Notice of Intent to Vacate the subject right-of-way was received from the Sheriff’s office, Fire District #1 or JeffCom911 (see Staff Report for copies of all comments received). 11. JCC 12.10.110(4) provides that roads should not be closed, vacated, or abandoned when
such routes can effectively be used for utility corridors. No opposition from public or
private utility companies or providers was received in response to the Notice of Intent to Vacate the subject right-of-way. However, if necessary, and in compliance with RCW 36.87.140 and JCC 12.10.130(2)(a), the Board of County Commissioners may retain an easement within the subject vacated area for the construction, repair, and maintenance of
public utilities and services.
12. JCC 12.10.110(5) states that roads should not be vacated when they could be used for public trails or pathways. Since the subject rights-of-way are effectively dead-ends, and do not provide direct public access to water or a beach, and the fact that there are no
Jefferson County Parks located within or currently proposed in the area, the subject right-
of-way would not be a prime candidate for a public trail. 13. JCC 12.10.110(6) and RCW 36.87.130 state that right-of-way should not be vacated if it abuts a body of salt or fresh water. The subject right-of-way, although close to Hood
Canal, do not abut the water, and therefore are eligible for vacation under this criterion.
14. JCC 12.10.110(7) states that a road vacation should not landlock any parcel or property. The subject rights-of-way potentially serve only the Zimmermann and abutting Rayonier parcels, all of which have alternative access directly from Thorndyke Road.
15. JCC 12.10.120 requires the Principal Petitioner to compensate the County for all Class A and Class B vacated rights-of-way in compliance with RCW 36.87.120. A resolution approving vacation of a right-of-way shall not be effective until the following payments are made:
• Base Payment: “The Principal Petitioner shall pay, with respect to the vacation of
either or both Class A and Class B roads or rights-of-way a sum equal to one-half of the current fair market value (as of the date of the petition) of the area so vacated if the county holds title through a dedication, or the full current fair market value
County Engineer’s Report – Petition to Vacate Portions of Mitchell St and Duffy Ave rights-of-way July 1, 2024 Page 4
(as of the date of the petition) if the county acquired the subject rights-of-way other
than by dedication, e.g., fee simple interest.” The County acquired the subject
rights-of-way through dedication. Therefore, if the vacation is approved, the Principal Petitioner shall be required to compensate the County for one-half of the fair market value of the property. Based on an appraisal commissioned by Zimmermann, the fair market value of the subject rights-of-way is $21,000. See
Exhibit F (appraisal).
• Additional Payment for Class A roads or rights-of-way: “any and all other
administrative costs incurred by the county in vacating the road.” To-date, the Principal Petitioner has paid a total administrative fee of $1605.78, which is the 2024 fee for vacating roads and includes 17 hours of staff time. Petitioner shall
be liable for any staff time over 17 hours and any other administrative costs incurred in processing the application. 16. Road vacations are exempt from SEPA, per WAC 197-11-800(2)(i).
RECOMMENDATIONS This proposal appears to meet all of the criteria outlined in Chapter 36.87 RCW and Chapter
12.10 JCC that would allow for the subject right-of-way to be vacated. It is the opinion of the
Public Works Director/County Engineer that the subject rights-of-way should be vacated, provided that no contrary testimony or new findings are presented at the hearing, and provided the Principal Petitioner pays all required compensation owed to the County for the vacated right-of-way and administrative process.
EXHIBITS A. Vicinity and Parcel Maps B. Annotated Plat Map
C. Petition for Vacation of a Jefferson County Right-of-Way
D. Contour and Lidar Map E. Dept. of Community Development Report. F. Appraisal Report
EXHIBIT A - Vicinity map and parcel map showing rights-of-way proposed
for vacation
Location of rights-of-way proposed for vacation
EXHIBIT B - Plat of Goodfellow’s Manhattan Beach Tracts showing
rights-of-way proposed for vacation
EXHIBIT C
Petition for Vacation of a Jefferson County Right-of-Way
EXHIBIT D - Contour map with rights-of-way proposed for vacation
highlighted
EXHIBIT E
Department of Community Development Report
JEFFERSON COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
621 Sheridan Street | Port Townsend, WA 98368
360-379-4454 | email: gballard@co.jefferson.wa.us
www.co.jefferson.wa.us/260/CommunityDevelopment
MEMO
DATE: June 20, 2024 TO: Colette Kostelec
FROM: Greg Ballard, Jefferson County DCD Code Administrator RE: Petition to vacate portions of platted Mitchell Street and Duffy Avenue rights-of-way west of Thorndyke Road (APN 954600201)
DCD received an e-mail on June 4, 2024 outlining the proposed vacation. Duffy Avenue right-of-way contains two slopes that are 50 and 70 percent slope and would meet the classification requirements for a moderate land slide hazard area.
Mitchell Street right-of-way contains Type Np stream (perennial non-fish bearing). All new land disturbing activity and development (including placing new access roads and utilities) are subject to Critical Area and stormwater requirement.
Based on the topography and development regulations of this area, DCD believes that it is unlikely that these rights-of-way would ever be developed. DCD has no objections to the proposed vacation of Mitchell Street and Duffy Avenue right-of-
way.
EXHIBIT F
Appraisal of Rights-of-Way Proposed for Vacation