The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3036 Ordinance - RecordedApp oved As To Form - g A Rubstello Catherine D Seaman voL0451 PG0375 552701. ORDINANCE NO. 30,3 C AN ORDINANCE vacating the alley right-of-way in Block 136, Pasco Land Company's First Addition WHEREAS, all steps and procedures required by law to vacate said right-of-way have been duly taken and performed, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. §1. That the north/south alley right-of-way located in Block 136, Pasco Land Company's First Addition, as depicted in Exhibit "A" be and the same is hereby vacated subject to the easements retained in §2 hereof §2. That the City for the construction, repair and maintenance of public utilities and services shall retain an easement and the right to exercise or grant easements with respect to the south ten (10) feet of the alley in Block 136, Pasco Land Company's First Addition §3. That a certified copy of this Ordinance be recorded by the City Clerk with the office of the Auditor of Franklin County, Washington §4. This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication Passed by the City Council of the City of Pasco, at a regular meeting this k day of August, 1994 City of Pasco Joyc ehce Ma'rjor Attest: S5azo..)5701 ka. V 01-0451 PG0376 552701 I to elE 4 't: ID If E. IZ 13 3 1 14 E • st-TZ'70t ( TRANSACTION REPORT > 08-03-1994(WED) 07 22 C -T- R inn NJ S r-i I -T-- 3 NO DATE TIME DESTINATION STATION PG DURATION MODE RESULT 4252 8-03 07 21 15095821453 3 0°01 19 NORM E OK 3 0°01 19 DESCRIPTION ;75k: WOO ‘„t,* _PO BOX 2608 PASCO WASHINGTON 99302 2608 PHONE (509) 582 1500 LEOAL ADVE'0700002 INVOICE DATE ().)/(-) 7 14 " LEGAL NO ti 4 o 4 ACCOUNT NO lzwy/ORDINANCE NO 1()—P". A TIMES "-I I INCHES 4 ^ "1 SOLD TO - F- Ac_1120 Pt OF . 0 . BO X 297; LE:GALS 0- ()toll en. PASM WA 9-1 -01 MOTOCIE This is an invoice for legal advertising space Please pay from this invoice as no statement will be rendered Please detach at perforation and return with payment v..1:;tdgg gi r,k3G g '99 4 f‘NOICE. DEPT ORDINANCE NO 3036 AN ORD.INANC t vacating the elle" noht way in Block T-u6 Pasco Land Company s First Addition WHEREAS all steps and procedures required by law to vacate said right-of-way have been duly taken and performed now therefore THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PASCO WASHINGTON DO OR- DAIN AS FOLLOWS §1 That the north/south al- ley right of way located in Block 136 Pasco Land Company s First Addition as depicted in Exhibit A be and the same is hereby vacated subject to the easements retained in §2 hereof §2 That the City for the construction repair and maintenance of public util ities and services shall re tam an easement and the right to exercise or grant easements with respect to the south ten (10) feet of the alley in Block 136 Pasco Land Company s First Addition §3 That a certified copy of this Ordinance be recorded by the City Clerk with the office of the Auditor of Franklin County Washing ton §4 This Ordinance shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publica tion PASSED by the City Coun- cil of the City of Pasco at a regular meeting this 1 day of August 1994 City of Pasco -s Joyce DeFelice Mayor Attest s- Catherine D Seaman Approved As To Form 1 -s Greg A Rubstello j#1404 -8/7/94 AFFLIDAY117 PUEM11CLY1100 COUNTY OF BENTON S S STATE OF WASHINGTON CARLA ALFORD , being duly sworn, deposes and says, I am the Legal Clerk of the Tn-City Herald, a daily newspaper That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the superior court in the county in which it is published and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of the publication hereinafter referred to, published countinually as a daily newspa- per in Benton County, Washington That the attached is a true copy of a 14( )4/ORDI NANCE NO . cC. A as it was printed in the regular and entire issue of the Tn-City Herald itself and not in a supplement thereof, 1 time(s), commencing on 02/07/ ;LI , and ending on 0P/07/.":0 , and that said newspaper was regulary distributed to its subscribers during all of this period -* 010 gq ao &IAA, AlOka' SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME THIS DAY OF f/ Note public in and for the State of Wash- ington, residing at PASCO WA COMMISSION EXPIRES 7— rerlow Fool1 1111 1 11 1111111 01p FINANCE IEPARTMENT (509) 545-3401 / Scan 726-3401 / Fax (509) 545-3403 P 0 BOX 293, 412 WEST CLARK, PASCO, WASHINGTON 99301 August 3, 1994 Tn-City Herald P0 Box 2608 Pasco, Wa 99302 Dear Kathy Please publish the attached Ordinance(s) No 3036 on the following date August 7, 1994 Please send two (2) Affidavits of Publication for each Thank you, Cathenne D Seaman Deputy City Clerk 545-3402 cds * No attachments or maps included AGENDA REPORT NO 82 FOR City Council TO Gary Crutchfiel Richard J Smit Manager tor f Community and Economic Development FROM David I McDolty Planner DATE 7/25/94 Regular 8/1/94 SUBJECT STREET VACATION North/South Alleys in Block 136 and 137, Pasco Land Company's First Addition (MF #94-44-V) I REFERENCE(S) A Proposed Ordinance and Vicinity Map B Letter from Mr Coleman (Attorney) C Letter from City Attorney II ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL/STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS MOTION I move to adopt Ordinance No vacating the north/south alleys in Block 136 and 137 of the Pasco Land Company's First Addition III FISCAL IMPACT NONE IV HISTORY AND FACTS BRIEF A Bobby Gilbert and Nancy McGregor, property owners representing 66% of the abutting private property of the alley in Block 137 and 100% of the abutting private property of the alley in Block 136 have submitted a petition requesting the vacation of these alleys B State law requires that more than 2/3 of the abutting property owners sign the vacation petition to make it valid Because the vacation request for the alley in Block 137, does not meet the statutory requirements, the applicants are requesting the city initiate the street vacation process for this alley The petition did meet the statutory requirements to proceed with the vacation of the alley in Block 136 C On July 5, 1994, the City Council initiated the vacation process for these alleys Unlike most vacation efforts, the resolution setting the public hearing was not based upon a petition by property owners V DISCUSSION Vacation of the alley in Block 137 has been contested However, the individuals contesting the vacation represent only one-third of the abutting properties Only a protest by 50% of the abutting property owners prior to the hearing would prohibit the Council from vacating the alley The alley in question has never been opened or maintained by the city This alley is landlocked and not accessible by the public The alley serves no public purpose and has no public use Staff would recommend this landlocked alley be vacated The vacation of the alley in Block 136 is not being contested VI. ADMINISTRATIVE ROUTING 111111111 1111111111111111our CITY ATTORNEY(509) 545 -3406 / Scan 726-3406 / Fax (509) 545-3403 P.O. BOX 293, 412 WEST CLARK, PASCO, WASHINGTON 99301 July 20, 1994 Timothy M Coleman Leavy, Schultz & Davis, P S P 0 Box 891 Pasco, WA 99301 RECEIVED JUL 2 0 1994 COMMUNITY DEVuurromi DEPT Re Vacation Of Alley In Block 137, Pasco Land Company's First Addition Dear Tim Your letter dated July 15, 1994 was referred my office for response RCW 35 79 010 authorizes vacation proceedings to commence either by petition from the adjoining property owners or in the alternative by a Resolution adopted by the City Council This vacation proceeding was initiated upon the Resolution of the City Council after recommendation from City staff to initiate vacation proceedings If the City Council decides to proceed with the vacation, only a protest by fifty percent of the abutting property owners, prior to the time of the hearing, would prohibit the City from proceeding with the Resolution and vacation RCW 35 79 020 An abutter is entitled to compensation only when they suffer a special injury as a result of a street vacation where their land becomes land-locked or the access thereto is substantially impaired There is no special injury if there remains an alternative motive ingress and egress to the land, even if less convenient Hoskins v Kirkland, 7 Wn App 957 (1972) Your client has ample ingress and egress from Oregon Avenue In addition, there is no improved alley-way at this location In fact, there is not even any street access to or from this alley right-of-way since the streets at both ends of the block have previously been vacated The alley right-of-way serves only as a private drive and parking area for your client It has no public use The public would be benefited by the vacation of this alley and the public responsibility that is otherwise attached to it Your letter and a copy of this response will be included in the City Council's Agenda Packet when the City Council holds the public hearing on August 1st Timothy M Coleman Re Vacation of Alley in Block 137, Pasco Land Company's First Addition July 20, 1994 - Page Two You and your client are certainly entitled to appear at the public hearing and give testimony in support of your position Very truly yours, Greg A Rubstello Pasco City Attorney GAR/mjg cc David McDonald GEORGE FEARING 1 C 1. C , ,.., r IC rs ROBERT G SCHULTZ (509) 547 5951 -TIMOTHY M COLEMAN 4-n r•• •••n• I- ** .-- ••••• JAMES LEAVY (1915 1087) JUL 1 8 1994 CO MMUIVI 1 i L/L. t Lt.," 01417 Utei July 15, 3.994 City Clerk City of Pasco 412 W. Clark Pasco, WA 99301 Planning Department City of Pasco 412 W. Clark Pasco, WA 99301 Re: Vacation of alley in Block 137, Pasco Land Company's First Addition Dear Sirs: This law firm represents the Shanks/Huston Limited Partnership which owns Lots 1 through 8 in Block 137. Shanks/Huston objects to the vacation or the proposed vacation of this alley for the following reasons: 1. The petition filed by Gilbert and McGregor is insufficient. Under RCW 35.79.010, the signatures of more than 2/3 of the owners of the abutting property are required to validate the petition. In this case, the ownership interest of Block 137 is so divided that Shanks/Huston have a one-third ownership interest. Therefore, any resolution passed by the City based on this petition would be invalid. 2. Vacation of the alley would damage Shanks/Huston. Currently, the Fastener Building sits on Lots 1 through 8. This business uses the alley to get trucks back to its loading dock. Currently, they need the entire alley to be able to get these large vehicles back to the loading docks. If the alley is vacated, Shanks/Huston will have an ownership interest in only one-half of the alley. This would be insufficient to allow them to get the trucks back to the loading dock. Case law has consistently held that one who is an abutting property owner upon a street or alley, any portion or the whole of JOHN G SCHULTZ WILLIAM E DAVIS GEORGE FEARING ROBERT G SCHULTZ LEAVY SCHULTZ & DAVIS, P.S. ATTORNEYS AT LAW P 0 BOX 891 117 SOUTH THIRD STREET PASCO WASHINGTON 99301-0891 TELEPHONE (509) 545 1434 TELECO PIER (509) 547 5981 TIMOTHY M COLEMAN JAMES LEAVY (1915 1987) JUL 1 8 '1994 commum, 1JL n 6111-11 utel July 15, 1994 City Clerk City of Pasco 412 W. Clark Pasco, WA 99301 Planning Department City of Pasco 412 W. Clark Pasco, WA 99301 Re: Vacation of alley in Block 137, Pasco Land Company's First Addition Dear Sirs: This law firm represents the Shanks/Huston Limited Partnership which owns Lots 1 through 8 in Block 137. Shanks/Huston objects to the vacation or the proposed vacation of this alley for the following reasons: 1. The petition filed by Gilbert and McGregor is insufficient. Under RCW 35.79.010, the signatures of more than 2/3 of the owners of the abutting property are required to validate the petition. In this case, the ownership interest of Block 137 is so divided that Shanks/Huston have a one-third ownership interest. Therefore, any resolution passed by the City based on this petition would be invalid. 2. Vacation of the alley would damage Shanks/Huston. Currently, the Fastener Building sits on Lots 1 through 8. This business uses the alley to get trucks back to its loading dock. Currently, they need the entire alley to be able to get these large vehicles back to the loading docks. If the alley is vacated, Shanks/Huston will have an ownership interest in only one-half of the alley. This would be insufficient to allow them to get the trucks back to the loading dock. Case law has consistently held that one who is an abutting property owner upon a street or alley, any portion or the whole of City of Pasco, Clerk City of Pasco Planning Department July 15, 1994 Page 2 which is sought to be vacated, has a special right and a vested interest in the right to use the whole of the street for ingress or egress, light, view and air, and, if any damages suffered by such an owner, compensation is recoverable therefor. Fye v. O'Leary, 141 Wash. 465, 252 Pac. 111 (1927). If the City is to vacate the alley, it is clear that Shanks/Huston will be materially damaged by this action and be entitled to compensation from the City. This would be true even if the City found there was a "public purpose" in vacating the alley. 3. There is no apparent public benefit to be found in vacating the alley. It is clear that the vacation of a street or alley must be based upon some element of "public use". Case law has held that a city may vacate a street when it is no longer required for public use or when it has little public benefit, or when it is desired to substitute a new and different way more useful to the public. Yarrow First Associates v. Town of Clyde Hill, 66 Wn 2d 371, 403 P.2d 49 (1965). There is nothing currently to indicate that vacating the alley would indeed serve any sort of public purpose. To the contrary, it would seem that by keeping the alley in place, the City is providing access to one of its local businesses which would seem to have a positive impact on the public good rather than a negative impact. We would therefore respectfully suggest that there is no public purpose to be had in vacating the alley. We would respectfully request the Planning Department and the City Council to review our objections to the proposed vacation. Should the City decide to continue on with its proposed action, we will, of course, appear at the Courcil meeting on August 1, to more fully argue our position to the Council. If you have any questions regarding the above, please feel free to contact me. We are most anxious to work with the City in this matter to come to a resolution that will be of most benefit to both the City and to the property owners. Sincerely yours, LEAVY, SCHULTZ & DAVIS, P.S. TIMOTHY M. COLEMAN TMC:jwe cc: Richard Shanks and Hal Huston #14607