AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

Seattle street end beach dispute

3 Posts
2 Users
0 Reactions
782 Views
Sean R-M
(@sean-r-m)
Posts: 64
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

The local news station here reported this morning that a judge has ruled in favor of the adjoining neighbors over who owns the park at the end of N.E. 130th St. The only article I could find on the topic is from April but it looks as if the ROW here may have been vacated at some point long ago but the adjoining property owners never took possession of the property and it remained a public beach. The issue came up only recently because the city was considering improvements at the beach, which are now on hold. The news has a way of mixing up important details but it seems clear enough that the city would reject a vacation request on this street end if it was filed today RCW 35.79.035 . I would like to get more information on this situation such as the ruling and the original vacation ordinance, something to look forward to on monday 🙂


 
Posted : August 24, 2013 11:33 am
Sean R-M
(@sean-r-m)
Posts: 64
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I was going to research this at work but I got busy and I forgot until I got home, now I'm researching this at home 🙂 Thank you King county road services map vault 🙂 I will add some images tomorrow from work.

Looks like the street in question was platted in 1926 in the Cedar Park Lake Front (corrected)plat. It was then vacated 6-27-32 according to King County Engineers Map, which also shows that it was deeded back to King co in 8-10-1932. I also found the Road establishment survey which has a note on the front about the road being vacated in error, but the original deed was never recorded. It was deeded again by puget mill co 4-10-35. There is also a plan on file for a pedestrian crossing over the N.P.R.R. in 1937

There is also an article on the komo news site
That is all I got for now


 
Posted : August 26, 2013 8:29 pm
back-chain
(@back-chain)
Posts: 468
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Try to search for case records on Oak Island (NC) vs. . Regarding abandoned street stubs and 'parks'. Or, search the starnewsonline.com archives.

This island was divided years ago, with street stubs to the AIWW. They evolved into parks and, I think, even a 'public' boat access manifested.

Fast-forward: The Town officially tries to dedicate a 'park' and the savvy adjacent (read as lawyer), said NO.

My understanding is that abandoned r/w reverts directly to the original owner. Or, to the current owner of record by chain of title.

Oak Island is still trying to fight this one... and I don't think they're winnding.

Later,


 
Posted : August 27, 2013 9:26 am