Public Interest Statement.pdfPublic Interest Statement
Request to vacate the east end portion of undeveloped 232nd St SW.
Historical Context:
Gunn Family Tenure in Edmonds
My family took up residence at 10430 231" ST SW, Edmonds, WA in 1979. With the passing of both my parents I
relocated from Montana and I have resided in the home for the past 12 years.
During my parents tenure in residence, in 1991 they removed trees in the ROW that were considered a hazard as during
three different storms trees had come down on the house. Upon asking the county for financial assistance for the
removal, my parents were informed they were the responsible party to maintain the ROW area from any hazards.
County letter attached.
In my tenure I have continued to maintain the ROW to mitigate risks, including pests with removal of shrubs, bushes and
diseased trees that families of rats resided in the root areas and were problematic. I have been replacing the plants with
ones not conducive to the rat families.
ROW History
In 1970, Sherwood Estates was platted and developed. At that time 231'Y ST SW and ROW's for two undeveloped roads
were put in place —an extension of 104th Ave W and 232nd ST SW. I can assume this was to be used for development of
lots and also possible access to the High School.
In 1979 the portion of 104th Ave W behind lots 8-10 was vacated at $1,200 per lot. The remainder of the 104th Ave W in
the Westgate Division is now also vacated.
My request:
My request is to vacate east end of the 232nd St SW ROW behind lost 11,16(private road) and 10. The purpose of the
road is moot as all lots on both sides of the ROW have access to a city street, nor does the ROW meet the required width
to be a City street, and the West end is several feet below the grade of 106th St it connects to. In addition, the ROW does
not have direct access to the old High School.
Benefits:
In 1979 there was no compelling reason to not support the petitioners request to vacate the ROW behind lots 8-10 as
the possible intended use was no longer applicable and the County file shows support to vacate. I believe the same
holds true today for my request.
My original submittal to vacate was only the ROW area behind my house and after review I was told it was not likely to
get support. It was recommended I submit a new application requesting to vacate from my lot to the East end of the
ROW (Lots 11,10,16).
Vacating the area would provide the city an infusion of cash (The max 50% of appraised value allowed of approx
$28,000). Increase the property values and property tax value of the two home lots for future cash flow.
I have agreed any future underground easements that may be needed can be recorded.
The remaining ROW area is still one connected parcel.
My situation would improve as my end lot is more of a skinny triangle with the long side being 131 ft vs the other homes
being 80 feet wide. Therefore, my backyard is half the depth of my neighbors' yards.
Your approval of my request would be greatly appreciated.