Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Right Of Way Vacation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners advance petition to vacate unopened right-of-way in Township 14 for future resolution
Summary
At a public hearing Aug. 12, Yakima County Roads staff recommended vacating an unopened 375-foot strip of county right-of-way near Sila Loop Road; the board voted to send the petition forward to a future agenda for a formal resolution, with a 25-foot access easement required to serve neighboring parcels.
Yakima County commissioners on Aug. 12 moved forward a petition to abandon an unopened right-of-way in the northwest quarter of Section 23, Township 14 North, Range 18 East WM, after County Roads staff recommended vacation and imposed a condition to preserve access for neighboring parcels.
Star Betancourt, a right-of-way agent with Yakima County Roads, told the board that Andrew Leah, owner of several adjacent parcels, submitted the petition to vacate a 375-foot-long, 60-foot-wide section of unopened county right-of-way just north of Sila Loop Road. Betancourt said county review found that, given the topography and surrounding development, the strip is unlikely to ever support a public through road and that the county engineer and roads department recommend vacation.
Betancourt said the proposed vacation would cause the parcels to the north and west to become landlocked unless a private access easement is recorded. To prevent loss of access, she said the county will require a concurrent 25-foot access easement from the petitioner.
'In May 2025, Yakima County received a petition to vacate this section of right of way submitted by Andrew Leah, the owner of Parcels 1000814.23, 2241111, and 1000814 Point 232000214.14,' Betancourt said. 'The right of way is located 'just north of Sila Loop Road, for the length of 375 feet and 60 feet wide' and, she said, 'based on the location and surrounding topography, it is highly unlikely a roadway could be constructed within the existing right of way.'
After a public comment period that drew no speakers, the board voted to schedule a resolution on a future meeting agenda to formally consider the vacation. The motion to advance the proposal was made on the record and seconded; commissioners then voted in favor and the matter will return for a resolution at a future date.
Betancourt and county staff also noted the condition that the petitioner must concurrently record a 25-foot access easement to serve the affected landlocked parcels; that easement was described on the record as a precondition for final county action.
The board did not take a final vacating resolution on Aug. 12; the public hearing and a staff recommendation were recorded and the matter was directed to a future agenda for resolution.
Items to watch: the formal resolution language when the matter returns to the board, the recorded 25-foot access easement and its terms, and any public comment submitted before the future resolution hearing.
