ZE-48-70_ _ _ _
,~m:..,
„q: p.,., ..,;.r x;., ~+.ati,~w ~,~,:.a~ ^s.^.•: s,r«~e~. J":.,xtiraCa~~:§4.+.~+~ P^.~^.~ra n w;: :u::a„a,a^ ro«~~
. ,n^
k~ .
emu. a....~._. ~
'2'~, a k......
i
.a.
I
, a s a ~
I f t
'°d . t " .w
t
~^~y„
9
• ~ '8 +e 'P
i m R w., ~ a. ~
' , k r^ x~.. ~ r
u~,..:. . ..:m m y t
n }
y~y E S
: ~r.r
~ F 8
u : : ^ ~
: A:: r w,
' ^9:', r. : . y
: p E :
s w,~'; : i
: ~
: :
v
: E
i j 4
^
Y I
5y7 ~ 1
i y~ I
" ~„'"r ~r
a s
~ ~ '
t , : ~ - ~ d
: : r
^ :
:
t ~ y I
s,: , xw. ~~.rr i
a s i
r ^ ~ i ~ ' ~
4 i v.:~ ~ 3 ~
{ ~ { i
1 9 ~ ^ ~ ~
} : ~
S I
«y,~ . , ~ m : a"
d A : Ji _ ^ 1 d
a d ,a• p , a ,
~ m^ ~m ^
~
. ~ ^ E ^
i w
t
j ~ § }
1
r
m,
t
t
1
a
~ _ ^ ~ ,
M 111
~
m ^
„ ^ oo a r.tw.~ r,, s
: 9
: ^ 4 { yR. ~M 6
: k
C7... , w i ,,^r^ ^+r ^:^^^K ~i~.,M".Ir_r.7Ni'r~r.~°°,~:^s'~ax~^:~~^^ „^^r ;a:~e«•~~;,^,^ x
~d
a„
~ublic Records Request
City Ha61, 11707 E SpPagaee Ave Su'te 106
Spokane !la9ley9 WA 99206
509-921-1956 phone 509-927-1008 fax
Please Prxnt Name gla, i' /a 4/ P Date
~ ~
~ - - ~
~ l /
Phone Number Address ~0 6 [p
Requested Documents (Please be spec.if'ic in descnbing the xecozds bevag requested and any addrtxonal mformation that
will help us locate them for you such as dates )
~ rI o s ~ ~ A~dh-r Ir ~ r ~OS /1/ i
i ~ PUBLIC RECORD5 OF THE AGENCY ARE PROVIDED FOR INSPECTION AND COPYIlVG SUBjECT TO THE FOLLOWING
R.EGULATIONS
1 No person shall knowvagly alter deface or destroy pubhc records of the agency
2 Onginal copies of pubhc records to the agency shall not be removed from the offices of the agency
3 Care and safekeeping of pubhc records of the agency furnished pursuant to a request for uispection or copymg shall be
the sole responsibility of the requester
4 Records furmshed for pubhc inspecaon or copymg shall ble returned in good condition and in the same file sequence or
orgazuzatzon as when furnished
5 Boisterous or othervvise disrupnve conduct by those requesnng pubhc records of the agency shall not be permitted
6 The charge for providw.g copies of pubhc records is fifteen cents ($O 15) per 8% by 11 or 8% by 14 inch page
The sma11 print Itas the Cftys poky to respond wJtlua five busmesr days ofreceinng s pubLc records re,quest by erther 1)pmvlding the record 2J ac!nowledgiog
that the Cityhas recielved the Muest and pmvrdtqga masonable estrmate of the trme the Crty will re,quire av respond ro the reqrrest or 3) deaying the request to
locate and assemble the iaforaratton requesre4 m noafy thu d persons or agencier affected by the request or to determine wbether any of the lnfnrmatron requested
fs exPmpt aad that a denlal should be made as m all orpart of the requert- In acknowledgWremJpt ofa request that is unclear the Cltymay ask tbe requestor to
cJanfy what mfurmation the reyuestarls seelang See Ordrnaace No ?I
Requestor cemfies that the records requested sh not be used for commercial purposes
J
.Signature Date ~
Internal Use Only-Information To Be Completed By Csty Staff
Request best handled by the Department there£ore for purposes of processing, a copy of tbas request
was provided to on
The schedule for thzs request is as !f'nllows
The day response beguis one workuig day post receipt responsibility staff must advise the Caty Clerk on or before day 5 if records
can not be produced withui five worlang days Was 5-day letter sent Yes No Date
Attached
Location of Rec rds on si off sitelbox #
Notes
Date Produced
Date Demed (Attach 1 er)
Number of Copies J Fee $ City Representative A c
Public Reoords Request 3/27/03
_ r~~~ ~ / VGL ~2 PAGE 439
~ ~ i
~ ~ t a ~JJra~QO`~d
~ ~f t 1~/
N0. ij. 3io C►
.
~ .
BEFQRE TSE BOARD OF COIINTY CONDRISSIONFRS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
zE-48-70
IN THE MATTER OF CHANG,ING THE ZONING NfAP FROM )
AGRICULTURAL AND RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL TO )
MULTIPZE FAMILY SUBURBAN AND FREEWAY COMMERC7AL ) R E S 0 L U T I 0 N
ON P'ROPERTY LOCATED IN BI.OCK 1 OF VERADALE )
PARK ADDITION IN SECTION 14, TOWNSHIP 25 N., )
RANGE 4+, E.W.M., SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON. )
The above-entitled matter coming on regularly for hearing before the Board of County
Commissioners of Spokane Eounty, Washington, on this da,y, and it appearing to the
Boasd that the Spokane County Planning Commission has given due notice of the hearing
on tILe matter in the manner and for the ta.riP pJ ovlded by law, that sazd Planning
Commission has held a public hearing as required, and that the sau.d Planning Commission
concurs in the plan to zone the follotving described property as
FREEWAY COMMERCIAL
Lot 2, except the West 140 feet of the South 40 feet, all of Zots 3, 4, 5, 6, and
8, those portions of Lots 9 and 10 and portion of Cataldo Avenue vacation lyz.ng east
of a line parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 feet west of the east line of Lots 7 and
8. All in Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition in Section 14, Township 25 N., Range 44,
E.W.M., Spokane County, Washington,
and to
MUI,TIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN
The West 140 feet of Lot 1 and the West 140 feet of the South 40 feet of Lot 2, Block 1
of Veradale Park Addition, all of Lot 11, those portions of Lots 9 and 10 and portion
of Cataldo Avenue vacation lyi.ng west of a line para11e1 to Sullivan Road and 160 feet
west of the east line of Lots 7 and 8, Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition. Section 14,
Township 25 N., Range 449 E.W.M., Spokane Courity, Washington.
NOW, TIMXFORE, BE IT RESOLVED9 That the above-entitled and described property be, and
the same hereby is, zoned under the classifications of FREEWAY COMMERCIAL and MULTIPLE
FAMILY SUBURBAN as defined in the Zoning Ordinance of Spokane County, adopted August 25,
1953l as amended, and that development and use of the above-described property shall
be as described and delineated wz.thin the Development and Traffic Control Plan,
ZE-48-70, subject to all conditions stated wi.thin and upon sai.d Development and Traffic
Control Plan.
PASSED BY THE BOARD THIS ob DAY OF 19710
ATTEST BOARll (F !COtTNTY C ISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY,_ WASHINGTONo_
1TERNON W. OHLAND ~
Clerk e Board
f •
By
J Deputy
This is to certify that this is a
true and correct ,~sp►py ~ ~
Re solution No. ~ s~ 2rdei-I
passed by he Board this ~
~
day of , 1971. fILEO OR AECOaDEO
REC U F-T f- C OUJJ~'i,y~
Commissioner9
Deputy ~ J11N Z 4 30 PH 1971
►
I hereby certify that I have posted vERNtsk ONI.AND aUDITOR
the above changes and revisions on SPOKANE C,ANIY, WASN
the Zoning Map z.n the Buil.da.ng Codes OEPUTX--~a YXX
De artment, and do furti~er certify ~
p q that the zone classification change ~
is the same as described above and ~ 'Re q Cot4r t H ousc
shown on the attached map. y
SIGNED
fL-~L ~ HAT hd.=
DATED 0,-t 7. /e;? ? /
~
,
OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Date--_~~-' .19 -
Inter-office Communicatior,
,
,
;
To~'
~
rrom I / 1 ,
4
SUbje'Ct~Z.
TrO4/-5.
)Oa/ GC,~S T~i~~
c~IW 41
o,er~
~7'',G. ~A~/
/C~v' Ci'~/~f3 ~✓a~' ~~vv/!!s~ ~~'~~Jit/I~G' ~f.'ZD G`~iLl T'T'f~l//~'I] 5
72~) C~'4/72~~e 19s St~~arv
yGr~l/ GW-Ly
; ~
, .•GLU~L' 14' ~EO•
Form 327-C R
_ . . ~ _ 1
I
'
~
WILLARD J SHARPE HUDSON 7 1651
ROBERT W TWIGG V AREA CODE 808
JOSEPH J GAN2 S H A R P E& T W 1 G G
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 817 NORTHTOWN OFFICE BUILDING
4407 NORTH DIVISION STREET
SPOKANE WASNINGTON 99207
January 5, 1971
~ECEIVED
JAN 8 1971
Mr Charles Huggins SPOrCAIVE COUNTY
Director, Spokane County PLANNIIVG COMMISSION
Planning Commission
West 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington 99201
Re Greater Spokane Development Co.
Sullivan and Mission
Dear Mr Huggins
I am in receipt of a copy of the County Comm.issioners
decision of December 17, 1970 rezoning the subject
property to Freeway Commercial zoning for the site in
question At a meeting of the principals of Greater
Spokane Development Company a decision was reached
concerning the phasing of their development. As I
mentioned to you on the telephone when we recently
discussed this question the company was required upon its
rezoning to exercise its option to purchase the land
which expense together with the other costs of the
project to date make it essential that the company
realize some income from the property at the earliest
possible time. At this time Texaco is prepared to
develop its site 3ust as soon as the weather permits
which will represent income to the owners and it is the
owners desire that Texaco be permitted to proceed with its
development with the understanding that adequate screening
be provided to the West at the Texaco site The developers
are not immediately prepared to proceed with the restau-
rant-motel apartment development and it may be considerable
time before they are able to secure the acceptable finan-
cial commitment to proceed with this phase of the develop-
ment I am sure you are aware of FHA's thinking in regard
to apartments in the Valley It is the thinking of the
~
~
9HARPE & TWI00
ATTORNEYB AT LAW ~
Page Two
January 5, 1971
group that it would be more feasible and in the long run '
more practical to develop the apartment units called for
in the plan at the time a building permit is secured to
construct the restaurant-motel complex It is difficult
at this time to make a specific time commitment as to the
~
restaurant-motel apartment commencement, however, a 6 to
18 month period is probably a fair estimate As you know
at the time of the request for zoning a commitment was
made by the developers in my letter in the event a building
pernait were not issued for the entire project within 3
years the zoning would revert to ilts present classification.
Taking into account the substantial outlay ma.de by the
developers for the purchase of this property which they
now own free and clear it is not likely that they would
permit the zoning to revert and I am personally confident
that they will secure the acceptable financing to fulfill
their development plan well within the 3 year period
originally proposed. ~
Would you kindly give this your thoughts and should you
wish to meet with the County Commissioners in a joint
meeting I would be glad to be present at their and your
convenience.
, S incerely, ~
~
~
,
WILLARD J. SHARPE
WJS ds
~
~
~
~
~
~
' RECU'VED _
.
.J
JAN b 1971 January 5, 1971
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNiIVG COMMISSION
To 14hora It May Concern
bire, tie resldents adjozning the Droposed motel, apartnient, anci
service statzon con'Plex would like to mako tne g01l0wln6 suggestaons ~
for construction of ti11s project
^ 1 celar ance be coastructyd on ~he Doundry line
2 A cedar fence be constructed Uetween the proposed aDartments
and the adjoining resldentlal pronerty
3 The fence be constructed bei'ore any otner co=istruction
4 In al.l ;qlndows facing west, the glass be of tne opaque varlety
5 That all signs be placed so as a buildin; can obstruct the
li&ht frocn tne adjozmng proDerty
It was pro-oosed ln the Dlan for a five foot feflce ten feet east of
the pronerty lltie We would like to recoinmend tlls fence be placed on
the llne, Piade of cedar, and the residents have tie opoortunity to attacn
a fence to it As oie resident now has a cedar .feYlce, tae fence to be
constructed should match the one alread~► constructed in height arrd daslgn
~
Triis fence has an elght lnch cedar board then a seven lnch oDen3ng, then
anot}ler eight Zncti board, and so on On the otner side af the 2x4, an
, eignt Znch board is olaced over tne seven Zqch oDenzng (See attached
diagram )
I
A fence should also be eorsi,ruc ted beti~een the aoart nents and the
~ adjoiniZg residentlal property This fence would glve inore przvacy to the
residents and to the tenants of the apartmeits This Fence nead not go all
= the iaay to the streets 6Ie £eel thiis would obs uruct trie drivers view
Hozaever, this fence should go to the front ot" the di-lellzngs
,
~f
The fences adjoina.ng the eesldentZal property sqould be constructed
befofe any otier construction Thls v,ould g7ve t 1e reslcients Drlvacy diarlng
constructzon uaci lteem the chlldren from being injured We feel thzs ls
very lrioortant ide are aure the safe'.y of the chlldren are of the utmost
z nportance to all concerned
On t~►e aest sa.de of t ze motel, any Unnclows should be of the op3que
variety As tha s ls the hot siae of tha xnotel, tiZS glass would keep tE1e
rooms cooler as iTe11 as add to tt1e orivac,)r of the resiaents
~
l ,
,
gage 2
, Lighting is a very Zmnortant saart ior tnls co-aplex, nowev9r, it ca-n
be extremely agLra,rating to tne adjozna.ng propartv oimers The sigi for
tie motel, olaced at the north opening to the motel, should be -noved to
I tne south, east of the restaunant This would gut tne motel between the
slgn and all the property owclers to the west
'ge would also llke to recomiiiend this sign, at tne hignest pozn-L,
ba loiler than the motel As thls sight is (for all gefleral purposes)
out of 4-lew fro-in the freeway, an extre nely hiSh szgn is of no value to
freetJay users It is also our opinion that no signs ileed be of tne
rotatlnc variety
Lighting to tqe trest of tiils cormlex should ba 3s lotid as k,osslble,
as the haibht of these lights have no advatitage Hlgh lights in tle back
of this complex would orL1y lnterfere witq t~ze privacy af the resldents
The Adjoining Property 4tdners
17 ~ Y~A ✓~'a'L ~ ~,P ~~y sa~~ ~ ~~r ~2
r
~ 7l
~ { ~ ~/U~ \ ~ LLG~""~-~ ~t/' ~~a~~~l..v~ L.aT ~ ~
f'
5~R vi~F rv~ n- dk 4d Avo 7' e o~~.a ~'T 1-07 ~ 3
~1-r~vl r.v l~r ~20-~9
6ur ~y/rQfEp~~v~ f E•Ve-e-
~
~
°'l~
i , r ~ , 1 1 ► ~ jt
t
i It
i t
t" ~ ► ~ ~ ~ 1 _ _ - -1 - - 1
`
~
,
► ~
~ -
.
~
~
~ .
~
d
NOTICE OF kUBLIC HEARDTG
RE ZE-48-709 ZON:LNG PLAN FOR VEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD "
APPEAL OF GRFATM SPOKAPIE DEVEL4P'IM1T COMPANY, ET AL, OCTOBL"R 30, 1970
PLArTNING CONMISSIOV RECOMMIDITIONS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVIIV that the Board of County Commissioners of SAOkane
County, Wash.zngton wi11 hold a public hearing at 2 00 PeM , on Thursday,
Deceaber 3, 19709 ir the Assembly Room at the County Courthouse to consider
the appeal of Greater Spokane Development Company, et al, from that parti-
cular reconmendata.on of tre Spokane County Planning Commzssion dated
October 30, 19709 Vahsch denled the request for Freeway Corrnnercial zoning
and directed the staff to advertise for consideration a change s.n the
Comprehensive Plan to zndicate h1.gh-density residential uses Por propertles
fronting on Sullivan Poad betireen Broadway Avenue and Mi.ssion 4venuep more
varticv.larly de-crirert as fo] lo is
Sectlon 14, Totmship 25 N, Range 44, E W M
Lots 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Fark Addition
NOTICE IS F'URTHER G= trat any person interested may appear at sazd hear-,ng
and gresent testzmony either for or against the reconmendatzon of tre
Spokane County PlannlnT Conmssiori as outlined above
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD T.HIS 13 day of November, 1970
VERATON tiJ OBLAND
Clerk of the Board
BY~
Fsa *~e TjEtr~ro ~ Devuz,;
\
8
WILLARD J SHARPE ROBERT W TWIGG
SHARPE & TWIGG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE A 1 7 NORTMTOWN OFFICE BUILGING
4407 NORTH DIVISION STREET
SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99207
HUoSON 7 1651
AREA Cooe 509
November S, 1970
Board of County Commissioners
Spokane County
Spokane County Courthouse
Spokane, Washington 99201
Re Decision of Planning Commission 10/30/70
West side Sullivan Road, Broadway to Niission
Denying Freeway Commercial Zone
Broadway to Nlission Avenues
Gentlemen
Please be advised that my client, Greater Spokane Development
Company does hereby and herewith give notice of appeal to the
Board of County Cominissioners of Spokane County from a deci-
sion of the Spokane County Planning Commission on October 30,
1970, denying a request by the owner of said property and its
optionee, the Greater Spokane Development Company, to rezone
said property from agricultural and restricted residential
zoning to freeway commerclal zoning
Wou1d you kindly advise the undersigned of the date to be f ixed
for a hearing on this appeal? In that extensive testimony will
be offered at the hearing, I respectively suggest that at least
two hours' time be allocated for this hearing in order to give
all parties an adequate opportunity to present their materialo
Sincerely,
s J '
~
~ f
t
WILLARD J. SHARPE
Attorney for
WJS/bd GREATER SPOKANE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
cc Spokane County Planning Commission
Nir Robert M Schaeffer, Vancouver, Wn.
I
I'INAL DEVELOPNIENT AND TRAFFIC CONTRCIL PI.AN FOR ZONE CHANGE PROPOSAL, ZE-4$-70
This Development and Traffic Control P1.an, together with the below-listed
i conditions and requirements shall have the same force and effect as the require-
, ments oi Chapter 4o08A of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinancee
~
Conditions and Requirements
I ' 1) That the applicants dedicate rights-of-way as shown on the Developme,pt
, and Traffic Control P1.an hereone Such dedications include
i a) The East 100 of the subject property for the purpose of widening
Sullivan Roado
b) Tne South 101 of the subject property for the purpose of widening
Broadway Avenueo
c) A 201 radius on the southeast corner of the subject property to
allow construction of a 251 curb radius at the northwest corner
of Broadway Avenue and Sullivan Roado
d) A 20' radius on the northeast corner of the subject property to
allow construction of a 20' cuft radius at the southwest corner
,
of N,ission Avenue and Sullivan Roade
e) An easter].y portion of Lot 1, Block 49 Veradale Park Addition to
allow realignment of Cataldo Avenueo
2) That improvements to Sullivan Road, Broadway Avenue9 Mission Avenue,
and Cataldo Avenue as indicated hereon be made by the applicants,
such improvement6 shall include pavement widenz,ng to ex3,sting
pavement, curbing, and sidewalks.
3) That access and egress to the subject properties be limited generally
to those points shown on the final "Development and Traffic Control
Plan" hereon. Access permits precisely defining points of access
shall be obtai.ned from the Spokane County Engineer'a Officeo
4) That the applicants construct a cedar board-on-board fence approximately
six feet in height according to attached specification drawing (see
A ttachment A) along the west boundary of the Freeway Commercial zoned
area as shown hereon prior to any constructione A fence shall be constructed
to the same specificationa between the multiple family units in the northwest
corner of the project and the adjoining residential lote Such fences shall
be constructed on or near the property lines and shall come w3.thin 25 feet
of any County right of wayo
,
~1 s
5) That the applicants construct a duplex on the southwest corner of the
proJect prior to constructi4n of the motelt restaurant, or second servzce
station and in any case, the framing of the structure sha11 commence
within 18 months af this approva]..
6) That the applicants construct ezther a six unit apartment or six court
apartment units zn the northwest corner af the project south of Cataldv
Avenue prior to construction of the motel, restaurant, or second service
station, and in any case, the framing of the structures shall commence
within 18 months of this approval.
That the applicants construct a residence on Lot 16, Block 4, and
either a residence or a duplex c►n Zot 1, Block 4, Veradale Park Addition
prior to construction of the motel, restaurant, or second service station9
and in any case, framing of the structurea shall commsnce within 18
months of thi s approval,
8) That the applicants commence framZxag of the motel and restaurant within
three years of tha.s approval,
9) That plans and specifications for signs and all exterior lighting shall be
submitted by the applicant and apprpved by the Planning Cornmission and
Board of Caunty Commzssioners prior to znstallatx.on.
10) That a landscape plan identifys.ng location, number and species af planting
for the portions of the project not covered hereon shall be submitted by the
applicant and appraved by the Planna.ng Commissaon and Board of County Cornrtjiss-
r-
ioners prior ta issuance of building permits for the respective structures.
A bond adequate to install the landscaping may be required as a condition
of such building permits. An~ tac sprinkler system shall be instal.led
wa,thin the landscaped areas.
11) A seirerage disposa3 plan meeting the requirements of the Spokane County
Health District snall be submitted and approved prior ta the Yssuance
of any construction or occupancy permit.
12) Provzsiflns for fire pratection shall be made in accordance with recommendations
by the Spokana Valley Fire Yasshal.
Examined and approved this day of 1971.
Greater Spokane Development Company
By
~
-2-
~
.
Examined and approved this day of , 1971
Director of Planning
Spokane County Pla nning C ommi s si on
Exarruned and approved this day of , 1971
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
t
ATTEST
VERNON W OHLAND
Clerk of the Board
By
Deputy
-3-
~ -
MINUTES
Z O IV E CHANGE October 30, 1970
ZE-48-70 - ZONING PLAN FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD PLANNIIVG
COMIVIISSIOIV AT REQUEST OF GRE A.TER SPOKANE DEVELOPMENT
COMPArn (Postponed from September 25, 1970)
~ ~ st
LA L
~
Planninq Commission Recommendation To deny the request for F:eeway
Commercial zonYng and that the planninq Commassion direct tlne staff to advPr+-ise
for consideration a chanqe in the Comprehensive Plan to indicate hiqh-densxty
residential use s for propertie s frontinq on Sullivan Road between Broadway Avenue
and Mis sion Avenue ,
Backqround
The applicant requested that the Plannfng Commission advertise the
subject property for Freeway Commercial zonfng because proper petition
signature s could not be obtained to place the proposal on a regular
agenda The Planning Commission agreed to conduct a Zoning Plan Study
for the west side of Sullivan Road between Mission and Broadway Avenues
The subject property was advertised for the june 26, 1970 hearing to
consider the following zones or combfnations thereof 1) Restncted
Residential, 2) Local Business, 3) Commercial, 4) Residential Office,
S) Multiple Famfly Suburban, and 6) Freeway Commercial
The Commission at the june 26th hearing removed the following zones from
further consideration 1) Restricted Residential, 2) Local Business,
and 3) Commercial The Restricted Residential Zone was elimfnated
because the Commission was of the opinion that the ownership could not
be replatted into more appropriate single family lots and that the existing
lot arranqement was not conducive to single family development The
Commission eliminated the Local Business and Commercial Zones because
of conflict with the Comprehensive Plan lack or need and the apparent
lack of control with such zoning
Consideration of Residential Office, Multiple Family Suburban, and
Freeway Commercial classifications was continued to the September 25,
1970 hearing
At the September 25th hearfng, the Commission elimfnated t he Residential
Office zoning proposal from consideration because of the desirability of
approving a planned, integrated development for the entire ownexship
instead of allowing a series of offices on fndividual ownerships
After review of the Freeway Commercial proposal presented by ths
applicant and review of the desirability of Multiple Family and,/or off2ce
development of the subject property, a motion was made to advertise 3
- 1 - (contd )
I
ZE-48-70 - ZONING PLAIIT FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD (contd )
change in the Comprehensive Plan to designate the area as suitable for
high density residential development (Multi-family) This motion
received three "yes" votes and two "no" votes but failed to receive the
necessaYy majority of the total Commissfon Subsequently, a motion to
approve a zone change to Freeway Commercial failed (receiving two "yes"
votes and three "no" votes) Since there were two members absent, the
opinion was expressed that a definitive decision might be reached at the
next hearing A motion to continue carried unanimously
A Reasons
1 The Planning Commissfon is of the opinion that the Freeway
Commercial Zone is not appropriate for the advertised property
because
a) The site does not satisfy two of the three locational cri`eiia
established tor evaluating Freeway Commercial Zone chenge
applications (The locatfonal criteria is contained in the
text of the Freeway Commercial Zone, adopted in the text
portion of the Comprehensive Plan, and utilized by the
Commission for evaluation of Freeway Commercial zone
change applications )
b) A Freeway Commercial request to the north of the advertised
property and more immediate to the Freeway ves denied
earlier this year because the request did not conform to the
esta}alfshed locational criteria
c) The Commission does not vfew this request as an extension
of the Lamplighter Lodge development to the northeast
d) The Commission does not want to encourage strip commer-
cial development of Sullivan Road
Explanation of Reasons
The text portion of the Comprehensive Plan and the criterfa contained
fn the Freeway Commercial Zone relate to the following objectives
for determining the best locations for Freeway Commercial Zonzs
1. To provide the highest degree of usefulness and eonvenience to
the Freeway users (The Commission does not believe that the
advertised property is well situated compared to other quadra-its
of this or other interchanges within Spokane County to serve the
traveling public The property does not have good visibiliiy
from the Freeway. If the property were developed in accordarcE
with the applicant's proposal, extreme signing might be required
to the detriment of neighboring residential areas )
- 2 - (contd )
J
ZE-48-70 - ZONIIVG PLAN FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD (contd )
2 To create a minfmum of traffic congestion or hazards on the
limited acce s s highway, its acce s s and egre s s ramps, arLd
connecting County roads.(This proposal would apparently
create little problem with respect to the functioning of the
interchange or the connecting County roads )
3 To create a miniimum of adverse effect upon property developed
or planned for development for residential use (The Commis sion
is of the opinion that the development would, indeed, have an
adverse effect on neighboring re sidential propertie s The
advertised property fs part of a subdivision which is substan-
tially developed with single-family resfdences Although a
great deal could be done to minimize the impact on the adjacent
residential properties by control7.ed development and special
screening, the effects of traffic, noise, lighting, and night
activity commonly associated with service stations, restaurants,
and motels would (unavoidably) have a detrimental effzct on the
adjoining residential properties )
The Commission denied the Freeway Commercial request for a
service station site on the northwe st corner of Mf s sion Avenue and
Sullivan Road earlier this year because the request could not satisfy
the established locatfonal criteria The Commission is of the
opinion that the present proposal is in an even les s advantageous
location for development than the previous request
The Commission is of the opinion that this request may not be
regarded as a mere extension of the Lamplighter Lodge development
because the existing development in our opinion conforms to the
established locational criteria and is located in a different and more
advantageous quadrant of the interchange
Finally, the Commission is concerned about the ultimate development
of this and other vacant properties along Sullivan Road, especially
the vacant parcel immediately east of the advertised property The
Commfssion does not want to encourage strfp commercial develop-
ment of Sullivan Road. Instead, the Commission has recommended
a change in the Comprehensive Plan to indicate high density
residential uses (apartments) for propertfes fronting on Sullxvan Road
between Broadway Avenue and Mis sion Avenue
B Reasons
The Commission is of the opinion that the advertised property is
appropriate for high density residential development (apartments)
because
- 3 - (contd
)
ZE-48-70 - ZOIVING PLAN FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD (contd )
1. The location of the advertised property is in conformance wzth
the criteria repeatedly suggested by the Planning Commiss.Lon
as being appropriate for such development, namely
a) Its location on a major artertal (in this case Sullivan Road
with very good access to the Spokane Valley Freeway)
b) Its location on the edge, rather than the interior of a low
density residential neighborhood, and
c) Its reasonable proximity to a shoppfng district and other
community services (Veradale)
2. The Planning Commi s sf on i s of the opf nion that the adverti s ed
property can be utilized for high demsity residential develop-
ment because
a) A recent staff study indicates that there is a dramatically
increasing demand for apartment units in the Spokane Valley
b) The staff study also indicates that there is a critical
shortage of sfgniffcantly-sized vacant properties in the
Spokane Valley which are available for apartment develop-
ment
c) Several of the recent Multiple Family Suburban zoning
requests have been for properties located immediate to the
Spokane Valley Freeway Interchanges
3 The Commission is of the opinion that the entire advertised
property should be developed as an integrated project to reduce
access points to Sullivan Road and to allow flexlbilfty of desfgno
4. The Commission is of the opinion that apartment development on
the advertised property would be more compatible with the
adjoining residentiai districts than Freeway Commercial develop-
ment,
C e General Data
1. Location Sectfon 14, Township 25 N, Range 44, EW",M
Lots 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park
Addition
2 Zoning Plan Considered
at Request of Greater Spokane Development Company
c/o Willard j Sharpe
Northern Town Office Bu:tlding
Spokane, Washington
- 3-A - (contd )
ZE-48-70 - ZOIVING PLAN FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD (contd )
3 Site Si ze Approxi mately 5 acre s
4 Existing Zoning Agricultural and Restricted Residential
5 Proposed Zoning The Zoning Plan will consider Residential
Offf ce, Multiple Family Suburban, and
Freeway Commercial
6 Proposed Use of
Property Unknown
7 Application of Zoning
Provision Chapter 4 21, Section 4 21 030
-3-g-
~ H o c~Ar vvN.Mi tvv Tcyfv
DANIEL J EVANS 60VBRNOR
STAp~ O~
~
b1 1.~ I, .V.
cn
~o
y~ 1889
~~SunANGTd'"N
SYATE HgGHWAY COMM6SSQ0N
DEPARTMEN9T OF HIGHWAYS
OGFICE OP DISTRIGT ENGIIVEER
N 2714 MAYFAIR ST
BOX 5209 NORTN C6NTRAL 54ATION
SPOKArlE 99205
October 22, 1970
Air Charles Huggins, Director
Spokane County Plannzng Comroission
Spokane County Courthouse
ib'est 1116 Broadway Avenue
Spokane, Tdashington 99201
Spottane County Planning Commission
AQenda - October 1970
Dear Sir
This office has received and reviewed yosr October 30, 1970 Planning Com-
mi ssi on Aggenda, and crrould of f er the fol lowing comments relative to the
matters under consideration by your Commission
ZE-48-70 and Zt1-56-70
Our comments uere forwarded to your Commission by letter of September 13,
1970
ZE-92-70
This office would not oppose the proposed zone change but would not approve
tht- platting snd developmant in detati 1 untll presented with a comprchcnsxve
dcvL.lop►nenIL p1an ot thc nrc.a, showing accesy and egrebs po3nts along State
Itoute 27
Very truiy yours,
~
I:Lal~ER R YORNIIdG, P E
District Engineer
tIItH rlh
RRE
cc RREarnest
-4 i ll~~
I
~
~
PARKSIDE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
10777 Main Street
Bellevue, Washington 98004
October 6, 1970
Spokane County Planning Commission
Courthouse
1116 West Broadway
Spokane, Washington
Attention Mr Charles L Huggins
Director of Planning
Dear Mr Huggins
This letter is to indicate our desire to zone property in the vicinity
of the Lamplighter Motel Our property is a 23 acre tract which
adjoins the 1Kission Road to the West of the Lamplighter Motel site
We are convinced because of the industrial area to the North and the
general population growth coming Eastward that multi-family develop-
ments are of a necessity As we all know, over 507 of all housing
today is being built in some form of multi-family configuration
Since there is very limited zoning for high density residential or
multi-family in this area we feel it is necessary that our application
and others be looked at seriously We anticipate having a formal
application in to you during your regularly scheduled December meeting
Thank you very much for your time
Very truly yours,
PARKS I E., DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
i
Thomas D Archey ~
TDA jp
C E I %Y~E UP`
0CT 7 1970
SPOKANE COJN I Y
PLAIVNING COMIV~I,-~5I0iV
OCTJBER AGENDA -POKANE COUNTY COURT HOUSE
SPOK.kNE COUNTY PZANNING COMMISSIOIV TELEPHONE NO 456-2274
Time Friday, October 30, 1970, 9 00 A M
plaCe Assembly Room, County Court House
ZONE CHANGE
1e ZE-48-70, Zoning Plan for West Side of Sullivan Road
(Postponed from September 25, 1970)
ao Location Section 14, Township 25 N, Range 44, E W M
Lots l through 11, 81ock 1 of Veradale Park
Additionp
b Zoning Plan Consldered
at Request of Greater Spokane Development Company
c/0 Willard J Sharpe
North Town Office Building
Spokane, Washington
c Site Size Approxs.mately 5 acres
d Existing Zoning Agricultural and Restricted Residential
e Proposed Zoning The Zoning Plan will consider Residential Office
Multiple Family Suburban, and Freeway Commercia-
f Proposed Use of Property Unknown
g Application of Zoning Provision Ghwer 4a21 , Sectzon 4 21 030
.
~
M ~
ct ~
\k!
~
ti
1
►
J~ ~ ^ ~
f~
~ ,vil J \
~
I ' n
~
~ o f
N 1 ~ ,
\ ~ L q °
R p,~ a 1rL I`
~
~
.
%
1
7 ~VAy
P3RC- L\
MINUTES '
September 25, 1970
ZONE CHANGE
ZE-48-70 - ZONING PLAN FOR V/EST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD - PLANNING
COMMISSION AT REQUEST OF GREATER SPOKANE DEVELOPMENT COMPAN'Y
Planning Commission Recommendation Continue to 4ctober hearinq
A Reasons
1 A majorfty vote of the entire Commfssion (four votes) is required
to approve a zoning recommendation Only three votes were cast
for a move to advertise a change in the Comprehensive Plan to
provide for "high density" residential development along Sullivan
Road between Broadway and Mission Two votes were cast to
approve the Freeway Commercial application in accordance with
the plot plan (#3) reviewed at the September hearing
Both motions failed because of lack of a majority vote Conse-
quently, the Commission continued ZE-48-70 to the October
hearing
B General 'Data
1 Location Section 14, Township 25 N, Range 44, EV'JM
Lots 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park
Additfon
2 Zoning Plan considered
at Request of Greater Spokane Development Company
c/o Willard j Sharpe
North Town Office Building
Spokane, Washington
3 Site Size A,pproximately 5 acres
4 Existing Zoning Agricultural and Restricted Residential
5 Proposed Zoning The Zoning Plan will consfder Resfdential
Office, Multiple Family Suburban, and
Freeway Commercial
6 Proposed Use of
Property Unknown
7 Application of Zoning
Provision Chapter 4 21, Section 4 21 030
-4-
i ' r • ~ ~
. . ' . ' : , 1 w ' f ~-{~~,.I~ a'•' r ~ . ) , I 1a- ~ - ~ -
a i ^
~ J ~ ~ ~L ~ ' ~ . ` - i _ , ~ ~i"'"".t„ , ` ~ ~ ~ .l ~
. ~ ~ .
.
;
a ~n ~ A
~ , _ _ - ~ ` ,~r • qti,- ~ ' ~ 4 w y + -~a ~r
~ ~ f~*~ ` ` ~ ' . r + ,,~-r~ ~v ~~f • _ i ' ~ r
~ ! , ~ ~ j y i , jW } F i ~ ~d a r r ~ t. ~ i ~ • ~ + s
io ry: s~C➢ 1'. e Y T„{ ~
_ I'~ 'Ih I ►f' C`, a.I ~ .
.
' -
v
. ~ . . . ' ~
~ ~I ~1 t^ . - ,«~t _ I~ ~ ~'y' - i.~ .~1 _ ' .I+~l~~~! ) - . .AE' ,r.y~ _ ' '-'M.,~ ~a .
,F l I , ` -".Dr' ~ ~~Y . '-^y'~i= ,~l~+1' ~ti'• .y4~ ~7~1- .s~, /~r ~ 'L
r
r_~;, ~ y ` , ~ ,.~~Y~..._,.•.~. a.Y i~ p 1~3'_- ~i.l '..i•~ jq gi, # .i5t ~y'= „ . ~~f7 ~ ~^I``.~9~.8'1 ~ 1 , ,.y` ~
• - - - , ~,l~ - . ~ , ~ ~ ~ - 1 ~ .I ~
. ~ . . . , f ~ y~ ~ 4 • ~ ~ ~ I - _ ~ : ~ ~Rj+7~ ~ K'}'T - ~ ~'t '~.~i,~ , 1
o-~
. . •i : - ~ . • - ~ ti
_ , h' 1~ ~"a '4~~: M y j~T t~e~~I :x} ~ ~q 1 r~~ ~y~ ~ F,,~ ~V,~
.
E""~
~ r , ~ • ~ .
~
~ . . p
_ ~ 1 ~ _ ~ • ia~ _i ~ , ~ S y ~ ~ E -:l ~JF
~
, ,'p~ - , ~ . _ i ~ - - r+~ ~ ~ ~^r - "y~ - _ i
y~ " . . _ ~ ~P+-r" . ( = Yf , ~1~ "i. , n i ~ . . ~ . .
.IL' y
~ • ~ - -
i ~ ~ , . ~ „r . a ~ - ~ ~
,.I I t I
~ ~
~ ~i I ?.y'1 4 i . I • u~ I ~~~9N~ ~~''ll '_~~`~N. ~
i , ~?`+.s~ ~ _ : ~l f ! ~ . T , . !1.. ~ . ~•:~,rrt ~ '~.y. . r~': ~ ~,u~ ~ v i~ ~ ; ~ . .
Sl1ptembeT c~~t 1970
Mr. -j11stin ~ ~ckunbuspf,, .;h:i'A'.1`~'sn
:i~•ii'~ ~1it~iy'tx,.~ ~'.i..-.s1'~►l'#:►~~ t~i~h~~.;c.B~3.U~1
vj'K~ic`:~c v~ut~G;~ .iGwt•:r ::c.~t~5c ~~.~:~n~, , • ~.s~ha.n.~: ',r~►~.~9~.
~
~ This 1.fz4wr is Qc--.iw wr~ ~t-.n.ln 3-eg"n.a Z.o ttic rvp-,seu chasige
Vl 7s~Z~+4!l.~y W~ F.'fiwK~ .,+tC .i..~~ o~+ t'11:c (IrVS.~'P+Z- .~,~'~++ratY~'
De'+reWpmnt, u4s4wW•
.ZL =-i sq ut- Uet U~t -Wht propoac-vl ; I--ais of ;.tie • o.
wo{.~ .v a ,.~t "-t 9"t noi, ~;ra,y 3a1 ap-vk~ ~;Wmty but tO t,he
In~us,Lr~::~ 4zva 4in t,ise Spok.aw Valls, .
I. i& tdaf3 foe•i14> t!f 1S+3n;j '`7a'1t8 he3"t it~ luaJn&r1;}..~. :3&. `Gi._at
U.is woulu a* ufine lmprovement for tiais diea; fuUy zea1.iQ,itig
t::--Lt st, wju-ci +devtlop ~oak .:a~►j~~ :~~i+~n f~r th.--: exIstiz~ ~uvirtie.eiscs.
,,a we tiLU kno-wv aonr.r,i t: ti-:)n .is a ae: at~~W isi Lcat-JAon :.rx ;-vmy i~.xsinces
dvtrelupr:*nL~ and uawtlly nis tx:er. a beiiei': t to a7:l rar-ti*5 corrcerrwd.
I feei ttat these pLA.raa ot` Um gxeat,er ir~~~lolmunt ~;o, ii,ve #acen
inW couaaI'ci~rats.4n t~ s~r+~a~i~ rw.~~i~a~~~vcE ~d it c~r~,~:.`~
wi_I not; 'ta oet.x'immt Lo tr:c r*aidey,t..al ax''ed.
j f'eel yu:Ar c:~~tsidcrativn for ~om cmange waula .ae in tc-A: beat
interesG of a1l ptxta.+as, cviioeriwd.
~
very tru~,,,~~ yQura,
' J;3li,/aYp
aiAr lm:
. .r. Frar&k Keefi
~
r
<
t
Opportttn9.t~ ~ Fiaahington,,
September 239 1970
,
Spoka~~ Caun~j Plana~~~ Ccmiaa 30n,
Ct~~tv, ovurt NOulse ~
~~~kone 0 wqt~hljlgtan e r
t ' lit le my =fl4~~tanc~~~ ~t a riquest is bwttiS ms~ ~dr
a zcAi chan.~e of thQ prt~~~~y lo~~~d on asu~livs~ jt;st
s4~~4 0.9 ~rGoewa-y ac~~~~ ~~~m tbD £,~L1&**r
~
t I ~va been a resideat ~ p~perty oi~~~ tile
Sint$ 1952 aild~ bave e~on tha ~reat deve19pem0nt o~ '~loy
dut,ing thts por$ Qd. Wm no6d mare deve2 opmDioat, o ~avis ~y
~d~o.~s In ocdor to i~acreass as~r t~ sta~ao~~a a~ t6° ~40p't~~
,mme bu~ino~~ whi~h wi3.1 br~ng mc~~~ emplc~~ent'~x~dVovojope
M6r16 PaY46yC'Oj IS o
~ strong1~ ~~e that 9~hi~ ~ change b~ ~~~ted sLe It
3.s my oinaers be3.xef that davs&opament af a Motel suc~ ~~~~tuo
soot *~plex et thie Zor~~~ion vAl3 a+dd graatly to.the -prospersty
of tho salleye I boli~~e that tbore I~ ~ple naed for ~
94ditien~~ ~~~al ia this arem4 I bollee~ ~~~~Y ~i~
~t~rr$~ot~.~ o~' t~ free~►a~r ehou~Ld bo fa1ly ut#~.izi~. ,fer
business purposeso 't
r
There Ie ample land for reeidant3►~~~zag• io+~~~~~ ~~~er
awal aP~~~ ~h fro away and commercaial usago oPthe lau(i I~ ilua~~t-6
Ion wi].l I$ no way intarfer0 with sidvstial deva1~~~m~~t In
I ~
~
~~.e Iao ~illi am,
aa 12005 12 tYt Avs a ►
Wash,~ 692d6
t
r
,
~
~
,
w
4--~. 4 ~
t~okane CountY ~ - 6.01
S
HEALTH is a state of compfete physrcar mentaJ and social well being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmlty
s
DIStrICt
September 18, 1970
Boyington and Read AIA
Arch itec ts
Great Western Bui]ding
Spokane, Washington 99201
Attentions Mr Read RE: Suilivan Poad Praperty
Dear S ir
In our tonversation of September 15, 1970, you requested the
Spokane County Health District write a letter tlarifying our
requirements for pr 1iminary approvat of the plans for the
Sul livan Road prope~y owned by Mr James E Boatwr ight,
Greater Spokane Oevelopment Company.
This department realizes that detailed engineering plans of the
proposed sewage treatment faciiity can not be drawn up until
the overall devetopment plans reach a finalized stage We do
require that a11 preliminary plans make provisions far a sewage
treatment plant and an adequate disposal area
At such time as the engineer comptetes his detailed pians, this
department requires that copies of these pians be submitted and
reviewed for finai approval as stated in a letter to you on
September 10, 1970
SinceretY,
-1
^
t tj , i
~ ~
E 0 Ploeger,v 0., M P H.
Health Officer
Spokane County Health Oistrict
•
v /~!°!♦~a el)
✓
Edward M Pickett, R S., M P.H.
Co-Oirector of Environmental Health
Spokane County Nealth Oistrict #fl
EOP EMP • CWS/bbw
RECEIVED
S EP 22 1970
E 0 PLOEGER, M D, M P H, D►rector
rluirt, 1U.0t1h.....2.~, 49+-.r41 4n'k1nr WmtijiO6t►if/ri 492bl 01~onr t0b~YA 9 3~W
1
Febrwury l't , 70
Title CcmtPan,,Y
Planuing Commiesian
?:one Chaauge Application
?loase furnish a Ust of the ovners and taxp$yere of p~c~pert~t withfn 400 feet of t3w
following des+aribed propertyt
Lote Ithrough 9t Modt 1 0f Verada1.q Park Adli#►ion in Sectfon '14, Townebip 23 1t.,
Rmp 44* E.W.M.
FtAnk geed
Agricul.tgral aad Restricted Ree-i.deatis~. to Preev" Coomnerol.al
z
,
~ a 1
~
~
Opportunitg, viashington.
Septpmber 23, 1970
6pokane C ounty Planrif Mg C onin.i s s i on,
C ountg C ourt House,
apokane, nvashingt aa^i.
~entlomen:
I t i s my tu3der standing tha t a r s quest i s b eing made f or
a zane change of tho property located m aullivsn nosiLd, 3uat
south of the ireewa9 acroas from tYia LampLig4t6r Dldtcl,
Ihave been a resident anci proPorty owner in the Valley
sinee 1951 and bave seen the great developament of the vallEy
during this period& we need more developement of induatr-y and
bus inees in order to increabe aur tax structure and to encour-
age more buafness whi ch will bring morQ employment and develope
mor e pay-r ol 1s.
I strorigl9 urge that this Zone change be granted as it
ia my sincere belief that developememt of aMotel and nestau-
rant ccanple$ at this lacatiorl will add greatly to tho prosperity
of the valley. I belieee thoLt tbare is ample need Por an
additional Motel in this srea. F believe that alrery ma3 or
intersection of the freeway should be fully utiliZed for
bu9iness purposes.
There is ample land for residentl-ar usage loaatred fartber
away froffi th freaway and commnercial usage ofthe lend in queat-
ion will in no Mag intarfere with rasidential developemeant in
tha valleg.
6incerily,
~
~
. 12005 12 th A ve.,
Op por tuni tg, nwgLsh, 99206
E 15321 Mi ssion
Spokane, Washington
September 17, 1973
Mr. Justin I,. Quackenbush, Chairnaan
S pokane C ounty Pla,nning C omms, s si on
Spokane C ounty C ourthou se
Spokan.e, Washington
AND
PLAIITNIN G C OMMI S SI ON MEMBERS a
Gentl emena
This letter is to inform you of our latest decis3.on re-
garding the proposed zone cha,nge at Sullivan Road concern-
ing the plan of Greater Spqkane Development Company.
After reviewing their revi sed plans, we f eel that they have
treated us fairly sn taking into consideration our home,
which was up for sale. Because of their concern for us, we
wlll not oppo se the zone oha.nge they are seeking.
Sinc erely,
ca Mr. Charles Huggins
Direcj;or of Planning
S pokatne C oun.ty
RECEIVED
SEP 2 2 1970
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
RECEIVED
S EP 2t f'. 1970
SPOKANE COUNiY
PLANNING r4MM15S{ON
SDpWmbea~ 23,9 1970
w~'.i._~.~,:a.~'1 1.• ...d:~C~~t:~~~tib~~ vjfss3.'m33:
9pokam Coun1~~ pj4wurtg c;vmiesiun
3palc";a~b "vixntg :vuri, s:Ouse
3poltane-, ► : "jLin6to, 99:~:'()1
jear ;'-r. .oaackelibush~
Thi3 letter Is i*.i.r,g wrjtUn i'a regaz,#As t4a the ~..'repu"ci or4
of Zo~& c~r' 3,,:~van .;o~.d ~wr~d :,i lL ~1ie t~r+~a~ r ~pt3k ~e
,te~+e.lop~nc ~t~~.
Lht Prca'rvbaci rlwsB Of ;~hb
waul-~ ~ ~ ~~e'A ;,$net not OnV irx 3pokanc Gounty hut to #.hv
3r~ttua~ri~ a~a t~e~r I :n t,he 5pv1c ; V
it fwejLU6' of mkuy t.eroaan►" hers in Sndustrial. Park tiiet
th'~ wou'Q !fim iM=v1eymr1t f'car #.hie area; fu:.i,g realip
!ir~~
that it wouiA duveivp eame cOWititian fvr the existing busille.9 ses.
Ao we all ~kmow , ccmuit't'an ia a 1ealthY Gituation lin rru,y +~~jL.ai,~~~
developuent arW wsu&l.ly h,,w been a beriefit ta &U p4rtie;~ c4rjce~+~.
•
11 feel that t~~~e PL%ns 04' ttls Greater Devejor=nt CO, i1 v►e takgn
3.nt0 consid.eration ti-ic aurrO~d~ n9:~,9hl0rh00cA ana it cer1t.&iji4
W111 not :e a d+etrimnt tQ the residecnt~.al area,,
I f~l Your eonsideration for zme change woulci i.a in tr,(. kmat
interest af all part.igs concerrted.
1~ery, ti"lly yours,
. ~
~ t rrv/ iJ. F~.etc.~~
JAY,/alp f.
cc: Or. Gharle i H~gins
William J . ir~oax'pe
~ :x' ~ Frwik Road
SlAit tyr rwAarriiltvsVir
pANIBL J LVANB aoverrHOe
9TA
u'rn
~
t889 ~~y
WASHINGTON
STATE HIGHWAY COMIVIISSION 'A
DEPARTMENT OF HiGH1NAYS
ORRICB OP DISTRICT BNGlNE6R S 1Jt
N 2714 MAYPAIR 8T
80X SaYD NORTM CRMTRAL BTATION
~.'U' 14 1 Y
BPOKANE 99205 S PU AN+~~ r
Pi.ANNING C:ONi1VIiSSION
September ls, 1970
Mr Charles Hugga.ns, Director
Spokane County Planrung Commission
Spokane Countp Courthouse
West 1116 Broadwa,y Aveme
SpokarLe, Washz.ngton 99201
Spokane County Planning Commisszon
Agenda - September, 1970
Dear Sir-
Thi s office is in recea.pt of your September 25, 1970 Planning Comrrission
Agenda, and would off er the folloua.ag comments relative to the proposed
zom.ng changes and subdivisions
W-19-?0
Trde would desire that the terms set forth Zn our letter of Apml 23, 1970
to Mr Huggina be complied with prior to approval of the proposed zone
change.
Z.v-4B-?o
6/` ke feel that due to the exi.sting development in tho aroa, tho proposod
zoning woul.d be proper
:tv- !,t,- ,(cl
Tnasmuch as all access to the area under considei ation f'or rezaning woulcl
not have direct access to State Route 2, we would not oppose the proposed
rezomng (Letter June 16, 1970)
ZW-?2-70
Provided that a control to the width and number of access anci egress points
to State Raute 904 be guaranteed, this office would not oppose the zone
change
YI~-82-70
Provided that access to tho 5tate Hightaay ramp bo totally restrfeteci, aa
shown on the propoaed development plan.
~
r
Spokane county
~`ALTH is a state ot complete physical mental and social well being and not merely the ebsence of disease or infirmity
~iStriV fr
September 10, 1970
Boyington and Read AIA
Architects
Great Western Building
Spokane, Washingtan 99201
Dear Sirs
The Spokane County Health District has reviewed the preliminary
site development and traffic control plan, Sullivan Road property
owner by James E Boatwright, Greater Spokane Development Companq
The District has the following comments
We approve of the treatment plant concept, however, we need infor-
mation on sewage flow, plant sizing, and drainfield sizing and
location before approval of this site plan can be issued as we feel
insufficient land has been reserved for these facilities
As you progress with development of this proposal we will require
engineering plans with details of pipe sizing, location, manholes,
plant specifications, maintenance and operation procedures, elevations,
profiles, and all other pertinent data
Sincerely,
E 0 Ploeger, M D, M P.H.
Heal th Of f icer
Spokane County Health District
R E C
Edward M Pickett, R S, M P H SEP 1'L 1970
Co-Director of Environmental Health
Spokane County Health District SPOKANE COUNTY
EOP EMP/bbw PLANNING (:OMMISSION
cc Bob Turner, County Engineer
Charles Huggins, County Planning Dlrector
E 0 PLOEGER, M D, M P H, Director
North 819 Jefferson Straot Spukana Washington 99201 Phono (509) FA 6 3330
Spokane County
is a state of compieie physlcal mentai and social weit being and not merely the absence ot disease or intirmity
1
'[d), o strict
September 10, 1970
Boyington and Read
AIA Architects
408 Great Western Building
Spokane, Washington 99201
Dear Sirs
The Spokane County Health District has reviewed the site plan
and traffic control study for the south Barker Road property,
owned by James E Boatwright, Greater Spokane Development Company
The District has the following comments
This type of development will require a mechanical
treatment plant for sewage With this in mind we
will require figures on total amount of sewage and
of drainfields With this information we could
issue approval of your project from a conceptual
standpoint
In addition to these items we will require engineering plans
detailxng, a sewer lines, locations, sizing, elevations,
profiles, b treatment plant details complete with maintenance
procedures c) drainfield layouts complete with replacement
areas d) and anyother such data pertinent to these facility
Sincerely,
E 0 Ploeger, M D, M P,H
Health Officer
Spokane County Health D istrict
Edward M Pickett R S M P H E C E I E D
Co-Director of Environmental Health
Spokane County Health District SEP 14 1970
EOP EMP/bbw SPOKANE COUNTY
cc Bob Turner, County Engineer PLANNING COMMiSSfON
Charles Huggins, County Planning Director
E 0 PLOEGER M D M P H, Director
North 819 Jotfarson Streot Spokane Washington 99201 Phone (509) FA 6-3330
SEPTEl~BER AGENDA SPOKANE COUNTY COIIRT HOUSE
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION FA 8-1551, Exto 220 - 221
Tirne Friday, September 25, 1970, 9 00 A M o
Place Assembly Room, County Court House
ZONE CBANGE
2. ZE-48-70, Zoning Plan for West Side of Sullivan Road
ao Location Section 149 Township 25 No, Range 44, E W M
Lots 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park
Additiono
be Zoning Plan considered
at Request of Greater Spokane Development Companq
c/o Willard J. Sharpe
North Town Office Building
Spokane, Washington
co Site Size Approximately 5 acres
da Exzsting Zoning Agricultural and Restricted ResidentZal
eo Proposed Zoning The Zoning Plan will consider Residential Office,
Multiple Family Suburban, and Freeway Comrnercialo
fo Proposed Use of Property Unknown
go Application of Zoning Provision Chapter 4e21, Section 4.21.030
~
~
DU►c~~~6r ~56 i5b ieo j~2 ~
~ lv No IZTHE KN`~
(S C q p
-SPur)
• - _ ~
`SPOKRAle ~ - _ .~c p
~ ~ .
qc t F y ~
Ft 4~r c~ ~
\
~S rRT~
~9v<`~ ' 50 -
Q Q o r' J
WOR7H Q
r
~Gr'II.E =10 fi a p r~ ~ ~ v ~
,u K O AD+,v A y
~ 13
P~u y r e; 5 t..''~ I C r7 ~
,.Cho01 ~
v
Ck ~ tn
Q ~ 0
~ v
2
MINUZ`ES
June 26, 19 70
ZONE C HANGE
ZE-48-74 - ZOIVING PY,.AN FOR WEST SYDE OF SULLIVAAT ROAD SHARPE
Planning Commis sion Recommendation Continue to September, 1970
hearing (90 days).
The Commissfon removed the followinq zones from consideration in the
study 1) Restricted Residential, 2) Local Business, and 3) Commercial. The
following zones or combinations of such zones were retained for oonsideration in
the study 1) Residential Office, 2) Multiple Family Suburban, and 3} Freeway
Commercial.
A. General Data
1. Location Section 14, Township 25 N. , Range 44,EVVM
Lot s 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park
r.ddition.
2. Zoni.ng Plan considerEd
at the request of Greater upokane Development Company
c/o Willard J. Sharpe
North Town Office Building
Spokane, vVashington
3. Site Si ze Approximately 5 acre s
4. Existing Zoning Agricultural and Re stricted Re sidential
5. Proposed Zoning The Zoninq Plan will consider Restricted
Re sidential, Re sidential Offi.ce, Local
Bustnoss, iVlultipla Family Suburban,
Commercial, and Freeway Commercial
6 Proposed Use of
Property Unknovrn
7. Application of Zoning
Provision Chapter 4.21, Section 4 21 030
-4 -
~
~
~
~
.
00,
y . ~•r r
C~
zo~
~ 6,~~ ~
~
. r Pz-
✓ ~ ~
15
Z ~
/ r
~ c~ f-3 ~.l
~
OAAA~
~ lo,
ly
G E~
i ~ r >
I! a 3 i~'C~SS~e.}f
~a 1 c3~ 1
~
~
AY
~
s ~'~9r~s ~,~Qs Cfd2,l oa
~
~ f,/,~,,~r!'~/~l~ ~ ~?d' y !
~i~~
j
June 24, 1970
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Spokane County Courthouse
Spokane, Washington
In re. ZE-48-70
Zoning Plan for the West Side
of Sullivan Road
Gentlemen
n~-
Members of the SPOKANE VALLEY BOARD QF REALTORS, Con Bentley, t,
would like to put their endorsement of approval on the proposed re-
zoning of the West Side of Sullivan Road for a motel complex.
,
Our interest in the zoning of this property is to have the facils.ts.es
available on the off-ramps of the freeway to encouraqe people to stop
in our valley and stay in our valley.
We would suggest that thoughtful consideration be given to the homes
in the area to protect them with beautification of the property adjacent
to them, as per your usual requirements.
1
~ -i
. ~ .
r '
~
~
/
~
1
J
~
~
i a
r
~L }
~
~
(
~
t 1 "
. r!
Sub~l~tedt
Resp'~ctf ~11~
t
` ' 9
Ca'n
-
r ~
April 20, 1 9?0 - - ;
l
~p,okane County Plsnnfag Gomm.s.siail
Cot,aty CmutL HQuse
Sprokane, VJashiragton 99201
~entlemen
vVe,, the under~~gned p-wners, req€test t-he Spokans ~our-ity Pianrdnc~ ~~mmis~ion
(to considex a zoning p~~~) or (to ~.an9idor changlng the zomng map), from
Agricultural aad Restricted Residential to Freeway Commercial
_ ~ . r- • ~ . _ -
t1e fQUOYJiAg dQScXlbed Propany
Lots 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition in Section 14, Townshlp 25 N.,
8ange 44, E.W.M. , : ~ . _ .
. NAMME ~ ~DRESS 1EGAL~.DESCRIPVON_QrFRUKRTY._,=u_
~ ~.v o 0- / 7 x,
. 0``.' -
-Lss -
a,.~C'' v' • ~ -r , . . - ~ . ' . ys._' . _ . .
1
~ - -
-t- 0-,r
~ ~ .
~
~ _ . ~
~'V
.
► _ . - ~ -
,
~~(j ~Y
~Y 4_
Y'~ I
~ I / e~/
12
l
~ /Y
~ J
J~
~
t ~
c
, ~I
~ •
~
~
r
~
~ _ - ~ ~ ~ _ _ r _ ~ ~ i ~ a , ~
Pv
r
i
I]
Q Q ~ ~^09~ ` '
t ' - _ ' ~ J ~l a ~ ~ ~ - G 1 J O
• Y ~ _ - r~ ~ / ~ < 1- . , ' 7 z~.~ _
• ~ Y r a! R~O ~t~.r,_ _ _ T n
1
J
~
~ i
~i I!
d
R~
i
7
~ _ ti G ~~.~s~.-f.-.4a.•.a .~a~ ^'y c~... vc~ ~ ~ ' LiizrCS_ ssta ~ 1.- ; - v~ ' _ _ c :i. T .r c- _ ' ~ u~o ~s_ ~ f
~
1 7
il
u GI
q ~
P
-e.c=-~, __a.~.~ - _-rt ~ - sr-- ~.4 as--- o.i... .,.s v,. ~ _ ~.__~s.~ - - - <
I ~
~
i
t
~
~i
~
~
i ~
r
G 1
- . ' _ u-t~.-.__--~-z rr• . ' ' _'_Y,_aw . i s-+--aa =ct-~~. ~ r ~.r~~ ~ ~
C
~
~
_
~
- s-z ~ ~ d ~ . ,
3.~.~
~
J
j ~
I
l
~I
~ ~~d
1
4ti ~
♦
WILLARD J SHARPE ROBERT W TWIGG
SHARPE & TWIGG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 81 7 NORTHTOWN OFFICE BUILOING
4407 NORTH DIVISION STREET
SPOKANE WASiiINGTON 99207
HUosoN 7 1651
AREA CooE 509
June 24, 1970
S pokane County Planning Commis s ion
Spokane County Courthouse
West 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington
Re Zoning Sullivan - Mission -
Broadway
Gentlemen
The undersigned represents Greater Spokane Development
Company, the Optionee of the land which is the subject
matter of the zoning hearing set for Friday morning,
June 26 It had been the original intent of my client
to file a formal petition with the required signatures
to secure reclassification of the land to a Freeway
Commercial Zone, however, due to circumstances beyond
the client's control it was unable to secure the signa-
tures required by the ordinance and for this reason no
formal petition was filed prior to the hearing of the
matter by the Commission on its own motion
The notice of hearing indicates the Commission will
consider reclassification of the land to any one of
several possible zone classifications and it is the
purpose of this letter to encourage the Commission to
rezone the property to a Freeway Commercial Zone
classification
Greater Spokane Development Company has surveyed the
Freeway interchanges throughout the East Valley
Freeway and has undertaken to design uses and improve-
ments for the land compatible with existing land uses
both East and West of the property which will serve the
a
~
.
SHARPE & TWIGG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Page Two
June 24, 1970
needs of both the freeway user, the industrial community
to the North and the local residents of the area A
perusal of the East Valley Freeway will indicate a
dearth of service facilities proximate to the freeway at
any one of its interchanges except for the recent
development of the Lamplighter facility on Sullivan
Road Contrasting the East Valley Freeway with similar
freeway approaches to Seattle, Tacoma and other major
metropolitan areas in the Northwest clearly indicates
the lack of modern travel facilities adjacent to the
East Valley Freeway This particular location is unique
and, therefore, highly useful to the industrial community
to the North, consisting of Kaiser and the Spokane
Industrial Park, as well as the local residents and
general freeway user From information obtained from a
reliable source the occupancy rate and patronage of the
Lamplighter have far exceeded the projections of the
owners The Commission by its salutary action in
providing needed zoning for the Lamplighter has now
established the character of the area on the South
approach to the freeway and it is clear the economics
will support Greater Spokane Development Company's
intended uses
This project as designed by architect, Don Reed, places
considerable emphasis on design compatibility with the
residences to the West and the commercial improvements
to the East A ranch style motif is planned with
generous screening and fencing and a motel unit
separating the residence area to the West from the more
intensive commercial uses incorporated in the plan At
the present time there is no improvement and, therefore,
no effective screening between the Lamplighter, the
Standard Oil Station and the residences to the West
~
SHARPE & TWIGG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
Page Three
June 24, 1970
Traffic, traffic identification signs and commercial
signs are visible to the residences The option of the
Greater Spokane Development Plan would itself buffer the
residences and largely be site obscuring insofar as
lighting and traffic are concerned
Should the Commission see fit to approve the zoning, my
client will construct in accordance with its plans and
any deviation therefrom will be sub3ect to the Planning
Commission approval Also the client will agree that in
the event a building pernait is not issued to it within
three years from the date of zoning that the land may
revert to its former classification or such classification
as may be directed by the Commission This commitment
is being made as an expression of good faith to the
end that the property is properly used in conformance
with the Freeway Commercial Zone classification and that
the plan itself as developed will provide maximum
protection to residences to the West and provide the
facilities of the quality and type promised by the
developers
Respectfully submitted,
(C.>
WILLARD J. SHARPE
WJS ds
4
y.. .i.~' .i= l~iCCl' UF p l.~) Cv:~~;~.L~l'_ .lJ.. t._.T'_.-''E:-.,.J ~C:~~_ ~._.w L•r t_.
a
1 throug,11-i 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition in Section 14, Township .-5 Ir'.,
:.ange 44, E.W.M. The property is preser.tlar zor.ed Agricultural and Restricted Resicze..tiz.1..
11
he zor.ing plan will consider Restricted Residential, Residential Office, Local Business,
::u1 tirle :~uburbnr., r7om.nerci-al. nnd ^ree~.,,a~- Commnrcia7 .
l. - - - ~ . .A p t_... , . .1... _..1"'.'J.~~...:~i , . . . ' /
AFF IDAV I T OF POST I NG
STATE OF 'lASH I NICT0N' ) SS.
)
COU NTY OF S POKA ~~E )
. einP first duly sworn9 deposes and says:
hat at all times montioned hcrain he was9 and now is9 a citizen of The United
StatES9 a residc:nt of Spokane Countyy, '.i'ashington9 and over the age of twenty-one
years.
That on ~ !3 j 19 7c
y he personally posted three (3) true
and cor t cop i es of the hereto attached f~OT ( CE OF PU3L I C HEAFi I ~~1G at the
following places in Spokane CiuntY9 to-wit:
~
`
3. °r
~
f
Subscribed and sworn tu me
Ir 19 4-
~ : r . ►
~r- w-• I ~ ~r r. ' ,
E .,r .s • NOTARY PUBL I C I N AND F0ri SPOKANE CO&ITY9 1;1ASH I:.,,GTJH
Residing at Spokane9 '!Jashington
. ~
r.
L,~cennV.~er .9, 1 ~75
. • .Jil r.~--~+ i.a~ 4.~J'V'1.ii... ~J V:A'rlL~' LJLiir..l1:'~ -'~J..G~ s/V~....:~.6.
FRCM s John D. KOnen, Zontng Adaitsiisttator
SUBjECT: Envtrontnental Review of B-Uhit Apartrnent Pcopoeal--
."f.s_4$-70
a!s
Tn 137%, the Spci:.ane County Planning Gomaiission cevtewed a proposat for
zr Freeway CoinmercLal developmetrt alorsq the wast side of 8ulitvan Road between
Btoadvuay atd Mia8lon Avsnues, As a reeult af nsQotiatione to minimize the
impact of the project oa edioining tesidentiai propertie8, a buffer af multiple
ftmi1y developrneht wonx conternplated in the rAwthwast and aouthwest ipocnets
of the proiad. The cuttsnt 8--wnit epaitment propoeal along & oadwesy Avenue
confornna to th• saslter scuilnq aotion aad will help mlttgrate thr impact of a
futute Fteeway Corntnetclai pr+aJect on adioining re8tdential propertlem.
T am of the opinion th,at an envirostmentral lmAact statement is not rsquired
cor thls particular portion of tha projeat bsmusa of the small sise of the project,
its relaUan$hip to the urban environrnsnt with r+sspect to accesa, ut11lties,
loaatian, etc., mnd its fitture need of buffering the potsnt~.tal Freeway Commemial
site.
:_GE DA, JUNE 26, 1970 StOKAP1E COUNTY COURT HOU~
SPOI!.ANEL, COUNTY PLAr1r3ING COIKMISSION FA 8-1551, Ext o 2_120
i ir"' c : Friday, June 26, 1970, j: 00 AoM ~
Plac;~ : t:ssembly Room, County Court House
ZOI',1E
CFi~NGE
4, Z~-43-70, 'LoninF Plan for west side of Sullivan Poad
ao Location: Section 14, Township 25 Ne, Range 44, E.W.M.
Lots 1 through 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park
Additione
be Zoning Pla-n Considerod
a.t the Request of: Greater Spokane Development Company
Willard J. Snarpe
North Town Office Building
Spokane, Irlashington
ca Site Size: Approximately 5acres
de ~,xisting Zoning: Agricultural and Restricted Resider_tial
eo Proposed Zoning: The Zoning Plan will consider Restricted
Pcsidential, Residential Office, Loca1 Business,
hlultiple Family Suburban, Comrnercial, and
Freeway Commcrci?.lo .
f. Proposed Use of Property: Unknowr,
go r'lrplication of Zoning Provision: C1_iapter 402~1 , Sectioil 4021 0030
t.. S-r4 T-r-- k w- N o 2
~
~
c ~s
~v 'v ' 1
I U ~
V, ^ J
r Q
~ >
Q
\
.
, ~ ..Q
4' t32oQnw,p~ ~ .
v
~
F
0
~ SPRiNCn FI GL 0
+
April 209 1970
To: Title Company
From t Coun.ty Flsani.ag Commiesion
Subject s Zone Change application
Plsase ltiirniah a list of the ownere and taxpayera of record of property tirithin 400
fsst of t,h,e ialloving deecribed propertyt
Lota 1 tbrough 11, Bs.ock 1, Veradale Parls Additiong in Seation 149 Tovnahip 25 N.,
aauge 441 a.u1.K.
(P'leaem inaluds all applicable nvmbore of mortpgaeg alea loan numbere, ao that
psoper n,otification my be sent)
willard Sharpe
7.E-48-?0
Agricultural and xestricted 8esideatfel to Freetira,3l Commercial
40 ~
~
APPLICATION FOR SPOKANE COUNTY PLAN14I14G C4MMISSION
Z ON I N G H E A R I N G Court Hou se j Spakane, Vva shington
_ yY- 76
Date AAPlication No. ~ ~ ~ A-70
4
iVame of Applicant Street Addre s s__Lr~ c~ C ity State ~
/
Telephone No
Existing Zoning Classification ~ 64 Date Existatng Zone Classification Established
zotii P2-'
Froposed Zone Class ficonLS ~-1~w!_v/
~
~
Legal Description of Property C~ .
)11A~
~
~
Site Size
Section Township Range
Street Address of Property
Who Holds Tftle to the Property If you do not hold title to the property affected by this application, what is your interest
in it ?
Furnish a letter from a Title Insurance Cosnpany, showinq the property owners of record,
their address, within 4:00 feet of the exterior boundaries of subject property
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIOIVS t1l['UST BE AN5WERED
1. VVhat are the changed conditions which are alleged to warrant other or additional
zoning
*
s~
~
2. What facts justify the proposed zone reclassification based on the advancement
of the public health, safety, and general welfare %
,
~
~
3. 'Vvhat effect will the proposed zone reclassification have on the value and
character of ad j acent property 7
4 Can a reasonable return from or reasonable use of the property in question be
secured under the existing zone classification ~
~
J '
A plot plan or sketch must be attached containing the following information
(a) Scale of the drawing.
(b) North point.
(c) AlI dimensions of property, existfng buildings, and proposed buildings
(d) Locatfon of all existing and proposed buildings, or additions, with
dimensf ons to the nearest property line.
(e) Off-street parking area
(f) Defined points of access and egress
(g) Date of the drawing
THE NECESSARY FEE NUST ACCOMPANY THIS APPLICATION.
The recommendation of the Planning Commission in this matter will be presented to the
Board of County Commissioners for final action Any person desirfng to contest the
recommendation of the Planning Commission must request, in writing, a hearing before
the Board of County Commi.ssioners no later than ten (10) days following the date of the
public hearing held by the Planning Commission
(Signed)
l
~
i
APPLICATI4N FOR SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING C4MMISSION
Z O 1V I N G H E A R I N G Court House, Spokane, Vvashington
Date Application No.
Name of Applicant
Street Addre s s , C ity State
Telephone No
Existing Zoning Classification Date Existi.ng Zone Classification Established Proposed Zone Classification Proposed Use of Property Legal Description of Property Site Size Section Township Range
Street Addre s s of Property Who Holds Title to the Property If you do not hold tftle to the property affected by this application, what is your interest
in it ? Furnish a letter from a Title Insurance Company, showing the property owners of record,
their address, within 1100 feet of the exterior baundaries of subject property
ALL OF THE FOLLOVIIING QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED
1. Vuhat are the changed conditians which are alleged to warrant other or addi#ional
zoning ~
I ~
~
2 What facts iustify the proposed zone reclassification based on the advancement
of the public health, safety, and general welfare %
3 `vYhat effect will the proposed zone reclassification have on the value and
character of adjacent property %
4 Can a reasonable return from or reasonable use of the property in question be
secured under the existing zone classffication'
A plot plan or sketch must be attached containing the following information
(a) Scale of the drawing.
(b) North point.
(c) All dimensions of property, existing buildings, and proposed buildings
(d) Location of all existing and proposed buildings, or additions, with
dimensions to the nearest property line.
(e) Off-street parking area
(f) Defined points of access and egress.
(g) Date of the drawinq
THE NECESSARY FEE MUST ACCOMPANY THIS APPLICATION.
The recommendation of the Planninq Commission fn this matter will be presented to the
Board of County Commissioners for final action Any person desiring to contest the
recommendation of the Planning Commission must request, in writing, a hearing before
the Board of County Comnussioners no later than ten (10) d o wing the date of the
public hearinq held by the Planning Commissi .
~
(Sf d) ~
. ~
~
• !
You are hereb nof~fied, that on Y
~ ~ ~ , at the hour v# ~ ; ~ ~ ~y. of said
da in the S o~ran~e Count ~ourt House, S akane, Vlfashin ton
y ~ Y P ~ ~
The SPC~ICANE ~C~UNTY P~ANNING CC~MMISSION will ~on-
duct a u~bl~~ hear~n to ~ ~a~
P ~
~~~P~R~"~ PR~S~~TLY ~+~1~~~ AGR~~~~,T'~'~A~ AN~ ~~E~~'RIC~~~3 R~~~I~~N~~1~L.
Tk~E ~pN~N~ lL~~I '~ILL ~C~I~~~i~~~ R~~~RI~T~~ R~S~~i~~T~~,~,, ~~~~~D~NTI~L
flFFI~~, L~3~ B~~~N~~:'~, ~CUL'~~PLE ~~~~~Y ~~'~UR~~"~~3, C~~!l~ERC~~L ~IND
~ ~ E W ~AY G ~ ~d ~f ~ R ~ ~ A L r ~ G~st~rr ~pc~Cea~r ~~~a~p~r~t C0. ~ ~,/Q
fi~t~. I~t~t~ C~~ 8a~1~+~~, ~pvk~, V~~a~~l~~. ~
General des~cri tion of area:
p
Lat~ ~ ~hrouqb l Blo~k ~ a~ V+~r~d~►~~ ~~rk ~ddit~oa ~n ~~~;~oa 14,
.
Tow~thl~ N., ~et~q~ ~4~ <<pok~na ~vue~yr ~~ka~~t~+~tva.
~~i+~~t ~id~~ oi ~~u~i~+~~~ fio~r~, b~t~roen ~roedw~a~ ~n+~ ~tt ~~ton .~v~nu~. ~
F~R FURTHER DETAILS conta~t th~ S akane Coun Plannin P 9
C~mrnission, S vkane Cvun ~ourt H~ause, S vkane~ Vllash. P p
Di~rector of Planning
F~~ F~ a:, F ~ H<< F~, Spokane County Pianning Cammission
~
~
/
♦
.
WILLARD J SNARPE ROBERT W TWIGC3
SHARPE & TWIGG
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 81 7 NORTHTOWN OFFICE BUIIDING
4407 NORTN DIVISION STREET
SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99209
HUasoH 7 1851
AREA CODE 509
May 5, 1970
Mr Justin L Quackenbush
Chairman, Spokane County
Planning Commission
Broadway Centre Building
Spokane, Washington
Re Freeway Commercial Zoning -
Mission to Broadway on
Sullivan
Dear Mr Quackenbush
Greater Spokane Development Company has requested that
I represent their interest in seeking freeway commercial
zoning for the above property The petition requirements
in the ordinance to secure a hearing as a matter of
right cannot be met because of competitive economic
opposition of the adjoining land owners to the East
For this reason request is made that the commission hear
the application on its own motion
Would you kindly discuss the matter with the members of
the Commission to determine whether the matter could be
scheduled on the June calendar Naturally if the Commission
schedules the matter, I will file definitive plans and
documentation to meet the other requirements of the
ordinance
I have not briefed the matter in recent years but I
believe the courts have held that any property owner has
a right to hearing regardless of the requirements, however,
in this case I believe the concepts of due process and
fairness themselves will justify the Commission scheduling
I
~ J
SHARPE & TWIGG
ATTORNHY9 AT LAW
Page 'I~vo
May 5, 1970
a hearing in any event i
Thank you for your consideration in this ma.tter, I remain,
Sincerely,
- ~
, -
_ ~ T
WILLA.RD J ,r~9~1~ARPE
~
WJS ds
J
P ~
~
I 1
j . i
4 ~
~
k~ .
77~
"'p.~r ~ 6e . 5
I , . ~ I
: f~~', , t
y
. ~ .
• y ~ '
~ Y ry
T
~ ~ n
; S
. ft: SCO , +,~il p
i(Je~
r : ~q ♦ b9 3 "'a,, ~ * •
+b{ +
~to4~~.t ~ 40
f
11~%9444
4 . OL ~ . • . '
~ ~ ...u4 ~_i J • .r
~i
10
4 ~OY ~ ~ ~
a Y. ~ 1
ic}
3A ~ + S ~ .
~
+ ~ 1
. . ~ 4
tk
r ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~
1~ ~
A'
4F
1 ~ z'±►-~'r.'1~•-
~ ^ }1
, 14
~e- , t . . • q ~
c
~
~
PI-MAL DR+WPMEl! 1 ANL 1 A!~ FIC VYNTRKJL rL11 FOR ZQ~~ ~~~E PROPOSAL:
N YE~48-70
Thf$ Mvelopmeat and Traff-tc Control Plan, together with
the belaw-listed comditious $nd requirement$ ahall have the sane
€orce and effe►rt as the requiremeata of Chapter 4.08A of the
Spakane CQunty ?oning ardiaaance.
Coad3.tions. and Requiremente;
x) That the awner deditate rights-of=tay a,s showa on the
Deuelflpment gnd Traffic Control Piaa herean. 3uch dedi-
catione include :
a) The East 101 oF the subjee t property, eacept the
most Sflutherly 90' thereaf awned by Humble ~il
ComPBny, for the purpose of widening 8utlliven Road.
10 A 25' curb radi+us on the Nortteast corner of the
subject propertq to allow constxuction of a 25'
cuzb radius at the Southwes t eornex on Mlss ion
Avenue and Sullivan Raad,
c3 An Eaaterly poztion caf Lot 1, Block 4* Veradale
Park Addition to allaw realignsent Qf CaCaldo
Avenue.
2) That improvemeute to Su-llivan Road, MisesiQn Avenue and
CataldQ Avenue, as indicated hereon be sn$de by the owner,
such improvements shall include pavement widening tq
exis ting pavement, curbing and s idewalke .
3) That acce~~ ~nd egress to the subj,ect propertiva be
l#mited generally to thaae points shown an the fiAal
"Develaptaent and Traffic Cantrol P1an" hereoa. Accese
permito preeisely definin$ po3.nts of access shali be
ab te ined f rom the SpOkaAe C411A ~y LiAgitieeZ' f 8 Of fice .
Tit$t the owner coustrtact a cedar baard-oa-board fence
appzoxi,uteteiy sfx feet in height accerding to attached
specification drawing (eee Attachuent A) along the
West boundary of the Freeway Comnnercial zoned area as
-1-
~
r
~hown hereon + A fenc.e -shal1 be c onstru~~ed to the sam*
specifi~~tions between the muitiple family uni~s in t1he,
nor~~~~~ coraeir of the projeet and the adjc~~~ing
resideutisk lat. Such feaces ahall be construct+~d on
ar neauc ~rope.rtY iineR and shall coc~ withf.n 25 feet
of any County right-c~~~Wa~~ ~aid feace sha11
constructed in its entirety b~~~re final completion af
3 the e9nstruc~tion of the T+exacQ Servi~~ ~tatio~ ~~ein-
~fter m+~tioned,
A1l right-of-way deeds required to ac~~lish the
fvr~~oing sl~al1 be filed with the Caunty Engineer of
Spokane Ca~ty after issuanee c~~ a bui~ding ~rmit ~o
Texaeo ('Tho TQxas Co y) for the constraction of i~~
~erviee ststian on the svuthwest corner of Missicra
Avenue and Su.Ilivart Road ala+d priQr to c~mipencement of
coqstructi+~~ of service station improvements. The
buiYding permit to be issued to Uxaco s~~ll fuxthe~
~equi~~ ~ aid company tD cvnstruc t the street improve-
mentg, ca~rbi~~ and ~idtrwalks, togethgr with such other
improvements as aze called for i~ ~~~aco' s plv-t plan G
~nd t~~ ]Dev~ lopment a~~ ~~i4c G~ntro1 Plan as s ai~
improvements re1ate tv that p~~tion of Mi8sion Avenue ~
and Su1livgtt R+~~~ ~~~~cent to the Texaco site Reason-
abYe bond may b+e reqgiged flf Texa~~ ~~~~~ng gerformance
of ~aid improvements r
W
6) At the ~ime the right-of-w~~ ~~eds,, referred to in
paragraph ~ ~er+~~~, are filed with ~~e County Eng;in+e~~
Spokene Co+~~~ the applican~s shall file a gno+d
~ ~~ffi~~ent bvn+d with the Cv~~~ Enginee-r condiCiQaed
upon the owner's constrv~ ~~~rk of the paving,, c~~bing'
sidewalks and other improvements reguired by a-aid plsn
which said impravements ,shaLl constructed. ~~e
time the ~emainder 4~ the improvement,~ ~hown oa the
flaal develt~~en~ plan are eortstru~~ed or fi~e years
from the date o.~ ~~option of the zoailag resol~ti+cn by
the Count$` Commissioners of Spok~~e Cou~~y, whichever
~hall ff,rst occv~~
At the time the owner shall obtain a building permit
tv construct the mote1 and r+~stautrant Inprovements as
shrnwn on the p1sn they s~all at ~ai+d ~~~e obtain buL1~~
~ 2fm
{
~
pormits atoLd commence conetrucCian of the spartmeuts o~
the BouthWest and rtqrthwes t aorners o£ the projec t and
the xesidence 4a T.ot 16,, Slock 4,, VergdsYe Park Additiotn,
County of spokaae, and either aresidence ar duplex an
i.vt 1, 8].ack 4, V'eradale Park Addition, County of Spokane,
whiah sai+d apartmenta, residence sttd duplex fmprovements
shsl1 be consta:ucted prior to ax at fihe time of the
c cmstruc tioa ag the mrtex and res tauraat iwproveaaents.
8) That pZans and s pecif icatiflns for s igns and a 1l extexior
i#.$hting ehall be submitted by the 8pplican~ airtd approved
by the Planning Comm3.ssion aAd Baard of Couaty Commissioners
~ pxior ta iaatallationr
9) That a landsoape plan identifging locatiom, number
and species of planting for the portidns of the praject
not eovered hereon sha11 be eubmitted by the appli.caat
and approved by the planning CQmmission and Board of
Cvunty Cammissioners pxiar to isstxance of building
perrait s for the re spec tive stzuc ture s. A bond adequate
ta ina ta lI the Iandscapiag maq be requs.red as a condi-
t3.tm of such buildi-a$ Pesm3,ts. An underground sprinkler
systeoa shall be inst$iiec~ within the Iandscaped areae.
14) A sewerage disgogei p],an meeting the require,oaente of
th+e Spokane Countp Hea3th DiQtriet shall be ee~bmitted
end approved prio~ the issuanee of any buiXding
permit or accupancy pexmit.
11) Fra,visiQns for fire pra tection shal l be marle in
acaardance with r+ecammendatior►s by the Spokan~ Valley
FiTe Marsha 1.
12) The obligatione of tihe owner herein sha11 be zind become
the abli$atfons of the awner's a8sigiieea ar succesaore
in intexeet aaci the owmer shal1 pause suitable and
proper provisioA tQ be made in at1y subse$uent sale bq
~
_3_
r
~
i
E
the owner of the prQperty herein referred t* for the
assumptian af the oblfgetione of tihe awner by its
purchasat.
.r~'~'
Exam~,nec~ and ~.pproued this day of . , 1971.
GREJ4;ER SPOWE DEVELAR4ENT COMPANY
Hy r
~
Examined aad approved this Z~i - day of , 1971.
YA
DIRECTOR 4F P[rAMNG
SFDKANE COUAITY PtANNING CQAMESION
Examined and approved thats day of , 1971.
BOARID 0F CflUM CONUSSIaNERS
SIPQKA►NE Ct}UNTY, WASHMGT-ON
Attestt
VERNON W! 4HLAND
Cierk vf the 8aard
Bq:
Deputq
RECEIVE: 71-;
APR 3 0 1971
-4..
SP0KANE COUt~ ► Y
PLANIVINC COMMISSION
~
~
~
~
R=Ch 26 s 1~j ►
f W.. 'Winaed J• XuaW, AttorAey
HDrthto~m Offift bAl~ _
~ ~ir4 Subjgcta ZF-48-70
in re~~ #►o goUr 16tter 17. 19n ~ ~ reftafted =iditims ixc
0=60tice wx'!,h the above tft1e4 zane obage matters aek bave the fo
4umment►i0:
Ztem X)a3~ Both ia thie ftea shoA1d be 25 geet.
Item .5,. Mi3.s ~cifiea that aU 7ight of way dess raqWaed "I De
filed with the Cow3ty ZU;bw"'~ IMer tommocea of a bu&Wns pomit U
ToXat'A ~or U8ir pKortidA 4f the rrolvt► and !a CG=enCm@at Of CoA..
S$ru@U0a Of s8rvio$ s'~'►~,'$0n IU'1pY'opemE►nt8~ our coQer 1etter Wio8tef3
th8t, alCu b~~~ ~t Mabl@ Oil =Y to inftced tG partiL'ip&te i14 the
d6edtrAtioYt and UpCavem+et~~. T-s 2►t iv&nd acm~~~ Te=co+~
~oxotrwtiaa cou1d oar should ba iacsi'~ite],y fwnetaUed duauld~ Ru*1e
XWI ~ ~bo aecoacaT r16t ot v8y doWs osx Broadway and guol,uvan?
As a matter of fwt, alf.hough ve bad gremed &r3~ Oavawicca
~c~rQ ~_l~~ cot #hia pvpoml ~ ~ oj~pUa~~a masn W the eadrza-
omt o$ UmnU$ ~ nov appma 3~w than defluite.~ ~abU wiU rot
1e a Bimatciry of thew ~ w hav+~ ~~ved no ovxami-
04tia~ ~ Rumble theix ~f the pbm or their
~ rail:unpew ta ita corAltis~ ~e wmdes if the popertiw cas-
PrUda$ ~ ~po"d awrit~o atati= ai~~ ~t A~owtoy A41ivau abood
be zwed at #hi tUe*
Item O. it was our unorstamdizg ~~e 4ioftsoion in the losfonwat
office ttat ym eV"d to tUmiAh boM to ommtee the +etroot lmp-ovements
I=Ieftately the MAP pernft gag Taxw8 was L=ed* We w4 eloo a=-
cwezwd ing ~$r~~. Ls~~,~$mtm ~ s9c~is~~ of the rec~ire8
f?~~~ts ~c~co~ xomit 1'ew the woq W cewhtiva in dranw.
We thottibt that we bad =derstood fih& 8~►~.~~'s diffimaty to 8~
that priog to mle of the ilonoo jaopertv tlib rQaanq ipprov~u~4 WOU'Lc~
~owtitut8 an p~~
We woul-d reommimds thactm, tbut Itta 0 be =ft&A to Prov%" #Mt th~
Aic~ ~ '4~ a4equ4e tv suaraaUe 4f ~ the
a
Wz J. Charpe , Attaxn~~ ~ch 269 1971
~dway improvementse that such band be oupglI.ed at the time of issuance
vf the Toxaco perait and that the bond provi.de that the improv~~~s be
c ted as cne project within ~ ~~~nable ~imes
Item 7). We rec ens~ the word "owners" bwe chaumd t-o "appUcants." We furtber
recvmme~ that the be stmeken and the fo~ su'b~
~~tute3, tberefor: ~ ~ shall within 1+$ mont1cs after the insuanc~ of
the Texaca buildfng permit seeure ..,...t~
Item We recommend tbLe wcrrd ~ownors" be c-ed t,v Uapplicants."
Item 10). ~e have und od that Texac+~ ~ ~ plma are now suffiai ~ c=plete
so tbaLt t~~ ~~tion, mnber, an4 species of plants r.~ ~w b8 specified
fe~ the ~ property and will be so inftcated on the fuml Developmmt
aad Traffic Coatrol Plem accampany.`.zic thece c~nditiv~. Also it wou~
perbMs be mor~ ~~ar th-t the bond to ~~tee I= pina impzovemen~s
i,~ ~ ~clude the spriWqor oyst+~ the lCat two sm cez were ersed.~
~ We would, be gleLd to meet wi~~ alai 361: r abovev our reccm tions, 31
~rou b613.eve thi~ ~~sirable.
secro~ mph of your 1ettec re mv the Bom P0~ Administration
e~~~~~ is a ~~ect statement of our vnd~tandInG.
For y~ informatiom, i~~~ vacativ~ ~~~s for Ca~aldo at Ms,smom t~wo
i=tiated b7 acticam af the Board, March 3L, 1971,w The f3apal hearing on this
matt+~r luS lee~ ~t for April 8, :LW1.
~er'y truly,
I Ro'bert S. Tumer-, P.E,.
5po1ane County Eagimer
Charles L.
RSTs 1p P2anning Director
r. ~
WILLARD J SNARPE HUDSON 7 1681
ROBERT W TWIGG AREA CODE 809
JOSEPH J aaNZ 5 H A R P E& T W 1 G G
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 817 NORTHTOWN OFFICE BUILDING
4407 NORTM OIVISION STREET
SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99207
March 17, 1971
Mr Charles Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Conunission
Spokane County Courthouse
Spokane, Washington 99201
Re Greater Spokane Development Co.
Sullivan Road Property
Dear Mr Huggins
Following our meeting on Wednesday, March 10, 1971, with the
County Commissioners I have redrafted the requirements to be
included in the Final Development and Traffic Control Plan of
the above zoning, and am forwarding copies to Mr. Turner and
the County Commissioners. I hope the enclosures conform to
the understandings reached by all parties and should there
be any disagreement, would you kindly notify me, preferably
in writing, to avoid any possible misunderstandings
In addition to the requirements to be included in the Plan as
enclosed, it is clearly understood that the applicants must
supply the County Engineer a letter from the Bonneville Power
Administration, giving the County of Spokane reasonab le as-
surance that Bonneville Power Administration's easement along
the westerly right-of-way of Sullivan Road will not be enforced
against the County in respect to the right-of-way being dedi-
cated and conveyed to the County by the applicants and that
the County will not be required to move Bonneville's utility
poles at the County's expense
Also, I hope all parties will keep in mind Humble Oil Company's
contingency that I mentioned during the meeting with the Com-
missioners In that regard I called Humb le last Thursday and
told them of our meeting with the Comnaissioners which I be lieve
may induce them to participate in the dedication and improve-
ments I had previously requested of them.
RECEIVEU
- 1- MAR 103 1971
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
9HARPE & TWIOG
ATTORNEYB AT LAW
Mr. Charles Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Page -2-
3/17/71
Re Greater Spokane Development Co.
Sullivan Road Property
Also, Mr. Turner indicated at our meeting on March lOth that
he would immediately commence the necessary vacation proceed-
ing relating to realignment of Mi.ssion Avenue at its inter-
section with Cataldo. We are most anxious to have this vaca-
tion completed at the earliest possible date to permit us to
close with Texaco which, in turn, will enable us to deliver
all deeds required by the Final Development and Traffic Control
Plan.
May I thank you, Mr. Turner, and the Commissioners for the time
you have given this matter, which I am sure will ultimately
result in a worthwhile improvement to our County
Sincerely,
~ ~
r
` WIL~4 ' `~S PE
WJS /b d
enclosures
cc N1r. Robert S. Turner, P E.
Spokane County Engineer
cc Spokane County Commissioners
FINAL DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN FOR ZONE CHANGE PROPOSAL,
ZE-48-70
This Development and Traffic Control Plan, together with
the below-listed conditions and requ~rements shall have the same
force and effect as the requirements of Chapter 4.08A of the
Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.
Conditions and Requirements
1) That the applicants dedicate rights-of-way as
shown on the Development and Traffic Control
Plan hereon. Such dedications include
a) The East 10' of the subject property for
the purpose of widening Sullivan Road. ► 4
t
b) The South 10' o f the subjec t proper ty&for
the purpose of widening Broadway Avenue.
~
c) A 0~'lradius on the southeast corner of the
subject property to allow construction of
a 25' curb radius at the northwest corner
of Broadway Avenue and Sullivan Road.
d) A 20' radius on the northeast corner of
the subject property to allow construction
of a 20' curb radius at the southwest
corner of Mission Avenue and Sullivan Road
4 e) An easterly portion of Lot l, Block 4,
Veradale Park Addition to allow realign-
ment of Cataldo Avenue
2) That improvements to Sullivan Road, Broadway Avenue,
N1.ission Avenue, and Cataldo Avenue, as indicated
hereon be made by the applicants, such improvements
sha11 include pavement widening to existing pavement,
curbing, and sidewalks.
3) That access and egress to the subject properties
be limited generally to those points shown on the
final "Development and Traffic Control Plan"
hereon. Access permits precisely defining points
of access shall be obtained from the Spokane County
Engineer's Office.
-1-
4) That the applicants construct a cedar board-on-board
fence approximately six feet in height according to
attached specification drawing (see Attachment A)
along the west boundary of the Freeway Commercial
zoned area as shown hereono .
A fence shall be constructed to the same specifica-
tions between the multiple famY.ly units in the
northwest corner of the project and the adjoining
residential lot. Such fences shall be constructed
on or near the property lines and shall come within
25 feet of any County right-of-way. Ja:id fence
shall be constructed in its entirety before final
completion of the construction of the Texaco
Service Station hereinafter mentioned
S) All right-of-way deeds required to accomplish the
foregoing shall be filed with the County Engineer
of Spokane County after issuance of a building
permit to Texaco (The Texas Company) for the con-
struction of its service station on the southwest
corner of Mission Avenue and Sullivan Road and
prior to commencement of construction of service
station improvements. The building permit to be
issued to Texaco shall further require said
company to construct the street improvements,
curbing and sidewalks, together with such other
improvements as are called for in Texaco's plot
plan and the Development and Traffic Control Plan
as said improvements relate to that portion of
Ml.ssion Avenue and Sullivan Road adjacent to the
Texaco site. Reasonable bond may be required
of Texaco insuring performance of said improvements.
6) At such time as the owners apply for a building
permit or permits to construct the retnainder of
the improvements shown on the Final Development
and Traffic Control Plan, a good and sufficient
bond or bonds to be filed with the County Engineer
of Spokane County conditioned upon the owner's
construction of the paving, curbing, sidewalks
and other improvements required by said Plan.
-2-
7) The owners shall obtain a building permit and com-
mence construction of the motel, restaurant improve-
ments within three years from the date of the
adoption of the resolution by the Board of County
Coumaissioners changing the zone classification and
shall prior thereto or at the time thereof secure
building permi.ts and connnence construction of the
1~~~f"d apartmentskon the southwest and northwest corners
of the project.
8) The owners shall obtain a building permz.t and com-
mence construction of a residence on Lot 16, Block
4, Veradale Park Addition, County of Spokane,
State of Washington, and either a residence or
duplex on Lot 1, Block 4, Veradale Park Addition,
County of Spokane, State of Washington, within
three years of the date of the adoption of the
resolution by the Board of County Commissioners
changing the zone c lassification or at the time
the building permit referred to in Paragraph 7
hereof is issued to construct the motel and
restaurant improveinents, whichever shall first
occur.
9) That plans and specifications for signs and all
exterior lighting shall be submitted by the
applicant and approved by the Planning Commission
and Board of County Commissioners prior to in-
stallation.
10) That a landscape plan identifying location, number
and species of planting for the portions of the
project not covered hereon shall be submi.tted by
the applicant and approved by the Planning Com-
mi.ssion and Board of County Commissioners prior
to issuance of building permi.ts for the respective
structures A bond adequate to install the land-
scaping may be required as a condition of such
building permits. An underground sprinkler system
shall be installed within the landscaped areas.
-3-
11) A sewerage disposal plan m,eeting the requirements
of the Spokane County Health District shall be
submitted and approved prior to the issuance of '
any building permit or occupancy permit.
12) Provisions for fire protection shall be made in
accordance with recommendations by the Spokane
Valley Fire Marshale
Examined and approved this day of , 1971.
GREATER SPOKANE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
By
Examined and approved this day of , 1971.
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
SPOK;ANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Examined and approved this day of , 1971.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
SPOK;ANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ATTEST
VERNON Ws OHLAND
Clerk of the Board
By
Deputy
-4-
y.. I-t z y
DRAFT OF MEMORAIITDUM
TO Board of County Commissioners
FROM: County Engineer and Planning Director
We have reviewed the conditions to be incorporated into the final Development
and Tr4.ffic Control Plan as such conditions were redrafted by Mr. Sharp on
behalf of the Greater Spokane Development Compar~y. We wish to fotwrard the
foltowing comments arid recommendations to the Board regarding the proposed
conditions
1. Thpre is what we believe to be a typographical error in Condition # 1) C
A 20' radius dedication is called for to construct aM radius curb uaprovement.
This errdr was in the previous document. The Ds.mension in both references
should be the same, namely feet.
2. Condition #5 specifies that all right of way deeds required shall be filed
with the County Engineer after issuance of a buildz.ng permit to Texaco for
tneir portlon of the project and urior to commencement of construction of
service station improvements. In the cover letter Mr Sharp indicates that he
believzs that Humble O11 ma,y be induced to participate in the dedication
and improvements. Is it indeed contemplated that Texaco's construction could or
should be indefinitely forestalled should Hwnble fail to file the necessary
right of wa,y deeds on Broadway and Sullivan?
As a matter of fact, although we had presumed during Planning Commission consid-
eration of thls proposal that the applicant•s plan had the endorsement of Humble
this now appears less than definite. Slnce Humble will not be a signatory of
these oonditions and since we have received no communication from Humble
indicating their endorsement of the plan or their wi.llingness to lmplement its
conditions we wonder if the properta.es comprising the proposed service station
sa.te at 8roa,dwa4Y and Sullivan should be zoned at this time.
4 1
3 With respect to Condition #6 we would point out that the only sure result
would be roadway improvements adjacent to the Texaco site, since the balance
of the roadway improvements would not be required until and unless the "owners"
applied for building permits for the motel, restaurant and other proposed
improvements.
We feel that all roadway improvements should be made at the time the Texaco
improvernents are made (as was done by the Lamplighter), rather than have a
patchwork of pavi ng projects we do feel that sidewalk improvements could
reasonably be postponed to coincide with separate buildz.ng permit issuances.
We thaught that we had understood the applzcant's difficulty to be simpl.y
that prior to sale of the Texaco property the roadway impravements would
constitute an unreasonable burden.
4re would recommend, therefore, that Condition #6 be amended to provade that
the apnlicants supply a bond adequate to guarantee installation of all the
roadway improvements, that such bond be supplied at the time of issuance
of the Texaco permit and that the bond provide that the improvements be completed
as one project within a reasonable time. If the Board feels this to be
unnecessary we would recommend that such bond provide that all roadway improve-
ments be completed within months of the issuance of any permit subsequent
to Texaco's and in any case within a three year period from the date of approval
of the zoning resolution and these conditions
4. We have understood (wnth respect to condition #10) that Texaco's plans
are now sufficiently complete so that the location, number, and species of
plants can now be specified for the Texaco property and will be so indicated
on the final Development artd Traffic Control Plan accompan,ying these condltions.
5. Also with respect to Eondition #10 it would perhaps be more clear that the
bond to guarantee landscaping improvements is to include the sprinkler system
if the last two sentences were reversed.
-2-
~
~
!4
~
. t, ~ .
t~
w ~
~ ~
~ . ~
~ ~
. ~ ~
C,Oy..,"
L
T
3 Na / 1Y~'►
I715
~ Nfibl;y 9,~ ~a' e~
s ~ c~ ~ i.,4s d.ld rr'~
`
~ ~ 4 ~o ! tf.~Jq ' T •s as "2 ! i
~ t~` ~ 7 E ~ f• 1►_
R yE V#2
O 7 • ~ S w . H ~ ~Z ~r ~ ~
7 ~t r 4` ~ _ ~ ~,r
. !
b 4bi
' ~ ~Re~1 j~~': 37S' 4r~w !►•1 f ~ .
,S z. U
y. ° . '~a •,,r
* a
$ 7
. , y
f ~ .
~ 3 1 ` i. !'J
ift
• M s
~ s . . 4 ~ / ~ • ~
w
Q ~ • v
18 • v° !5
,AL Qlrl%p~~ ~~.14~ ~ L►ie~''`~~~~
AVA~-
R ,~4.t•' Jb
4 1►7 , , ~ ~ } ~ a f ~ ; ~
8
~a ~ . W ~ ~'D 7t •
im
z3, 4
;zi a _
j
TEXACO
~
i'GTROLEUM PRODUCT~+
,,Ar,ES Dr:F':\RTMH:NT-L'. S. June 14, 1971 TEXAC•o iNc.
~'Mrrr.ANn isrcIO» N. 2733 PITTSF3LJRG
T. L. C'ARE1 P. n. BOX 2625
ni~rrirr r ..at.1z4 \t ~N V:1.11 SYOK:t\E. 'W:\SFI. 99220
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON RT. #43
I-90 & SULLIVAN RD.
~
County of Spokane
Building Code Department
County Court House
Spokane, Washington
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that our plans specify the amount and
type of landscaping and paving to be installed at the subject
location.
It is our intention to conform to the landscaping plan as
delineated in the approved zone change drawings.
The planting is scheduled to be installed during the
construction of the service station facilities and completed prior
to occupancy of the facilities.
The contractor scheduled to install the landscaping is:
A-1 Landscape Supply Co.
4004 S. Myrtle
Spokane, Washington 99203
Phone: KE 4-1089
Mr. Don Carrell
Yours very truly,
TEXACO INC. I
~ i
7
T. L. Carey
District Sales Manager
~ E D
Juy 1-1 1971
5F'UKANt C;vUNIY
PLANNING COMMISSIQ(V
~~f/s Mewt
'Mr - e ; ~
1k ~ i . R • , • , ~
t , i ~S ~
' ~ ~kti . ' t ~ ~ . ~ , , u ~ !
( y ~I ~
~ ~ ~ ,i, i~ ~ ~ _ s
.f~` - ~ ~ • ~ ~
i
;
~ . ~
- . ♦ l~~`~, ~r'
. ~ ~ ~ .
~Y 1_} ti 1J h _
i j l►.._s
~,~1 , , d : • ~ ~ ,
.
.r _ , . ' r j,.,~•~ 1 ~ . ~ - . ~ L
;'w ~ • ; ~ ~ / ! J '
~ ~ ~ ~ ~F ~'ar.. ~ '
~:,St~.'~►11,r , ~ ' ; ~
~ .1.~ "7A
01'....~ r . . y . .
r
~i r f r l / ..I
/~'i•~
, r
i
i~
~ . . • ' ~ ~ ~ ~1
~
~
sk
~ ~y
K ?'~s r j0
:.t,
.
•~ti r ' ~
s• ' „ ~ ik ~,I ~.ji~ ,
~17 ' - .Y { ~,,,~,.,rr.+Li.j ' . t ~ _
010,
. , ~ j ! ~ _ . s J ~ r
~ar
; . ~~~f~ • r ' .w ~ s . . ~b' ~ s`~" a
.
~
.
1 '
~
, -
,
. ~
. . .
, ~ . •
, f~ ` ~ ~ t
~ r ~lJj
r s~ ~ y .tY:1i
6 r. +
.
'i1t
N~
1 • _
. ~ i , . . ' ' . a
~ { , - } I~ ~s . !
M-
~ '~i• ~ ~ ~
r
~
~ i
~ J S 1
a
PLANNING DEPARTMENT ,
~r
BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING N 721 JEFFERSON STPEET
{ " a A
t r El ( . _
PHONE 456 2205
SPOKANE 1MASHINGTON 99260
SAOKAHE COUNT COURT NOUSE
April 14, 1982
Mr James A1, Frank
Attorney at Law
North 410 pines Road
Spokane, WA 99206
Dear Mr Frank
In response to your letter of March 9, 1982, and in confirmation of our recent phone
conversation of Apri 1 9, 1982, 1 dm fortiardi ng th7 s 1 etter to you to indi cate that
the Spokane County Planning Department has reviewed the deVelopment plans for the
50-unit motel complex by NorthtNOOd Properties, Inc, and have found then to be 1n
substantial compliance with the approved zoning and haYe, therefore, signed a release
of the building permits requested on the site.
It was found to be in substantial compliance after the apLenue icant, ~lorthwood Pfoperties,
modified their site plan to prohibit access onto Mission yia the nortt portion
of their property and have further taken out parking stalls initially shown ~o be cn
adjacent property which were to serve the motel The curl^ent s i te pl an cal 1 s for «
50-unit motel, whereas the original approVal in 1971 anticipated a 100-unit lotel
being built on the site
The applicant has further submitted to the Planning Department documents and plans
to support a request for the issuance of building permits on lots of land cie>>Ploped
in violation of Chapter 58 17 RC4! when the issuing authority finds that the public
interest will not be adversely affected thereby. We have reviewed the plans and
documents submitted by Mr Dwight Hume on behalf of PJorthwood properties and nave
issued the bui7ding permit, believing the public interest has not been adverCPly
affected An Indemnity Agreement, I-6-82, relating to this mattel^ is on file in our
offices, if you wish to review 1t
Should you have any further quest7ons, please feel free to contact me at 456-2205
Si ncerely,
~ DOUGLAS S ADAMS
Zoning Administrator
DSA cmw
s
310 _
BEFM BE BOARD aF cam aa~is~raM a~ SMAM COMM. q
ZZA&70
. IN MsMAIM aW MIa~= Z=13 up I=
AMXc~~~ ~ ~NED BEUMWM To ~
pARtLY AND FF4MQt AL ~ RE8 0 L U TY OY~
~ mwi M I'li'v LOCATED 3N UAClC ~ ~ ~~RAMW
PABIE DDlZ'1'd- 1- 1 IN 8=0" 14d 258o9
RAM 44e SeV0N0* BPOKAIM any-M. 1dA5=31123e '
Ow abovemeatitled maLtw samUe on regularly for hearUW befoae 4he Noar;4 of Comty
Cadialftor~ of ~pokwo cmt7o , an th,1e dayg, and It ~ the
Bowd that the $p*aw Comty Biemidna cammaed.cn, boo Aoven due notica of the hoar:Ue
ca tILe Mat4►er ita fte monw and 8or the ZUm pr+avUed by lae~~ ~t said Plamning
CinWadw bas Sad a pabl~o heerig as aequbvdl aad ttat t~ add P1aminit
c a wars fn the pl aa~ tb zom the S~11o~g de~t~ A~ ae s
Lot 29 mept t~ ~eat 140 feet Ot the Sou~ ~ feet$ aU 39 $e 69 ?p ~
$l ~ios- par~t.s ~rf ~t~-9 ~+d 9~i ait po~o$ of Ca~do ~ va 1~ ~t
oY a lim ta ~van Rwii ataA 160 !e6t weat oS the east um of Lots I am
8. AU In 811a►4* I of Vesadet~e Ph* AdcUL3cm $n 8oeUva 94o 3bAp 2.S 190 o Ranp 44o
g.vem.o Covo►tye vambli some
to
Fl1MLY i4Q~8A~ ~
mm wedt i4o feet of Lot 1md the weist 14o teet ot the 8m@h 40 teet of Lot 29 Wo* 3.
of Versdale Park Addf#►ion; oU o$ Iot 1iI those pmt~~ua of 1.ote 9 end 10 and portim
of CafaMo Avemue vaatioa IrUic weet ot aIe m ]ell to ~ullfrna~ 8wd and f6fl ~~t
veat of the east lin of Ioto 7 emd 89 lMods t of 1►grad&2e Park Addftioao Sectlea 14*
Tbwnemp ?y m. oRmp 440 seveN., Spolwm co~tyl r~~t~t~
~
I= 0 a 8Ei I'1' -_i~o Za$ tho aboVementitled and 11esu$bed --°OpNV iDo4 alld
~ ~ ~by U~ ~ undw the daedflta~ of FRMWAY and
FAMY WBMWS ets defined iA the Zoning ~ of S~~ Comtyo aOpled A149"t 2%,
195'S1, ae aaeaftdl and that developmt and e~e of the W*vemdescrlbetl Imperif
be ae daaa3ibed and Ift within the Datrelopat end Tftfftc Cmtrol Pien,
ZB4&709 mbjoct to e'11 eosmUUcw ofttod wfthin and "an mi8 DetroUlmeat md TW~c
camuv1 Flane -1 -
PAZ= BY THE bOABD I= M4 m ~ 19" 4
AV~~B BOARD t~ COMT'Y
~ MM ~~MM.Mo
VEEM Wo CEAND
cLQ8'k Af tho board
ROARfl,
OF 5~~l.t,,r ~TY, VIASH idGAd'~~ ty W
Thic $o ti ewUfy that tU8 Is a
JACK GERAGHTY'
txw md fiofteCt ~1 OF
pass" by Oe~~ ttda
*W o~ ~ G, -it o
~
~ ho"by em#fy ftat t 1a" posted
tha aWvo obon~a and aevidom ou
the SoaUW ft ia thg sA4111d
In's Coclois
am ao furftr certigy
oe►t tho um etaselffcatim c.heaop -U tM me es dsscriWd oMve md
dwm ft fte e►ttacbed, mpo
r
I
.
k` ZE-48-70
WARD OF COLT=_2QMMISSIONERS OF A'~O ANE,,,,~NTY, WAMNGTON
~ ~ r M
FINDINGS AND ORDER REGARDI111G ZOrTING MAP PROPOSAL, ZE-48-70 -
GREATER SPOKANE DEVELOPMEIVT COMPANY
~
WHEREAS, The Spokane County Planning Commission did, after publ.ic
hearinq on October 30, 1970, forward to the Board of County Commissioners a
tecommendation that the Zoning Map not be changed from the existing Agricul-
tural classification and the existing Restricted Residential classification to the
Freeway Commercial classification on property descrlbed as follows
Lots 1- 11, Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition in Section 14,,
Township 25 N. , Range 44, E. W. M. , Spokane County,
Washinqton.
and,
WHEREAS, The applicant before the Planning Commfssionr Greater
Spokane Development Company, did by letter dated November 5, 19 70, request
a hearing before the 8oard of County Commissioners to present evidence and
testimony in favor of their application, and
WHEREAS, The Board of County Comml,ssioners did hold a public hearinq
on December 3, 19 70, to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commis-
sion and te stimony and evidence of the applicant and other intere sted partie s,
and
WHEREAS, At said hearing, opportunity was affotded those favoting and
those opposing the above-described Zoninq Map proposal, and the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County having fully considered the testimony
given, the records and minutes of the Planning Commission, and all other
evidence presented and having personally acquainted themselves with the site
~
and vicinity in question, does hereby find*
1) That there 3s a considetable need for the Freeway Commercial and
Multi-fami.ly facilities proposed by the applicant and inadequate
area zoned for such uses in the Spokane VaUey
2) That there is no objection to the proposal in terms of effect upon
the trafftc capacity of the interchange by the State Highway
Department
,s 0
~
a
3) That a similar development has been approved (the Lampliqhter
compiex) immediately to the east across Sullivan Road
4) That the development (because of the orientation of the motel units
and because of the buffering effect of the motel and apartments)
will not be unduly detrimental to the residential properties to the
west.
NOW, THEREFORE, The Soard of County Commissioners of Spokane County
does conclude that the above-stated findings are sufficient and controlling, and
does therefore, order that an appropriate resolution to change the Zoning Map as
follows be prepared at such time as the below-listed conditions have been met
Aj From Aaricultural and Restricted Residential to Freeway Commercial.
The E 154.65 feet ofLotl,, Lot 2 except the W 140 feet of the S 40
feet, All of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, those portions of Lots 9 and
10 and portfon of Cataldo Avenue vacation lying east of a line
parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 #eet west of the east line of
Lots 7 and 8, Block I. Veradale Park Addition in Section 14,
Township 25 N. , Range 44, E. W. M. , Spokane County, Washington
H) From Agrlcultural and Restricted Resldentiai to Multiple Familv,
Suburban,
Parcel (a) The W 140 feet of Lot 1 and the W 140 feet of the S 40
feet of Lot 2, Block 1, Veradale Park Addition in
Section 14, Township 25 N., Range 44, E W M,
Spokane County, Washington
Parcel (b) A11 of Lot 11, those portions of Lots 9 and 10 and
portion of Cataldo Avenue vacation lying west of a lfne
parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 feet west of the east
line of Lats 7 and 8, Block l, Veradale Park Addirion
in Section 14, Township 25 AT , Ranqe 44, EW. M,
Spokane County, Washinqton.
Conditions
1) Submittal of a final "Development and Traffic Control Plan" to the
Board of County Commissioners for approval. Such plan shall be
in substantial conformance with the preliminary plan presented at
the hearing of December 3, 1970. The plan shall show the proposed
development of the FYeeway Commercial area, the Multiple Family
Suburban area and Lots 1 and 16y 8iock 4, Veradale Park Addition
The final "Development and Traffic Control Plan" shall also
incarporate a schedule acceptable to the Board of County Commis-
sioners for construction of a]I stnactures Incorporated In the final
plan .
-2-
+a'
2) The finat'Development and Traffic Control Plan" }shall also show
any dedication and vacation of Right of Way, curbing, sidewalk,
paving to Fthe exisiinq paving within public right of way, and the
dimensions and location of proposed access driveways Such
improvements shall be made to County speCifications at the expense
of the applicants and appropriate quarantees of construction shall
be provided the County Engineer prior to Board action on any zone
change re s olutlon
NOW, THEREFORE, The Hoani of County Commisstoners of Spokane
County does hereby order that an appropriate resolutfon be prepared when all
conditions have beea satisfac#oPily aCCOmplished.
~ ~
DATED This day of i N. , 19 71
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSTONERS
OF SPOKAATE COUNTY, `IVASHINGTON
T
t.F CJi~~ CTL~.'TYl S~~DINERS
CF aJt~`i tr~ e ^ rL.~~~'Jnr~ ~~~~SHiBiGTON
e U'4~.n. st 9 LJ 'L`81lY~Y~
F. tl
,WCK GERAUHTY . ~
ATTEST
VERNON W. OHLAND
Clerk of the Board
1~"
By ~i
~ Deputy _
-3-
~
M3y 3, 19 ? 1
Mr. Wllletd J. Shupe. AUWWY
Nathtowa OffiLas Sv#ldtnq
NMa 4-407 str"t
spokane, v~ashtnqton OJ20;
LVm Mr. sbarpe ;
Re: DeweIopment Plan, Greater Spocaaae Developm ant 7E-48-70. e,a hava revfe wiad youc left3r of April 28, lg 71, and the tsxt sttateaent f vr the f inal
~telo~ea~t~t sAd i~caffie C'v~rod Plaa ~nQlosod dbt~to. '!bs ~cLowre is, f►~ed
comala#ant vritb the e~nc31~1oa~ macbsd at ous swout a~. 1ws did f3md om iaad-
vetteat omlasios frtwan tbs D~D~'tY ~med fot dedicatton aad,/'or bapr+aremrsftS namlY,
tbo West 1/2 vf Iat i, S~vck 2. vmd,ate Park Addition whhich you prapow la Im plan
ft~c tiva og an e1gft uvft a;pa:tssent. Ia t~oo aotloit with that pr~~ttp• an twm,
1-(rl), undw Can~d~tfo~ aW PaquinmeaRs should be iaclUied aa fdlows:
I-d) The SQUtb 10 6iet ct the s~bieat Arc"rty (axmpt the Em►st l,/Z o[ Lot 1,
131ock 1, Vwadala Park Additiou owned by Huucble Oill CompW) fa the
puspass of w1dWain Broadway Avenue.
!'4600 1+110 se- nve to &c odway Avsau sbvyld lor =ade in Itam 2.
%ve are sendiaq ac4py of tbia lettsr ta Mr. h#, with tbm uaRbrataadinq
that be will incocWate the twxt tvgothoi with the abova-tisted cbages to be iusc~
upoa the Uvaspata coy► af the final Drvsloyment and i1MMc Coatroi Fla►u. We vriil
t1oa aubmit the sass t+o~th~s wtth an ap~op~ia~e Mani" res~atutfv~ tio the 8Mrd of
County COmasslcws. Lat us aqaitt ronisg l4t. Byatv~rr~bt aWot W Rs$d to
iacctpmte the I~dac~a plana f+Gr Texaco tutto the UnnepaaE+ency vf the Dsvalopmaant aM
Traffic Contral Plan so thSL the Planainq Comssisadtn and Gaamtssioners vdU not bave to
taks "patate actioa on thoss lazudscape plaas.
~
~
M[ . V#laalld J. Shdtpe ~ 'l We htive &Ubaipted to coMact the Humble OU CompaaY bY lattes wlth anaspect tfl
th+s't yossiblo p oos !u tbs scao c2iaiMo buit as pas our discussio4 vrlth yout* wo
ar4 thoit pr op*tty frm the nsdution. psndiAq separats aqrosmeu# with them
with N"pod to aeoessM road dse~,catiaa aad soad improvements.
rAn-r: z
; 4-: ti:~ ..A . 4 4 L. ~ ~ A. s . -
Director of Atanxtlng
FC~Bt:~tT 5. TUttF~'~'n,
-r~`•.4-q~. fi.n.+s~Y; :t.'._ .
..,=.s. •
cc•
.
I~c'• Doaald L • Redd,
~
~
1
April 28, 1971
Mr. Robert ' S. Turner, P. E.
Spokane County Engineer
Spokarie Countiy Cauzthouse
Wes t 1I16 Broadwey
Spokane, Washington 99201
and
Mr. Char les Huggine, Direc tor
Spokane County Planning Commfssion
Spakane County Courthouse
~ West 1116 Broadwaq
Sookp1-IP, Washi_ncyt-on 99201
u
Re: Greater 5pokane DQVeloprnQnt Co,
5ull.ivan Rosd Property
Dear Messrs. TurnFr .3n.d ~ugg -Lns:
Please find enC losed a copy of the revised "Final Development
Traffic Control Plan ConditionW'-which I hope are. entirely
coasisrent with the agreements r.eeched in our meeting
'Monday.
I bel.ieve the entfre pBckage is now ready to be submitted
to the County Cauinis s i oners irt resa lut ion f orm.
I ncade Aa ref#rence'in the conditi.one tu the :iumble pil
Company partici*pation 3n the dedfcation and street improve-
mettts. 1 assume Mr_. Huggine in the =esolut ion may wish
to include e findi,ng thsr Humble'e property be rezoned
by further resolution of the Board to a Freeway Cormercial
j~ zone classif_i_cation gfter Hurnble has fited the required
~
~
P'c: ~ e Tw O
April 28, 1971
~
right-of-way deeds and a sufficienr bond to guarantee
the atreet improvements. Mr. Huggine.may prefer to use
a diffetent approach. Hvwevex that inay be, I think i.t
wise to heve a resalution which clearly permits Humble
or its successor in intexest to merely fi'le the deeds
and a bond to secure a building permit rarher than force
a new zoning petition.being filed. I a'm aure the
Coinmissionera wouid be as anxious as we to eee continuity
of right-of-way all along S ullivan and on Rroadway.
Thank you very much ftir your cdnsideration in this matter.
I renuain,
%IJ SineerelY,
WxLLAdW J. S HARPE
WJS : db
~
<
~ E C aw v ELi
APR >.0, 1971
SPG-KANc. CQUN-iY
PLANNING COMMlSSIUN
I
WILLARD J. SHARPE ~ HUDSON 7- 1651
ROBERT W. TWIGG ARE4 CODE 5: 9
JOSEP}i J CiANZ S H A R P E & T W I G G
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SUITE 817 NORTHTOWN OFFICE BliiLUiN:;
4407 NORTN DIVISION STREET
SPOKANE. WASHINGTON 99207
February 19, 1971
E C El , E ['111.1
I _,_o 1071
_ iJ,
Mr. Charles Huggins SPOK A N E CO;Ji'11'T'~'
Director, Spokane County pt_ANNING
Planning Commis 5 ion.
West 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington
Re ; Greater Spokane Develop<<}ent Co e
Sullivan Road Zoning
Dear Mr. Hu~ai_ns:
IJ_].aVe Spoke17 Lo ilr. i)OattvYlehL SeL'C'2'a1 t~~"C?~'S S1.i1cC' OLl]."
meeting in Mr. Turner's office on February 10. Apparently
the understandings reached at that time have either become
misunderstood or new and additional requirements are being
imposed upon the developer other than those we discussed.
In any event, the situation has now become terribly
confused as to the definitive requirements of your office
in regard to the traffic development plan and for this
reason I request that these requirements be spelled out
in detail in letter form to me as attorney for Greater
Spokane Development Co. I am submitting a similar letter
to Mr. Turner of the County Engineers requesting a
delineation of his requirements as well.
To aid in the final resolution of this matter I have
requested the County Commissioners to schedule a meeting oi-
the principals at the earliest possible date to resolve
whatever conflicts may exist to the end that this develop-
ment may go forward. I anticipate the commissioners will
shortly notify me of the date of the meeting. Meanwhile
it is essential that I receive from your department a
written statement outlining its requirements of the developer.
Sincerely, _
.
. ~
; • . ~~a _ r. « ~
W ILLARD J. S HARPE
WJS : ds
~
~2~~NT OF T
United States Department of the Intez •
Io'_'i..~. __~'✓.t ;I~'!,
':,s?..,~-'` : ,'a°`!
, ~ BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATIOti'
PaRTLAiVD, OREGON 9720~
,
Agril 1., 197
In reply refer co:
EL •
Mr. Robert Turner
Spokane County Engineer
Spokane County Courthouse
Spokane., Washington 99201
Re: Greater Spokane DeveI.opment Coziipany Pian
Sui.livan Road
Dea r rir. . Tu rne r:
We are advised Liiat L'ne Greater Spoitane Development Company intenris .
develop the properry lying immediately west of Sullivan Road and sou,.
>f the Interstate 90 Interchange Co Broadway Avenue. In this regard,
,,e understand thaC this firm will convey to the County a ten-foot strip
~long the westerly right-of-way line of Sullivan Road from the property
above described to provide the County with additional right-of-way for
street-widening purposes. Bonneville Power Administration holds an
easement on the ten-foot strip in question and has an easement coverinb
an additional twenty feet im;nediately wESt of the strip in question.
We have received assurance from the Greater Spo,cane Development Company
that, if it is necessary to move any of the poles in our Vera Tap trans-
mission line, they will pay all the costs of making these moves. Under
these circumstances, we would Iook to them rather than the Coun-Ly 'or
costs of making such a mave as required in the deve].opment plan.
Sincerely,
John V. Mulcahy
Chief, Branch of Land
c c : i, - . .
1
Greater Spokane Development Co. 0
Lj~~3►~'t
4~r
~Q71
~
,...r...r.~
Februuary 19, 19 71
~
Bvard of Cotmty Comissioners
S pvka,ne Cc~~nty
3poke~e County Courttyouae
Wes t 1116 Btoad4wa y
Sgakene, Washington 49201
Ike: Gxeater S pakane Devt1opment Co.
SUllivan Roed Zonfng
Gentlemen;
Sinrce the zvning decision in Lhe above rnatter conscientf,ous
effort has been made by the developer to meet the require-
mcnts of the Spokane County Planning DixectQr and the
County Engineer in regard to a traffic and site develQpment
plan. ~umervus m8e!tings have occurred among the p►rincipal~
~ ~~tioned and dissgreemente exist caver the cantent vf the
plan and the obligatinne to be essurned by the developer
resulting in an impasse that cnu$t be resQlved.
~
I respectfuZly xequegt the Cvunty Cvmmissioners to set aside
approximately an hour and a half at Ghe ear1i+~st possi,ble
time for azMeeting of th~ ~~~tiea to resolve the differenceg
th~t have arisen. Would you kindly nvLify me v€ the date
and Cfme when yau can entertain this matter, hopefully at
your earl iesr caavenieaace.
Very truiy youra,
WILLARD J . S HARP'E
WJS:ds
CC: Mr. ItoberL Turner, Cotiinty Engineer
CC: Mr. Charles Hugg#.ns, Planning Cammissivn
CC: Mr. Robert M. Schaeffer, Attorne,y
~ i
b6V 37 171/1
4r. S. M. Fisher
l.aad I~la~,~t$ealott Dept, Room 3080
Imble C?il aud Refinin~ Co~;
:'.0. Box 2180
. _ . ....,f v . _ ~_.o; Y •t:~-_ ...s.'vl. 'v.:1*:. i ti.u'vt~.: ti .:c:lli,
(~omwuny, agplied to Spokene Coumty far a aane chaage of psroperty located v`:
the intereectian vf SSul],ivsa aoad aad Broadwa,y Avenue in Bpokaae Caunt; ~ .
'1'he property owned by your canpsny that wae involved in the zone chane;c.
_ : , : . • ,,3d aa toZlow&.
Lloc_L l of Vora:dale rzu,r. Aiiditiou taxce t ::;.ie uest 1i-,,~.
'~hereof; located in the Nartheast 1!4 (NE 1,/4~ of Secti Gn 11~
';.°ownehip 26 N. , Rmge 44 B.W.M.
ihis zcute ohenge action hae pmgreesea tlLrauS4 iiris], public hearin6s and V-
encl.osed order calling for tho iatplemeuting reeolutian eubject te the listF-_'
cottditiona hea been sigaed by the Bomrd of Covnty Comniasioners. The road~
dediVBViCr ;?+'1-' ^ ritr~r!1~1r`•''1s'?'1'~', rn; 't;~ °h-}f.s"~~ c. lt...-1- d'~ ,."1 . .,1 A. _ t... . .
pS'Cr17P. T`ty A='e: - _ ,
Thet 14 feet of additional rig?at o~
2~roadvay Aveuue iacluding a 25 foot ra~:. ,
~ .
, . _ , .
::roadway Avectua, including sidew8lk, aurbing auui pavintg tv the exiet.:
narement, ba aorietructed or gutarentee be posted with the Caunt- . . . , _ . -
_ . . _ . . ..w.~.. a.. _ _ L. l• ~s_ .`~..t. v✓ ew r.~.~. 4 v .•.el`J1V y 4rl.s 4✓~ .
;•i C,,•,-Itv Con maigsio~.Pra n oM .
uttti.l the ~bove cca..df~~. .a~ h~ve h~►en rn e
t~
~
Mr. S. M. Fieher Z&48-70, Agriculture and Restricted
Iand Maaagement Dept. Resideutial to Freeway Cortmercia?.
Hiamble Oil and Refinir.,- Co. Aiati 3, 1071
We llave beeii warKirg witki the attorney zor Ureaiez` :apoitaue Developmerit
Company, willard Sharpe, to arrange eatisfactioa of the conditione for the
remainder of the property included in the zone change. It rrould be deBirable
for us to know if your compan,y doee intend to take the nsce8eary steps to
have tha zonin,g consummated irith respect to your property. we are enclosin~;
a right of xay deed Yor the necessary r.irht of way conveyance. May we hear
irom you in regard to this matte:.
Yours very truly,
Robert S. i't=er, P. E.
Spokaae Cotmty En,ginee:,
Charles L. Huggirls
Director of Pla.~niz:~^
IiST s 11,
Enc„ 2
United ......es Department of the Int.,..Lor
BO1VNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRAT[ON
~`G PORTLAND, OREGON 97208
V
~ April 1, 1971 ~
In reply refer co
BL
Mr Robert Turner
Spokane County Engineer ~
Spokane County Courthouse '
Spolcane., Waehington 99201
Re Greater Spokane Development Company Plan
Sullivan Road
Dear Mr Turner
We are advised that the Greater Spokane Development Company intends to
develop the property lying immediately west of Sullivan Road and south
of the Interstate 90 Interchange to Broadcaay Avenue. In this reg;trd,
we understand that this firm wfll convey to the County a ten-foot strip
along the westerly right-of-way line of Sullivan Road from the property
above described to provide the County with additional right-of-way for
etreet-Widening purposea Bonnevflle Power Administration holds an
easement on the ten-foot etrfp in queotion and has an easement covering
an additional twenty feet immediately west of the strip in question
We ltiave received assurance from the Greater Spokane Development Company
that, if it ie neceseary Co move any of the poles in our Vera Tap trans-
miasion line, they will pay all the costs of making these moves Under
these circumetancesp we would look to them rather tb,an the County fox
coets of making such a move as required in the development plan
.
Sincerely,j
'
John V. Mulcahy
Chief, Branch of Iand
cc
Greater Spokane Development Co ~
~.ft~afilt @N61NER.
APk 6 1911 .
~
w..n.....~.~..,,r.~
_ . 4~
~ ~ ~ . , ~ I
~1 ~ ~ ~ _ . 3 ~ . ~ ~ j _ , ~ 1
' ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ _ - ~ f ~ ~ I . -
~ . ~ ~ , - , -r-- ~ ,
I w ~ ~ i ~ - ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ , , , ~ _ _
- i fi~S' ~ , t,...~-- , . ~ _ - ~ , Y1 ~ 1 1 ~
, ~ R , ' ~ - ~ t ~ ; ; ~ ; ~ , _ _ i _ ~ _ ~ e- ` - ^
~ _ ~ ~
~ . ' ~ , . ~ ~ ~ i - ~ , _ ~ , ~
, - , ~ . ~ , _ ,
~ t i . ~ ~ , . _ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~c; ,
~ ~ ~ i ' _ - i ~ i _ _ ~ '~4 ,
1 ~ ~ _ , - _ ~ _ - ~ i V ~ ~---~-~"'~„t„~ i M
~ 4~ , I ~ - . ..d,_ 1 ~ , y rr « , 4 - __._...-s-.' ,
~ -7 , , I , t~~ . , , ~t , _ ~
I . y ~ , ~ i ~ ~ II . - 4 . ~ ~
I ^ ~ i I ~ ~ ~ i ' ; 4 ` '
t . t,~"'~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ . ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ .
F ~ ; , ~ ? k~ ' ~ _ ~ tt't ' - ~
~ ~ ~ „ ~1 ~h ~ 'M9~a ~ ~ ~,y~~~~'- ~~..a '
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ 1 ~ t1~ o t , ? , ' ; , - ~ ~1 , ~ ~ ~,4 '4 ~ - .
' 4[ ~ $ _ _ ~ " k'~ _ _ _ - - 7
r ' _ _ ~ ~ ~ _ ~R . _ ~ ; ~ _ _ - ' 1
~ ~ i _ , , ~I ~ ~ . , } _ ~ l ~,~y ~ i i p ~ ~ , 5 { ~ 1
e( ww~ ,.T t U ~ . . ~ I ~ 4_ f t
4l~ y ( ' i ` ~ . ~ ~ . t ~ti r ~ ~ ~ ~ , r ~ ' . ti ~ '.1 ~ . ' l~' , ~ ~ ~
~ . ~ i ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ , ~ • ~ ~ . . ~ ~y ~ ,
~ ~ i ` ~ ~ 11 , o--._ ~ ~ ~ ; _ ~
a~ ' ~ . " ~ ~ , , ~~ti 1 ~ ~ - t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `y ~.x ~ ' ~ -~r _ I
I~ ~ , f _ . ~4.~'~- ~ i _ . { i ~ ' _ i ~ ~ , 1 , . ,
~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ 1, _
~ ~ t _ . I s d ' 1 'I ' ` ~ ~ - ' ' y~~ w +e ^
~ ~ ~ I Y t, . ~ I I ~ ~ i ~ ~ _ . r+' ± ~ _ _
' ~ ~ , , , i ' s---'"'r_._. ~ ~ ,~l ~ ~ ' . ~ a 4_ ~
, ~ , , ~ ~ ~ f - a . ' _
1 - ~ J ~ ~ • _ ~ ~ . _ ~ i ~
, '
J , d :
` m { 1--- ~
~
NOT FOP, PUBLICATION - INFQRMATION FOR THE FOLLOV1lING INDIVIDUALS ONLY
Nessrs Quackenbush, Schadegg, Bell, Cook, Hales, Smith, and Mrs Rawlings
October 30, 1970
STAFF FTTVDrNGS PERTINENT TO ZONE CHANGE APPLICATIONS
1 ZE-48-70 - ZONIiVG PLA1V FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD PLANIVING
COMUfISSION AT REC)UEST OF GREAT'"PR SPOKANE DEVELOPMEidT
CONPANY
Staff Recommendation
1) That the Planning Commission direct to the staff to advertise for
consideration a change in the Comprehensive Plan to indicate high-
dznsity residential uses for properties fronting on Sullivan Road
between Broadway Avenue and Nission Avenue, and
2) That the Planning Commxs sf on direct the staff to place on the regular
agenda without petition any viable 1Vlultiple Family Suburban develop-
ment proposal for the advertised properCy Such applfcation shall show
the development of the entire advertised area and shall be made wzthin
five (5) years
Analysis
The staff is of the opinion that the analysis presented at last month's
hearinq is still applicable The staff has mailed copies of that analyszs
to the Commission members for review The staff has also conducted a
Multiple Family Suburban Evaluation to show the supply and demand
characteristics of apartment development in the Spokane Valley The Free-
way Commercfal survey indicates the approximate acreages zoned or
approved for Freeway Commercial development as well as the existing and
proposed facilities avaYlable to the traveling public. Both of these reports
were mail.ed to Commission members earlier thfs week
,
- 1 -
.
2.. ZE-48-70 - ZONING P'LAN FOR bJEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD P'LANNING COMMISSION AT
REQUEST OF GREATER SPOKANE DEVELOPLMENT COMPANY
Staff Recommendation
1e That the Planning Commission direct the staff to advertise for consideration
a change in the Comprehensive Plan to indicate high-density residential uses
for properties fronting on Sullivan Road between Broadway Avenue and Mission
Ave-iue, and
2. That the Planning Commission direct the staff to place on the regular agenda
wi.thout petition any viable Niultiple Family Suburban development proposal
for the advertised propertyo Such application shall show the development
of the entire advertised area and shall be made within five (5) yearso
Background
At the June 26, 1970 hearing, the Planning Commission removed the following zones
ior consideration in the study 1) Restricted Residential, 2) Local Business,
and 3) Conmercialo The following zones or combinatZOns of such zone,s were
rztained for consideration for this month's hearing 1) Residential Office,
z) Multiple Family Suburban, and 3) Freeway Commerciala The applicant has
submitted supplemental plans for the Freeway Commercial proposalo
Analysis
1. Freeway Commercial
The staff has reviewed the revised developments plans submitted by the
applicant who proposes a Freeway Commercial Zone which would include two (2)
service station sites, a motel complex, and a restauranta On these dev-
elopment plans, the applicant has attempted to show how the project could
be effectively screened from the adjoiru.ng residential area to the north
and westo
The text portion of the Comprehensive Plan and the criteria contained in
tne Freeway Commercial Zone relate to the following objectives for
determining the best locations for Freeway Commercia.]. Zones
1. To provide the highest degree of useful.ness and convenzence to
Freeway userso
Zo To create a mirumum of traffic congestion or haZards on the limited
access highway, its access and egress ramps, and connecting county
roadso
3. To create a minimum of adverse effect upon property developed, or
planned for development, for residential usee
With respect to the second objective, it would appear that this proposal
would create little problem wz.th respect to the functioning of the a.nter-
change or the connecting County roadse The Enpneer has recommended the
widening of SullZVan Road and Broadway Avenue by ten (10) feeto They would
also restrict access across the median of Sullivan Road and would request
redesign of the Misszon Avenue-Cataldo Avenue intersectione However we
_3_ Continued
,
ZE-48-70 - ZONING PLAN FOR 4JEST SIDE OF SULLNAN ROAD Continued
feel that approval of this project would generate still more demand for
Commerczal development ac:DSS Sullivan and we frankly wonder whether the
street can effectively handle that much traffica
With respect to the first ob3ective, we do not believe that this property is
well situated,compared to other quadrants of this or other interchanges
within Spokane County, to best serve the traveling publico The property
does not have good visibzlity from the Freeway, consequently, if the property
were developed in accordance with the applicant's proposal, extensive signing
would be required at the detriment of adjacent residential areaso Indeed, it
is extremely doubtful that effective signing of the subject property could
be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of the Freeway Commercial
zonee
bJith respect to the third criteria, we frankly do not know of an interchange
quadrant less qualifiedo The property in question is a portion of a sub-
divi.sion primarily desigried for singlE-family residences and duplexese
Altr.ough, admittedly, some of the lots within the project fronting on
Sullivan would not be conducive for single family residences or duplexes,
the staff is of the opinion that the property should not be developed to the
detriment of adjolning residencese While a great deal could be done to
minimize the impact on the residential properties by controlled development
of the Freeway commercial proposal, the effects of traffic, noise, and night
activity, and so one, which are unavoidably associated wi.th service stations,
restaurants, and motels could not help but have a detrimental effect upon
the adjoining residential propertiesv
Analysis of the applicant4s revised proposal indicates some effort to screen-
off the subject property from adjacent residential properties to the north
and west. However, the service station sites are still not effectively
screened from existiag residences.
Earlier this year, the Planning Commission dena.ed a request for a service
station site on the northwest corner of Broadway and Misslon, which is
north of the advertised property. The staff is of the opinion that the
present proposal is in an even less advantageous location for development
than the previous requesto
The Lamplighter Lodge request to the northeast of the present proposal
was indeed visible from the freeway P.nd has had almost no effect on
existing residential devel.opmentb We therefore do not feel that this
request should be calssified as an extensZOn of the I,arnplighter developmenta
Tha staff,therefore, recommends that the requests for Freeway Commercial >
zoning for the southwest quadrant of the Sullivan interchange be denied.
2. Residential Office.
Although the staff in its June 26, 1970 reoommendatzon considered the
possibilities of Residential Office zoning for portions of the advertised
property, it is doubtful that offices would be developed on the property as
a single integrated projecto Because access to Sullivan Road would have to
be restricted, an interzor roadway would have ta be developed to effectively
Continued
-4-
ZE-48-70 - ZONING PLAN FOR WEST SIDE OF SULLIVAN ROAD (Continued)
serve the offices in the projecta It is doubtful that the subject property
could be completely developed for offices at this time because of the
availabzlity of office sites in the Spokane Valleye
The staff, therefore, recommends that the Residential Office zoning proposal
be removed from consideration at this time
3. Multiple Family Suburbano
The staff is of the opinion that the aduertised property could be effectively
developed for town houses and apartments with less impact on adjacent
residential uses than either office uses or a Freeway Commercial developmente
The five acre parcel could be developed as an integrated multiple family
project which would provide effective landscaping and screeninge The
project could be developed with A low profile architectural design which
Vrotil.d afford privacy to adjacent reszdenceso Traffic problems could be
mznz.mized by the use of an interior roadwayo
The site has substantial conformity wzth the criteria repeatedly suggested
by the Cammission for the establishment of apartment zoningo The advertised
property is located on a major arterial (Sullivan Road)e The site is located
on the edge of ar~ established neighborhood, rather than toward the interioro
The high density residential development is in reasonable proximzty to
shopping serviceso
The site offers two other advantages
lo It is close to the Freeway and therefore allows easy access to the
traffic grido
2. It ia close to the Trentwood Industrial area azid the Spokane Industrial
Parko
On this month's agenda, the Planna.ng Commission has a proposal for an apartment
project immediate to the Argonne Interchangeo Evidently, the szte will provide
quick access to the Freeway and in turn downtown Spokaneo Apartments in the
Trentwood area are currently serving part of the demand for hoUsing near the
induatrial areao The staff believes that an apartment project at Sullivan
and Misslon could capitalize on the previously mentioned locational advantageso
The apartment project would also lessen whatever impact the Lamplighter Lodge and
accompanying service station may have on the residen.tial developarent to the
west of Sullivan Roado Presumable apartments may be built to the south of the
Lamplighter as wello
The staff therefore recommends that the Planning Commission advertise a change
in the Comprehensive Plan to encourage high-density residential land uses along
Sullivan Road between Broadway and Mission. Furtherrnore, the staff recommends
that the Planning Comms.ssion accept without peta.tion, any viable application
for a multiple famil.y project on the subject propertyo The staff does not
recommend zonz.ng actlon at thzs ts.me because of the desire to review any apartment
project propoeal.
-4a.
~ 4 a APAR'N&N'T"S
r
111.~11~~ ~
~
/9100 f%r rq(03 ►964 l9bc 1966 lqb7 /960 19(09
~ N~E~~mo• #reAc_ 109 f45_ _45- 9-8 _iob _ r?l ~"M0~ _zos 6s~ bSq
C,-ry to S l4-o I4-09$`' 1155 109 t45 c% +19
~d.t. MuQlb S 51 ~ 68 8s s22 16 3 s24o
3 9 34 ~ ~ - S'3
CaST 197
wesr - - 4 - - - - - - -
, , .
Igbo #4~( 062. f9b3 ~ (9b4 /9bS /966 1967 l96g t969
- _ ~
c~w cy? 95 ioo 62 bz 63 99 4 75or 63• 6
19 c ~ 1 , ? S, O
SOJ'n♦ - - - - -
~'AS~c I Z 19 3~ io•t~ ~3~2 2g•4
- -
wELIr - - 3 - - - - _
. ~ ~
?1ti-~.- ~L~(1 C~ ~ S/
l - - - - -r'
V
AL.0 OSl ~'+Q ~.l.~ lr~r ~ ~ l .1~ ~ ~,n ~Q.6+
~ (1 ~ -
A7 ~o t
L - ,
-se-" b c.a.w i~. tl-p-
r
+ 44
j 6A5-r
~ ~j NGuu~►b,e~► tl~rs
l ~
i9bo 1%1 t~07. 1%3 t9b4 1965 1966 1967 1%2 1969
32.5 27b 19s 175 .Z a 5 3so 43o 4*z _ 7.3o 9
ZSIT _2_2s' ~/49_ _/36 a115 234^ 402
~
~'t~. _ia'_ 74 1 Sal i41
_ OAI 6E9s! ~8 _30 _ ---3~'_ _•~7_ 30~ _ _72 itb 139 _
,
_ 6~ _ P.p~rc.~~ro►~~__ ~vo~.~au~'~o+~ _ - - - - - _ ~
14OA r96i t9fo% 19163 tqb4 1965' /9d(p 19641 1968 /949
,
81•5 7c ~__'71 ?_'71'8 6?•2_ 54•4_ b5•8 651 64•c
_~~P~~kEs _r_ 3' .~_S' g- - 4• I~__ 6 9___ 3~.~ 7_ y 11 b_ I I g 8'a2 79
-
l"1~ 12. -2 1 5.3 9@7I1 l. so a01 1611
~ "~iCA li.CgS ~ 6 _/d 9_ ~r7~~`- I ~•4 t ~ 3 ~/3 ~ 16 g c -7 J` ~24 `lV • 1
~
~
.eh.~-~ ~~,~c ~~,~o-~.~,~.~ ~ t~. -e~.~-~~ ,t,,.,h,~ ~~S
C&x-eS QnA fbC&Axoj K o O-W-c&Fa.d Gz 44A Q
l '
~ ~ •3 ju WI► Y
4''~' S z
. /y~ ~ ,~,t;1
~~'S• ~ ~ .
~ R• 6
'a
. s ~„t t•2 F
. T
-
1-
. . ~ C.~d s ~y ' ~ ~ j ~
♦ ~a~r~ •
4,01
~ , .J1 R • 1
`~~.`J~ 1 . ~y• t~ • ~
r~j.1"
cz f +t t~~j' •
•r
("~~'~,E, ~ 1~.~'~ 1•~,f;'~'4v~~ c',~.!~~ . +
\ ~`~P
-F
4 '
r~~~: T A.
r . r,,,~
;G1.p
~t ~'1 ~ fy ~ a J
~
e
d
,
• ~ ; a _ Z 0
[ , 7 1~ - } • /y ~'q~ f ~ 9
~'~C~ f., n~.~~ ~ : • ~..1-
r,,,...~.._...~- ;.n9
3ro
r:,
R~f•:f~ - (,r~,, 1"~.f]J~]~
'►l V '
5.L' ~
t.
, ..•~1 a ~
~
~ ~~~y -
J
,
~
~
May 3, 19 71
I
Mr. Vliillard j. Sharpe, Attomsy -Northtovm Office Building North 4407 Division Street 'Spokane, Washington 99207
Dear Mt. Sharpe:
Rs: Development Plan, Grearer Spokane DeveIopment Comp 4ny, Lnal
We have reviewed your Ietter of April 28, 19 7I, and the text statement Develapmont and Traffic Control Plan enclosed thereto. The enclosura is, indeed,
consistont with the conclusions reached at Qur recent meeting. We did find one fnad-
vertent omisaion from t,he property proposed for dodication and/or improvemonts; namely,
the West 1/2 of Lot l, Block 1, Voradale Park Addition which you propose tn your plan
tor cQnstruction of an eight unit apartment. In connection with that property, an item,
1-(d), under Conditions and Roquiromants should be included as foUows:
l-d) The South 10 feet of the sub)ect property (except the East 1/2 of Lot 1,
Block 1, Veradale Park Addit,ton owned by Humble 011 Company) for the
purpose of widening Broadway Ave nue .
Also, roference to Broadway Avenue shouid be mado in Item 2.
We are sending a copy oi this letter to Mr. Boatwright, with ths understandinq
that ho will incorporate the text togethor with tae abovo-listod changes to 1e inscrlbed
upon the transparent copy of the final Development and Traffic Cont.rol Plan. We will
then submit tho same together with an appropriate zoning resalution to the Board of
County Commiaeloners. Lat us again romind Mr. Boatwright and/or Mr. Read to
incorporaLe the landscape plans for Texaco onto tho transparency of the Development and I
~ Traffia Control Plan so that the Planning Commis5ion and Comnissioners wlll not have ta
~ take separate action on those landscape plans .
~
i I
i
I
i
~
Mr. Willard J. Sharpe - 2- May 3r 1971
We have attempted to contact the Humble 4i1 Company by lett¢r with respect to
their possible parti.cipation in the zona change but as per our discussion with you, we
are removing their property from the resolut3on, pending separate agreement with them
with respect to necessary road dedication and road fmprovements. ,
Sincerely,
C HARLE S L. HLTGGIIVS
Diroctor of PlazuZing
ROBE RT S. TtJ RNER,, P. E.
County Enginear
CLH:Cmw
cct Mr. james E. Boatwright
Nir. Donald L. Read, Architect
~
I
i
I I
i
I
i
i
~
i '
~
i
I ,
, ,
ES~(R+c~fE~ - icES' bF.04. .
R
r~ x ► 2~~
. g
~
l.,, A-TTED '
R ,
L _ t7c-
6b.
owe,T_BS.s~ ~
' S • ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ 1
3 ~ J
~
Naz•jb w "~t,~„ , ,
~ *V-q~ R' SG, ,S
3144 Lc,t7aA +~:~v~
r'A"
ay vw ~
5 ia Yw,
h6 ` ~ ~
~ , ~j~ "'~•,k~ E 4
~ ♦ OS Y .64
~ . . , ~ : . a ' ` , °'r ' ' ■ d.
.y
. _ ~
. • \ I ~
~ U
~ ~
15
J 61
~
~
~ . . 7 b
. .
~
, 12
. ,
CL
f N
~
`
: E►
~ ~ 010
' z cD
14 t • ~ ~
.
a .
- ~ ~
~ ♦4 0;: i
f l
t ~
'co
• a+ ~ ~ ~
• . ~
. . '
' .
~ • ~ ~
. . ~
. ~
- - - - - - - - - - - T
~
j ~ - - - - - ~ Y ~ . ~ , ~ - - -
1
, I V!
~
~ + lll
~
~ , ~ ~
► - , y _ ~ _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ -1.---~ ~ _ ~ = ~
r- . .
i ~ . ~ .
1 ✓"1 I i ~
I ~ ~ L-`' 12Cj r~' , I'~1; ~ .
' -T"Y~/~rq L = j ~ i ►~~-r-:~-= n~~ ~;~,~r,r~..~►~
~
~
~
~ - - - _ f - - ;
~
, ~ , ~ , ,J.~ '
I ~ r' • ~ ~ ~ ' I' ~ ...r x ~ ~'r' ' ~`1 I
`
~ , • ; ,..-•a t
~
' ~ I 1 1.... ~ L ~ ~L:f►. . i + ~ !i ~
. ~
• -.w~--..+..-~.~.-.._.~.-~+.-.+-v~..~...~..~~-~.. . w..-..r--. ..r- ...wv.. , i aMx.....a~~.~~ ~:+sws+~+-.-..sw rs~~~~ 1
~
~
f • ' ` ~ Ir ~~~v r~cs
AT TA Ci-li'tvl E tA )=EN C ~ =
7RA~'~'/C C 0 N'7 F"z C."~
AN' -5 1r4~~~A C)
Y;"~
I;
~""~."~..`_r.L--'~~•.-.~eA ~ .~_If"" ~I -4`-~'- •r/ V 11 4,~.. i" ~~',I -r . 1✓ 4"W
7- ~
SPOKANE COUNT~Y -
. _ANNING COMMISSION ~
N. 611 JEFFERSON ~ ~ •
/ _
Sp(-)uaN_, Wn9HIf1GTON 99201 ,pEC>~7CiLP
-n P^
k'AS~ _IF:r~=~' '
~Z
l
~ .
~ i . . , , . . i _ : . . . . .
Richar~ u_~mz~hries
~ 750 Li~ee1~n Buildinp
~S .
~ Snokane, Irlashirgton
J R E,, \
• ~
Ja;; 4, ~
I
~:r~ T E r_ey
, ~ ,
F , yyA s,~,.
I
1 ~
i
r.
~
~
!
I \ ~ ~ M
~
3 ~y G~a
~~r ~
• ; ~ .v~ ~ ~ ~
.
~ `~1~(~,{, '~s > • ~ ~ I
r., °x 4~r • " C ~
~ • ~p 9 ~
q ~ 1 'b .T ,Q ~ ` c,~ -•~ca-~ ,
ar o ra a ~ ' -
1 v
so ~75T !v,,
~
4
<
41
0~ ~
~j
Q ' : Z * ~ rT
/ ti•aj 3 ~ i 7 ~ ~ ~
*w f 19L , .7r 'cT~sn~ ~7 ry ~
/ ` ~ Q k~~, / d 4 ^ rl $
; / ~ r ~ ~Oyp ~ ,p ,~C "f ~i ~ 3~°~ a~' 4
~ Ad'0~~ ~
t
-.4
~ t .7 ~,~1 ~Ih► ~ P~ry~ ! a { ~
741.t.1 16
,b, . ~ ''aa ~'r9j. f,5 ~ ~Fr~ $
~ • ~ ` ~ OV 10
n i
•
o , .S / 3f
~ O 'o
17
s
~
f
✓ 3 1? '
~E ~ r IY r ~ ~s ~1 ~
~ • ~ t ' 'ul
,r,~/~ ~ l,t'~ r n ~ e ,~2 ,1l+ y
~ ? ~ 'p~ a
; Lt
' a Miq t r, o fv"21 q vE lk
fv. ♦r
14
zo RA VF9L L Jarr*f ~c` ~ - ~
}EOs~+ r~~• " rL~p` • ~ ?l.re • ~
JVa t R+- ~ W yf /~+1~ ~ / ~ .Z ~►.i tf 7'
lp
~ T►~ r i A /t+T • ` K ' . z ~ ,y ~ O f..l . ~
;~b 21 3 = •z4
SD~ ~ S3 _~~Q ~ ~ .r a _ /10 2"yzt"{~ _ .
1I
~4 - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ .
,
1
MINUTES
January 14, 19 72
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
ZE-48-70 - AMENDMENT (SUPPLEMETVT) TO DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONTROL,
PLAN - SERVICE STATION SIGiV: SPOKANE NEON SIGN COMPANY,
(Request #2)
Planning Commission Recommendation: Application withdrawn at the reauest
of the applicant.
A. Reason:
In a letter dated January 13, 19 72, Robert D. McGoldrick, atfiorney,
indicated that the applicant, Spokane 1Veon Sign Company had "been
instructed to withdraw the application relating to the location of
a 30' slgn proposed on the Texaco premises situated in Block 1,
Veradale Park Addition".
B. General Data:
1. Location: Section 14, Township 25 N. , Range 44, E.W. M.
Lot 2, except the West 140 feet of the South 40
feet; all of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8; those
portions of Lots 9 and 10 and that portion of
Cataldo Avenue vacation lying east of a line
parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 feet west of
the east line of Lots 7& 8. All in Block 1 of
Veradale Park Addition.
2. Applicant: Spokane Neon Sign Company
North 131 Pittsburg
Spokane, Washington
3. Site Size: Approximately 5 acres
4. Existing Zoning: Freeway Commercial, established May 27, 1971
5. Supplement to Development & Traffic Control Plan. Locatfon of a 30
foot sign. This is a revision to the plan sub-
rmtted and heard by the Planning Commission on
October 29, 1971.
- 17 -
KOBERT D. McGOLDRICK
ATTORNEY AT LAW
SOYTMTOWN OFFICB BUILOINO
PMONe KErsroNE 4 1874 EAST 2810 29TH AVENUH
SPOKANE WASHINCdTON 99209
January 13, 1972
Spokane County Planning Comma,ssion
West 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington 99201
Re: ZE-48-70, Amendment (Suppleme$t)
to Development & Traffic Control
Plan: Sign
Applicant: Spokane Neon Sign Company
Supplement: Location of a 30' Si_qn
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that the undersigned has been
instructed to withdraw the application of Spokane Neon
Sa,gn Company relating to the location of a 30' sign
proposed on the Texaco premises situated in Block 1,
of Veradale Park Addition to the County of Spokane.
A hearing has been set for Friday, January 14,
1972, 9:00 A.M., in the Assembly Room of the Spokane
CountX Courthouse. We do not intend to appear at that
hearing. Please accept this letter as a formal notice
of withdrawal.
Very truly yours,
.
D, :
RDMcG:ce OBERT D. MeGOLDRICK
cc: Spokane Neon Sign Company;
&
Texaco
F-109
r
ZE-48-70
In the matter of a hearing to consider an amendment (supplement) to the previously
approved Denelopment Traffic Control Plan, ZE-48-70, for property west of Sullivan Road
and south of Cataldo Avenue. The amendment proposes location of a advertising structure
for the Texaco Service Station being erected on property which is described as Lot 2,
except the West 140 feet of the South 40 feet; a11 of Lots 39 49 59 69 7, and 8;
those portions of Lots 9 and 10 an.d portion of Cataldo Avenue vacation lying east of
a line parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 feet west of the east line of Lots 7 and 8.
Al1 in Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition in Section 14, Township 25 N., Range 44, E.W.M.
Spokane County, Washington. (This is a revision of the plan submitted to the Planning
Commission on October 29, 1971).
((West of Sullivan and South of Cataldo)
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE 0F WASHINGTON )
} SSo
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
b!4'
, Being first duly sworn9 deposes and says:
4 1
That at all tz.mes mentioned herei.n he was, and now is, a citizen of The United
States9 a resident of Spokane County, Washington9 and over the age of twenty-one
years.
That on q 19-2(, he personally posted three (3) true
and correct copies of the hereto attached NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING at the
follows.ng places i.n Spokane County, to-w1.t t
Ogil 'o 1.
c
~ i ~
. ~
2 I
~
~
~ r
3.
Subscribed and sworn to me
L) 193.1
~
N4TARY PUBLIC I1V AND FOR SPOKANE COUNTY9 WASHINGTQN
Residing at Spokane 9 Washington
~
JANUARY ,AGENDA TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COIINTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Time: Friday, January 14, 1972, 9:00 A.M.
Pl.ace : Assembly Room, County Court House
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT & TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
1. ZE-48-70, Amendment (SuDplement) to Development & Traffic Control Plan: Sign
a. Location: Section 14, Township 25 N., Range 44, E.W.M.
Lot 2, except the West 140 feet of the South 40
feet; all of Lots 3, 4, 51 6, 7, & 8; those portlons
of Lots 9 and 10 and that portion of Cataldo Avenue
vacation lying east of a line parallel to Sullivan
Road and 160 feet west of the east line of Lots
7& 8. All in Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition.
b. Applicant: Spokane Neon Slgn Company
North 131 Pittsburg
Spokane, Washington
c. Site Size: Approximately 5 acres
d. Existing Zoning. Freeway Commercial, established May 27, 1971
e. Supplement to Development & Traffic Control Plan. Location of a 30 foot sign.
This is a revision to the plan submitted and heard
by the Planning Commisslon on October 29, 1971
,
T ~R~NTc
,
~
~ Ip~N , o
a ~ ~
-
~ TFE
AVE
s yPRru el2
0
h ~
N o WT ►A
Iso 153 ~3b Sc~A~.E• 1`= 2avo~
M
9
~
ci
TE7x,,Aca
.
d f~7Q~~~~
<e
r
~
~
~
,
~
SPOKAN E N EON SIGN CO.
P1e w-0r i w ~1 RdMA ''V N 131 PITTSBURG SPOKANE, WASH 992D2 KE 5-3604
December Z, 1971
Spokane County Plan Commission
Spokane County Court House
West 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington
Re • Texaco - Mission
& Sulllvan
Gentlemen :
We respectfully request permission to install a TEXACO
modular sign facing East at the above location and the plot
plan and structural plan attached to this letter.
The sign as we propose would be within the 301 height limitat-
ion in the Freeway Commercial zone.
The west or back side of the sign would be completely blanked
off with metal so no lighting or Texaco copy would face the rest
of the development of apartment houses as planned by Mr Boatright
who approves the sTgn plan as we are submitting Tt.
We thank you for your consideration.
~
S1 e ely
~
~
n . igle
~
. f
~
G JQ/ms
enc. '
SALES • RENTALS • Creative De.r:gn:ng • PLASTICS 9 PORCELAIN ENAMEL
yCP 7 i H 4-4- t9,v ~or7, e;
~
~
1. DATE OF BREAKING GROUND TO COMPLETION DATE OF ENTIRE PROJECT.
2. WILI PROJECT BE COMPLETED BEFORE TRAILERS ARE BROUGHT IN?
3• WILL YOU HAVE ACCO140DATI0N5 FOR EXPANDO-TRA1lERSj, IF SO# WHERE WILL
THEY 8E I.OCATED?
4• HON FAR WILL TRAILERS BE LOCATEO FROM EXISTING FENCE?
5. WHAT KINO OF FENCE WILL YOU PUT UP AND WILL 1T BE MAINTAINEO?
6• WFiAT TYPE OF SEWER SYSTEM AND LOCATtON.
7• WMAT WILL TSIS DO TA OUR WATER SUPPLY? AT PRESENT TIME WE 00 NOT HAVE
AN AMPLE SUPPLYo
S• WHERE WILI RECREATION FACILITIES BE LOCATED?
9• THIS SAME COMPANY Wll.l. BE MOVING IN 65 FAMILIES IN NEW 14PARTMENTS AT EI.LA
IINO BROAOWAY - WiTM THE ADOITIONAL 69 FAMILIES IN TRAILER COURT HOW WILL
T411 S EFFECT FOLI.OWI NG:
000,
A. SCHOOL,S
6 2
9. TAXES
C• TRAFFiC
MINUTES
October 29, 19 71
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN I
ZE-48-70 - AMENDMENT (SUPPLEMENT) TO DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC CONTROL
PLAN - SERVICE STATION SIGNS: SPOKANE 1VEON SIGN COMPANY,
,
,
Planning Comnussion R+ecommendation: Approve as follows:
1. A standard 4'x8' Texaco hexagonal sign shall be installed in accordance
with the submitted plot plan as amended. The sign shall also conform to
the following specifications:
a) The sign shall not exceed 20 feet in height.
b} The copies or illuminated surfaces shall be oriented north and south
to serve traffic on Sullivan Road and shall conform to the lighting
standards of Section 4.08A.020-C-(11) of the Spokane County
Zoning Ordinance.
2. The applicant shall prepare a sep3a copy (Amendment to Final Development •
and Traffic Control Plan) of the approved sign proposal for the Board of
County Commissioners for review. Such copy shall i.ncorporate the amend-
ments to the subject plan as well as text or descrlption of the sigrung
requurements listed above,
Background:
On Mag 27, 1971, the Board of County Commi s sioners appraved a"Final
Development and Traffic Control Plan" for a Freeway commercial proposal on
the southwest corner of Mf ssion Avenue and Sullivan Road (ZE-48-70).
Because of the site's relation to the Spokane Valley Freeway (I-9 0), the Plan
contemplated signing oriented toward Su],lfvan Road fnstead of the Freeway.
A. R+easons:
1. Approval of hexagonal sfgn.
a) The Planning Commission is of the opinion that a 4'x8' on-premise
hexagonal sign limited to 20 feet i n height and oriented toward
Sullivan Road would not affect the developed residential neighborhoods
to the we st .
2, Dena.al of modular sign.
a) The Planning Commissxon xs of the opinion that the proposed modular
sign would be of such size and bulk that residential neighborhoods to
the west would be detrimentally affected. The proposed sign would
- 19 - (contd. )
ZE-48-70 - AMENDMENT (SUPPLEMENT) TO DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC C4NTROL
PLAN - SER`TICE STATION SIGNS (contd. )
have 165.5 square feet of advertising surface displayed over szx (6)
modules. The sign was proposed to be 30 - 35 feet in height and the
illununated surface of the sign would face east.
b) Section 4.08A.020-C-(11) of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance
restricts signiing in the Freeway Commercial Zone to one free-
standing sign structure to identify each establishment or place of
busiLne s s .
B. General Data:
1. Location: Section 14,Township 25 N. , Range 44, EWM.
Lot 2, except the West 140 feet of the
South 40 feet; all of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7& 8;
those portions of Lots 9 and 10 and portion
of Cataldo Avenue vacata.on lying east of a
line parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 feet
we st of the ea st line of Lots 7 and 8.
All in Block 1 of Veradale Park A+dditi.on.
2. Appla.cant: Spokane Neon Sign Company
Agent for Texaco Service Station
North 131 Pittsburg Street
Spokane, Washington
3. Site Size: Approximately 5 acres
4. Exa.sting Zomng: Freeway Commercial, established May 27,
1971
5. Supplement to Developmen#/I.ocation of advertising structure on the
Plan to be Considered: subject property.
6, Application of Zoning
Provision: Chapter 4.08A, Section 4.08A.040
- 20 -
,
w • - ZFWA-70
w
In the matter of a hearing to coasider aa amendment (supplement) to the previously
approved Development Traffic Control Plan, ZE-48-70, for property west of Sullivan xoad
aad soutb of Cataldo Aveaue. The amendment proposes locatioa of an advertisiag structure
for the Texaco Service Station beiag erected on groperty mhich is deecribed as Lot 29
except the West 140 feet of the South 40 feet; all of Lots 39 4, 5, 6, aad 8;
those portfoas of Lots 9 aad 10 aad portion oY Cataldo Avenue vacation lyzag eaet of
a line parallel to Sullivan Road and 160 feet weBt of the eaet line of Lots 7 and 8.
All in Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition in Section 149 Townehip 25 N., xange 44,
E.W.M., Spokane County, Washiagton.
(West of Sullfvan and south of Cataldo Avenue)
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SSe
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
bk-4 , Heing first duly sworn, deposes and says:
That at all times mentioned herein he wasp and now is, a citlzen of The United
Statesy a resident of Spokane County, Washington, and over the age of twenty_one
yearse
That on 19 he personally posted three (3) true
and correct copies of the hereto attached NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING at the
following places i.n Spokane Countyy, to-wit~
. ~
2.
,
3. i•, _ C -
vh
Subscribed and sworn to me
i9.-7
1
C~ .
~
NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND k'OR SPOKANE COUNTY~ WASHINGTON
Reslding at Spokane, Washington
MCKANNA, HERMAN AND HERMAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
E 10819 SPRAGUE AVENUE
ROBERT J McKANNA SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206
MOWARD M MERMAN
LLOYD A HERMAN TELEPHONE WA 4-8144
October 289 1971
RECEIVED
NOV 1 1971
Spokane County Planning Gommission SPOKANE COUfdTY
Spokan e Cou nt y Gou rt hou se pLqNNING COMMISSION
Spokane f UUashington
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that Ulest Coast Service Company has
no objection to the pending application for a variance
permit to increase the hefght of a sign to be placed
by the Texaco Company on property situated between
Broadway and mission on the Ulest side of Sullivan Road.
An increase in the height of the planned sign will in
no way interfere with the overall development plan that
uue have for the remainddr of the property*
Very truly yours,
UIEST COAST SERUICE COmPANY
By: James oa uur gh
- - est Coast Servoce Corrip...,t
P O Box 1148
Vancouver, Washington 98660
Octobe r 27, 1971
Spoka.ne County Planning C~ommisslon
Spokane,
Washington
Gentl'emen:
This is to inform youu that West Coast 5ervice Company,
ln a meeting held Monday of thia week, reached the
de c i s lon that they` have no obje ction to the s ign var iance,
that has been reque sted by Texaco Oil Compa.ny,.
~
Very tr-uly yours,
~ - ~
Robert M. Schaefer
RMS : rn
RECEIV`E gLo )8'
0CT 2 7 1971
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSiUN
1 '
EXAC O
aoILHvM raoavcrs
rWr
SALES DEPARTMENT-U S Oc tober 27, 1971 TEXACO INc
PORTLAND REG[ON N 2733 PI1°I'SBURG
T L. CAREY P O BOX 2626
DI9TRICI' BALE9 MANAGER S'POKAI~~E+ H7ABH, 99220
Spokane County Planning Commission
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington
Dear Sirs :
Texaco Inc. is presently completing construction of
a new, modern service station facility at the intersection of
Mission Avenue and Sullivan Road in the Spokane Valley.
A recent site evaluation study indicates that we
can more effectively serve the needs of the motoring public
with the installation of a freeway identification sign. The
sign we propose to install will be located on the northwest
corner of our service station property. The east face of the
sign will be positioned to provide clear visibility to traffic
westbound on I-90 approaching the Sullivan Rd. Interchange. The
west side of the sign will be blanked out to prevent any possible
light reflection on nearby neighbors to the west of our location.
The sign will be 39 feet in length and will be 35
feet high to the base of the letter modules. Each of the 6 letter
modules will be 4 feet wide by 4 feet, 6 inches high and the sign
will be internally illuminated.
Your favorable consideration of this request will
greatly aid us in serving the complete needs of the motoring
public at this interstate location.
Yours very truly,
TEXACO INC.
T . . Carey
LTB:mis
RJV
CC: Glen Quigley RECEIVED
Spokane Neon Sign Co.
OCT 27 1971
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
OCTOBER AGENDA TELEPHONE No.: 456-22?4
SPOKANE COIINTY PLANNIlVG COMNIISSION
Time: Friday, October 29, 1971, 9:00 A.M.
Place: Assembly Room, County Court House
AMEIVDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT & TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN
10. ZE-48-70, Amendment (Supplement) to Development & Traffic Control Plan: Sign
a. Location: Section 149 Township 25 N,, Range 44, E.W.M.
Lot Z, except the West 140 feet of the South 40
feet; all of Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, & 8; those portions
of Lots 9 and 10 and portion of Cataldo Avenue vacation
lying east of a line parallel to Sulliva.n Road and
160 feet west of the east line of Lots 7 and 8.
All in Block 1 of Veradale Park Addition.
b. Applicant: Spokane Neon Sign Company
Agent for Texaco Servlce Station
North 131 Pittsburg
Spokan.e, Washington
c. Site Size: Approxl.mately 5 acres
d. Existing Zoning: Freeway Commercial, established May 27, 1971
e. Supplement to Development Plan to be Considered: Location of advertising
structure on the subject property.
f. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4.08A., Section 4.08A.040
'r
a o
~ITE,
ar.ag.pwAN
. .
~
LAy I J ~ SGAI.rr, ~ 1000
~
N
10
SPOKANE NEON SIGN CO.
weal Rdme=UAL N 131 PITTSBURG SPOKANE 24, WASH KE 5-3604
September 13, 1971
Spokane County Plan Commission
Spokane County Court House
West 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington
Re • Texaco
Mission & Sullivan
Gentlemen :
We respectfully request permission to install a TEXACO modular
sign facing East at the above location and the plot plan and structural
plan attached to this [etter.
The sign as we propose would be within the 301 height limitation
in the Freeway Commercjal zone.
The west or back side of the sign would be completely bianked off
with metal so no lighting ot% Texaco copy would face the rest of the
development of apartment houses as planned by Mr. Boatright who
approves the sign plan as we are submitting it.
In addition to the above, the second sign would be a standard 41x8l
Texaco hexogonat sign facing the traffic North and South on Sullivan
Road - 164 to the top.
We thank you for your consideration.
St e IY , t
~
GI n J. Quigley
G JCa/ms
enc.
SALES • RENTAIS • Creat:ve De.r:gn:ng • PLASTICS • PORCELAIN ENAMEL
~
~e
~
STCJXANr. C4UlVTY PI.AIVNII1TG COMIUIIGSIODI
C0U:.'iTY COURT HQUSE
SPCyK1NEo WASMNGT03V
AKLI
CATIQNv
FROP£RT-Y OiWNERS IJP BY:
L
AG.-..~'NDAS MAIL£ D BX: ~ - _ - - - . DAT.*&=
...~la Za 61)
N - B _l~ LEGAL MSC.~PTION Or ?R P~'.TtTy
-ri-
~ i
.
~
T
_ „ • , , ~ --r----'~ c., . _ _ . _ a^_ r . , ~ . ' , _
i
/ ~
. . . . . ~ - ~ - . . . - • ~ • " ~ ~ -
, - . ~ ►+rs . ~ ~ - . L' ~ -'r- , .1.~ ' _ . wr._ . . --s~
~
T . „ ' . . ` " ' . , . ' • . y.r ' . ' - . . _ . , _..._y
/ (J/p~~4
r ~ ..~J
Z
T
/
T
~
oxim . . _ .
r . . _ . . . ~ , . . ~ . - , . . . _ . . . _ . - . ~
0
r.
r`
~s~t-~. - .r••-_-......~~__. ,.~sc..,, . - ~...r.. 4_^ . , ~ :u~.,..._~ w.. ..,.a~n
~
T
~ -
0 ?v 7- _
T
I .
~
:
~ - . _ . _ . - . _ . _ . , -r - • - - -.~_s+ - - r
~ A'
.
~
ro
~ ~ ~
~ . .
~ - _ ~ - - I - - - - - - - - ~
~
~
~
. ~
r
. . ~
~ l l go~'
~
,
,
, ~ • / 1F+
V
i
. .
r l~ ` lv ,
.
ZL
~
~ r
.
N-01T
,
~
~ ► ~ _
~
~ .
, a
~ _ .
~ . rAlF
-VL- ~
t- ~
.
~a. 6 C-q
. .
~ ' ~ ^
~
~..s+.~ s.« r~~"'' ~ _ ~ a d •
' i
_
o~
_ 8 1 ~ ~
~
D~ _
•
- ^
1~'
7~ _
. ~r .-r O
o
~
.
~ _
• O g -
/ , .
~ . - QZ-
-
_ ~ ~ .
~ ' ~ _ - • !
. ` ~ ,r.,,,~• ' tJ c~
1
~ • ~ + I
40
. ~ ~ 60~~
s _
ocs
~
_ . .
~ .
~ . .r....
~ ~ .
s---
,
_
~
.
l~ .
- -
~
, _
r ~
/ r. ~ .
~6' '
....i~ , '
1 ( K~
- / -
. - - r--- . ~ .
~ r
v
. , - ~
. ~ -
~ . o,9,... .
I ~
~ ' •
n~ • ~ , + ~ ~ ~r• ~
. i .
. ~
- ~ -
. ~ -
~ . ~
. , ~ . ~
~
-
, - .
.
~
~
~ _
~
- . / ~
~ ~ a6
r
~
r-
l~ J.-
~
~ .
Q.,
~ _ -
o ~
~
' -
~ ~
f -
, ~ .
, , .
~
C r
~
`
.
i ~
o16'/
/
)
~
' 046
~
_
l Q ~ ~
.
~
/70 7
ps-iie 45~
,
.
~
~ _ .
.9-
~
J
~ l
/
C:)e/
-
~
.
~ -
.
~
~ ~ .
i
.
3Z ~
~
~-~-Z 43
C40
~ - ~
OL
.
oa~
~
~ ~
,
A v
F r k j
i ( waae ~rnu~ _ ( _ h~ u Ta~ ~M unq "
^ ' '.S M/~ ~ ~Irs111 A eI rf~) ~ ~
Y
Ii A ~lO+Aodofll
a0~0.rFij ` { i or~ OAanntt fW~tlM ta9rRK - ~
~0417 i/~J) - I, ~ ; PuB OA tLCO iM TXY ~ aP W
7Mf ~"14 „ O
~y - _ -
y~ I ~Mql ~Wt ~
iwf
r . _
~ F
r~
I T
l* 1
~ t e~ ~ _ ouu+r _
` ~ n r
- u e+~ w~ni n e~a nTtawt~ rsanw~ ap~j , _ - ~
~ IYSamo ceAraa. mar aYtw.aao ~ ~ °iAC saciw* i - _
w TM wv a TA Haf I~ . 290
t►+ul~f H
- - - - - ~1 ~ TA
~ ~IAfiqfO AWpplyq 'F ~ Y@i Ilu~l I . R~ I 14~ RfMIM~W ry,AlTit Mfl!' ~ ~ _ ~ OLKt OpIC r'^• u - y V ~
w.,e.~,y l°p'y) r ~ - ± ° ~ ,
• ` ~ - - - - - AE-*J
~•~w'a ~v - J~nrmuuya~oewvo , ~
• _ _ La~ rous•sny _ _ _ i -
FACG YiEW OF fi16N - " - w 9
rA
_ _ ' J ' y + ~ ~ I ~ = J ~ - l 4 acwr 1'• r~c ~ ~ ~J o
_ ~ ~ ~ . ' _ ' v ,
„ ~ 1_ t y - , FaA eaC]~ew6 A-A.-~o.~0 6~V9 ~as AY~ OS-~a?0 I
_ r ~ t - ' - -
~ ~ ~ nro n4M~7a0 avaqe en r«, aF:v t,}cer aau.i~ ' T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ^ - - ~
rna G 7LfJb6zM M M.efcqRAerurro oY ncw~r /,r~a eo " - - -
_ Ga ~+r~ovaa Aqu,at ~wr eoaMa s~vu~ te aora7'
~ NI~{7 Nu~taaRD 41 s~ae vpNO ~ ~ t~ ~ p ~ i ~ M _ .-f - ~ ,y ~ ~ .
~ / 7w t171pq Oa~e.t Mm ReA OM'ad Mv0 TR.tW w~,aaG
a
e~u Ia d'~cwear ceore,vlealn Ja's rasa n..,
P~+a ~+P mrN e~aa^"i G° r' 17•x f'~ iso ~ r R ~ -E' RtFFREtiCI' ~toAJi(/~uGS, „
'tVA4% Gl~A69o-! AMO phQPAtR ~ 6tQM Cpfd1M4E~1pv pq~
b.F
'1 S ~ J 4Af/ Pr Q/CM M~7Yd N allyMj C4NY//bAQ M'D Id 1 1' ~ • ~ `'f _t 1 IIM14L CW+fy" 7p AQT WdArA fAypraarsa ~rrer~co,we ' ~ - -
4 *aa* ap■fsw AwfM puce yEfteax yB i~Y.VA/ jdf~ ~ _ _ ' ~ ~ ' [ ' ~ ` •
(JFjp 1! . V .
NifROV4:0. cNAfiaM e+aAm 'o ea i., ArreovA4 Aceomo
iC T~ACQ ~16 ~ y
suo
1= y `
j;_f
rexaco iccuMruwr n ~n~rC sr~;
sevaa,oa ereoao Tex
OErB/LS OP S/GN r771~ .
O►7d AR A r
n ~ OAJIA7t ~Y 7R11WO Of -
"'°`o' I "2DS-2890 - '
71
~ E C -
I. ~r ~x~ ...L e2 L: .=1 y. '"f y-•• ` ^ ~•3 ~ ~ _ - ~
-'--SE1 ~Y G,~. yr-~ l ~ ~A
~J ` Y = ~ - - ~3 _ '^a.,•- ~T -_"'-••~.Fw-"= Y'~ ~I A ~`1i "~a~^ _ - _.,yJ~'~._._` ,-rj v_'~~.% -`-l =~r~.-•~~.r'-.:'"N~'
7r -
~4 _ + - ~ r _ ~ T• c c= 4 y ` ° ` ~ 7 41 4 - F' ~'a4 f t M n y' ' I 0. , r Y _ " " " ^ ~ _
[r tw~ « Y
c"~' tn!, 1^~" T^~` " ° k s~ry
'~r" t.~7 ' 4i ~ t P'~ ~a ir ~ nw \WeI y~ lr fC tN ; f { x 2 r~+< o y rt M1~ ~ ^ x,YV SN r,
4-Y
l L fr'K-~' s r r l a.~Ip f e 1" a 7~ V 1
.,a"y~
-f1
1 f~~f z''y ^ L r rt,'~ tL'-av ! ~1 ~ r l .t 1 C' v~,+5 w e tYy e g S/'~ +~~7[I► h$ ji~~1i ,.y 4k~ 7t ~ .c~"*.y k y T~, ,y K~ ~f~ 7~+ '1' v~~ ~t'`~ ~1-.. ~
A„~~-~°• ~.,rl s7;*~ t ~t'~".s"t~ `~*t~~n,yw ~ S,y{ S r' r x~ lt-~~ti..r„ytti ~,w ti i`~'rw"y~~ ~ ~"'.a ~ s f'c+,.~i«r'~~4y~.^~S~RM °~~rpJ' ~"r° ~yKh e 7art w, ~ ~+y~..a~yyKi ~,+,~~y. Th~ e~~~ ~J..,w~•..i
KR ~ SL`k.P" r ^wr` iC Y..1 A ~1 ~ ~ ' 3+ J f; ~ ~ ~7fR~ ~ 7~" S I ~ 1''Y~.,a°L ~ ~ q S J ~ '~If IT ' ✓aKN 'C .
.Y~~°,-~i . F . ~ ~i* ~ ~ ~ y c ~ ~ ~ t . , i _t° , , A 1 _ ' ~ • r .'T~. r _ ~ _ ~ r-. `-~'''r ~
~ ~
~
Yau are hereb notified that o~n ~ ~ Y
~~~~li ~3, < ~ , at the hour of y:~w~ of ~aid
da ~n the S okane C~un Caurt House, S okane, Washin ton, y R p ~
Th~ ~P~KANE C+~UNTY PLAhIN~~1C C~MMISSIC~N w~ill can-
duct a~bl~c hearin ta ~i~~~~~~~~ c~u~~~~~~~~~~
R 9
T~iE P1~E~P~aL~9LY AF'PRO'~EI~ ~~1T~~~~~~~'~ ~`T~}~~"FT~ C~~I~~+~L ~L~I~, ~~~~~?~1,
~HT~C~ FROP~SE~ ~.~~~tTl~~t C!F ~ ~ ~►~VE~~I~1~G S~~U~'~~RE T~i~
T~~A~~i ~~1~~'1C~ ~~~~I~~i BEi~~ G~1~ST~~~C~~L3 GN TKE P~4~'E~~'~',
S~~NSC~RE~ ~FCi~A~~ N~Q►N 5~+~~ G~, ~~'~~~~T~, ~UR~~ 131 P~~~'~~t~Rt~,
6PC~~A1+~~~ ~"~:~:~~~~G~aN.
General descri tian a# area: ~ ~ ~
p
~e~; x'~ o~ TAt~ 3, b, ~ t~, t~ci~ ~ c~ La~ 9~~!~ ~ p~t;t~ a~ Catai~ ~~~ra
v~!#ar~ l~a~g ~st c~ ~a Sul~l~~ R~o~d aAC~ l~~ ~aei w~aQt v~ the ea~ lipe a~ L~rt~ 7 e~
~IZ ~ ~OC~G l 4# V+~l~e P~G ~ttt~ ~ 1~1~ T4wq~ht~ ~5 ~4$i ~.YIr'.~.r
~ Co~y, V`. ~~d~a.
{~`~~~t o~ S~li~~au~ and ~b c~i C~o ~v~, 3
~ F~R FU~THER DETAILS contact #he S~kane ~Coun Plannin P g
Commi~si~n, S okane CQUn~ Court House, S c~kan~, INash. p y p
Direcfar of Planning
~ ~ n~~. ~ ~ ~ o M~ , a~ E: Spokaae County Planning Camrnissian
r
HO• 11. 310
HiX0M SM BOIAAD a' t:WN'1"i OQMI~dI~ or Spa= 0owZt YANSI110'PIS1.
nt m HATM or ~ KAP Fikalt )
~~v~w►s, AND xsBsRIc~a awitrl~su. ro )
l~L~'IPLT TAI[IL? BP A a- R~AN AItD lRCM? 0O !lMGIAL ~ a E 8 0 L U T I 0 11
Cal t LOCAM DI ffi.OM 1Or ~
PAM ADOflTt0 I11 3ECTIq1 14# SOAUtIP 2,g M.
~
R11JIU "g $.Y.K. t 9PM= OOtN'!'29 MA8111I1 tiT~C-10
The aevrrr•.atitted ..et.er oosi" vs r.~.ar1~r tor beerift e.tw. !b. sowd of vooft
Caa~ai~si+oaar, ot spalca~s County• Uashiogtoa, ao this eayg md it to uw
Boesd that the Spokan~ Comtj Kooning Cameissioo bss givm dw :atioe of the howift
aa the mattr io the wooner md tor !he tim pe~atb7 lav; that aaid P1aming
C
C Ms bold a pnUis honring v s~quir~d; md that the @miA Pleasing
oos~osre i.n !he plaa to soos, ttu falloviag deearibed parop~rt,~ as s
~ ~:u = Y t►Cf7*11GIAL=
moors=
Lot a, .mo.pt th. West 140 seei os U. sMth 40 ii.t= .u of Lot. 3. 4. 5. 6. ?g md
81 theM pe:tioo~ of Lota 9 mi 10 md portion of Cataldo I►v~e taoatias lyiaS Soot
of 4 liar to Sallivm Rood md 160 teet weti of the as! lim et Lota ? md
S. All ia l~loolc 1 of Yeradsle An~ Addiliow ia ~etion 1~►. T~orawhip ~5 •~~p
L.K.K.. apNc.n* comtr.
md to
fAu.n P~.B FAitII.? 80~ s
The YNi 140 tMt of Lot 1md the 11est 140 !e" of !he 8mth 40 tMt s! Lo! 2, XLw*'ot Twaddo Aaslc Additiaul oU of Lr! 11= them pret~oa~ o! Lsts 9 dd 10 md portia.
of a+UL8o Ave=* vamti~et lyin wet et a lim awo'lal te aallivan Rod md 164 i+ef
ww% of !he sut lim er Lsta 7 md d, ILoatc 1 of YnvadaU Pr"~- 01.,4144
~~p 25 11. g Rmp 44. t.Y.N. • Spdow C4wm't1+ tia tlailoa _
ilOMo 'mtwe mtrb, u IT a1C8ti.Y~D9 That tho abarve-attimle0 md dofo"bod Waperty iaeg r~
!he some lweby isg somed umdear the elasdticatiwis e! FRMA? OqHUR= md MQIdMR.:~
F/I14ILT a deti~d is !le Zeai" O~edi►a~o~ a! Syeica~se ~at7• ~P~ *
19539 as smm"dl md tbat d-we wt md nM ot !ho aMovebmd yarepfrtv be m dooosiWd md 641mated vitUa fte Development Y'rr►f!'ic Contsol f'lm,
ZZA&?019 oib 7
•i - ' ~ ~ ~
P~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~T CW
DOW M? comn saxems
M A/M _F. ~COO"W71YIMIGM
VEN= Y. ac.AUD
Q the Doat't .
~ . .
1 td n.. I vu ..:i ._L.
s~ ~e :
y
~(1~~~/ , - /-.y . /7 / - • 1 1'(! A ^f ~ ~1\
Hv = OF S i . _ r . . tr . r~ . ~ 1 • C~
d
Depu
ty W. Ll.
E.
~
• • l Thia is to oortityr that tUa is a
trw md oorr"t 1AC~C G~.~~~►~HTY
i 110. ~ o 1310
RNrelatos
peaNd !q► !he 8owd this
day of
,
-
the abm d%smpe md reridoas an
t~ Suiag ft ia the Building Cod-.
"o Md do ftttbw oa'tity
tha►t ow seee alaNiticatim elomw
ia the s■we as 8eaoribed abe" aW
dwm aa !bw attaoLwd Ml: ~
4