PE-1025-76
NO . - 1G~~~
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIOle1ERS OF SFOKANE C4UNTY, WASHINGTON
FINDINGS AND ORDER REGA.RDING PRELIMINA.RY PLAT PROPOSAL ANIJ ZONE
CLASSIFICATION UPGRADING - PE-1 n2 S-76, GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEVIT #7:
ZE-77-76, RGRICULTURA.L TO SINGLE FAIVIILY RESIDENTIAL (R--1): RICK GUTHRIE
WH£RrAS, the 5pakane County Planning Commission did, after public hear-
fng on july 9, 1976, forward to the Board of County Commissioners a recommenda-
tion that the preliminary plat to be known as Uuthrie's Valley View #7 (File number
PE-1025876) and zone classification upgrading (File number ZE-77-76) be approved,
and
WHEREAS, William R. Uteckt, et al, did by letter dated july 20, 1976
request a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to present evfdence
and testirnony against the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve
the above-described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners did hold a public hearing on
August 19, 1976, to consider the rec^mmendation of the Planning Commission and
testimony and request of the applicant, objector, and other interested parties, and
WHEREAS, at said hearing opportunity was afforded tho se favoring and tho se
opposing the above-described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, the
Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County having fully considered the testi-
mony given, the records and minutes of the Planning Commission, the environmental
assessment, and all other evidence presented, and having personally acquainted
themselves with the site and vicinfty in question, does hereby find:
1) Thafi the proposed plat does not exemplify a density that would be
Compatible with the surrounding area.
.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners does hereby concluded
that the abave described finding is sufficient and controlling and the proposed plat
is denied .
DATED this 0V day o f lo" , 1976.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
~u UF SpOKANE
COU1YTY C0MM6SStONE
RA Y V RS
;:alor~_
JERRY C. ~
KOPET
lIARRY M. LARNFD -
ATTEST:
Vernon VIt . Ohland
Glerk of the Board
001
By:
v~ Deputy
~ .
i~0. ~~'64 '
BOARD OF COUNTY COMIVIISSIONERS OF SPOKINE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
PINDINGS AND ORDER REGARDING PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL AND ZONE
CLASSIFICATION UPGRADING - PE-1025-76, GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEW #7:
Zi--77-76, AGRICLTLTURAL TO SINGLE FAMILY R£SID£IVTIAL (R-1): RICK GUTHRIE
WHERrA.S, the Spokane County Plannzng Commission did, after public hear-
. ing on july 9, 1976, forward to the Board of County Commissioners a recommenda--
tion that the preliminary plat to be known as Gutnrie's Valley View #7 (File number
PE-1025976) and zone classification upgrading (File number ZE-77-76) be approved,
and '
WHEREAS, William R. Uteckt, et al, did by letter dated july 20, 1976
request a hearing before the Board of County Commfssioners to present evidence
and testimony against the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve
the above-described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners did hold a public hearing on
August 19, 1976, to consfder the recommendation of the Planning Commission and
testimony and request of the applicant, obiector, and other interested parties, and
WHEREAS, at said hearing opportunity was afforded those favoring and those
opposinq the above-described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, the
Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County having fully considered the testf-
mony given, the records and minutes of the Planning Commission, the environmental
assessment, and all other evidence presented, and having personally acquainted
themselves with the site and viGinity in question, does hereby find:
1) That the proposed plat does not exemplify a densfty that would be
compatible with the surrounding area.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners does hereby concluded
that the above described finding is sufficient and controlling and the proposed plat
is denied.
DATED th:s day of , 1976.
,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMIVIISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, `IIIASHINGTON
Ur SppKANE
C0t1NtY CO~.~)iV1SSj~v , RAY W FRS
10
lERRY C. L'M. .
KO PET lIARRY M. LqRNF9
ATTES T: • ~ '
Vernon W. Ohiand
~'i
i
,
Clerk of the Board
o , •
' .1
l.. ' ~
Bv:
v ~ Deputy C~
! -
!:1TRJL~U."T~GN: ~i,rie State E!,•I:Lrcr,m~~nLa? Palzri A: t of 1971, Chapte~ 43~21C, RCW
011 sta.: e and Sovernmen t-a t agen::ies to consider environmental
v.:tl.ui;~i:: 'L:o: h i C•: Lt"l^1 r Otitifl -aCt 1'JI'18 d?':d whzn iicer,sing privace proposals. The
Act -:Lso zequ_iYes Lnat an EIS b2 prepaced for all ma3or actions sirnificantly
azfe-ting the quali}y of zbA an:%Lronmenfi The purpose of this checklist is to
Ine:p rhe acercips invv'Lved dletermine wnether or not a prorosal is such a ma3or
GC~ ..Ci,
P 4eGse unswer the fo iiowing questions as completeiy as you can with the
information presenr. 'Ly avai~able to you. Where explanations of your ans:reis
are required, or where you beiieve an exolanaLion would be helpful to govern-
mer,+= d` c ision rtak ss, inc 'Lude your exp lanat ion in the space provided, or use
adawt :.ora;. gogPs if :,4cess-ary- You should include references to any zeports
cr i_,Aies of wrilrh you ar.- aware and cahich are rel.ei ant to the answers you
Complpte answers to rnese Zuestions now wilt hel.p all ag2ncies in-
c'o?ved w_-h you. croDrJ-531 to undertake the reruir2d environmental review with-
cut urne_Ecz:ary cia i.ay
The fcl1ow;,ng quest ions apply to your rota:, proposal, not 3ust to the
ItCerse fox Wh1r'h yow are cu: re::tiy applying or the proposal for whiQh aoproval
is soug}it Xour ar:swerz~ ; n::uld include th-- impa:~ts which will be caused by
yra-_Y pr.:po,al •.vneri zt _s comnleted, e;;en tholigh completivn may not occur until
sometime an the fvt-urP, This wil1. alloca all of r-he agencies which will be in-
vo?-~ea to --_mple.a theif er!vi«rmental revie;r naw, without duplicGting paper-
_n the iut urP -
~ N~ ;_jpp? _::atsCri sha? l bz? prc,.ess ont Yl the cnecklist has been completed and
returr,ad ro the Plar< Commission- State _aw tejuires exnlanations for every "yes"
art:l "-mayre" on r-he :he,7_k~.,sr and person compl2ting the form may provide
Explan«tions P{ar °'no" anz_wersa
N0TE: This is a stanciaxd form being used by all state and local agencies in the
St.`- ~-If T.aawha;13tQn foa: var~cus types :1i pr;,ti:)sa.,s : Mar_y of the questions may
n,t ai r,o youL• prop ~:1 _ r aqu:.s cior. d::es not apply, just answer it "no" and
e-cn,-'yt;ue on to :re nexr q°<;zstio;l.
ENNkilRCNMEENTAL CHFCKLISI t ORM
~ r B;? C1C v=t~.^. t'J 14 D
N ame cf F caponznt
Ad:'cess and Phonk iJ4Mber oi Proponent: S/2i,
r
_ . -
` D~.tr Ch2 ,!Ci1St Sz..b111tL2d ~
~C~ -CJ
~ ZZ"E'I'Ve ~ Cr.eckii 05~ U ~,f ~J
- _ ,
~ .~J am _ Y r : p ~ f ap n 1 i cabie : ,7~,/
~'t
ulUN~ 5 r9 .
~ S~~'~'~- ~
P ~
~VJYIIV~ ~.Oo UN r Y
M.MissloV
✓ __y ` 1
,f Proposa, tin..i.ading b9aL noL iImiLC-d ta
?rs size, gel;eiai design ~Letr~entst and other factora that Wili give an accurate
undQY;tar. air,g =.;f _,ts s:_o~„e -nd n~tU, e' .
Lo:.at ion of PrJpoSc ?,describe the on~,°sica'1 set tina• of the proposal, as weiY
as tne _=xter,i i~ the 1Gr:c area aite~_tzd bx :.ny er.v.F.~onmentai impacts, including
any orrpt i:,formation needed t^ gsve an a:7c_:raze ur.derstandlLng o the environ-
ment.al setting cf the praposal):./e%X_: 5 ~ 6 Yl.: v
~
8. Est.imated Ga_e fcr Compiet.lon of Lhe Propc6al:
i
9. List of 3? 1 Perrnirs, Licenses or GcveznmeiiL Approvals Required for the
Frvpo-ca!, fedeKai~ -ra~e anc~ locaf. includir.g rezonesl :
.>~~~l~-~-z
Z0. DO yO'.i :'av2 aTly FJc:aS t0r Llitl.ir° additiD;5, expansion, Or furLher dCtlVlty re-
lated ycr. canrae~: r2•a w ich rh is prop::say ? ii yes o explain :
Do you knQw of ar.y p;ans by others r,hich m~/"Y ~ ct the propArty covesed by
r your prvpoaa.Lc I f yes, explain:
12 Attach 3n.y s-ther app? icat i:~ form, that hGs been complEted regarding the pro-
proposai, if none haa beQn c:v►npizzed, nLt is exFecced to b4 filed at some
~utu:e dc.te, descr3be the naT-u; c;t su:.'r, ai=Iication rorm:
s° ~'i..•,,,,~~._..~. ~ < , ,
; I- E
ENVi'r,GtiMENTAL T 11?ACT5
"rk_ 6 1T1at1'JnS of a't i"YeS" ci11d "wayIaE01 __:«7ti'Cto G`@ L°F'qL1i.L'f'CZ'
Ye-s Ma,ybe No
'II Earth 6AJ,111 t.he pr3~o_;za: re:.u!T _n.
' a URS tab 1e cu rl"h CO?1d1t i:r.a OY' lr~ _hara,.s 1n - ~
geo.!-:,,gi;: StMhc-i-tructuLves"s
rb' oisp; _ -emErzz~, .,,r
0 V _ ti1- _i 1r:9 Gr rri:. 671. 1: ~
(C, CI"lant~e _,.:1 LOPJy!"apijy UY yLC):~i:d SuL"Zca.^_E: $'eL:.°t
f E?3tL'?G: ~ -
ld) The destzu;tion, covEiy-.,9 oi m:r1siicati.r_~ or '
,
any ..r:~que geo1.Jg1c p'r,y~_~a~ ~eUc~ces7 v
e~ Any inr_laasr in wir.d cr t:at-r e!oSz_,.3n ,ii a:,ils,
ea.fiher o:s or off rhe site=
,;f; Chargps in deFosa.cj.on Dr ero: ion ot bea.h sar.ds, ; y
zi: C1:u(!qE& 1Cl 511tdL1UCle de~'i::: _iLU: :.L Pro 51 4clI1 ~ ~,.~~j"~~r~r`"a••~
'i ~,4~•t~"~►+•
c-
- Yes LMlaj No ~
(c) Introduction of new sbeczes of flora into an area,
or in a barYZer to the normal replenishment of /
exist~.ng species? ~
(dJ Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
~
Explanation:
(S) Fauna, Will the proposal result in:
(a) ChanSes in the divprsity of species, or numbers of
any species of fauna lbirds, Iand animals includin5
reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organismso
insects or microfauna;?
(b) Reduction of the nuribers of any unique, rare or /
endangered species of fauna? l~
(c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area,
or result in a barrier to the migration or movement ~
of faun.a? ~
(d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? '
Explanation: ~
(6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise leve_ls?
. ' ~
E xp 1 ana t i on :
(7} Light and Glare, Will the proposal p-ycsduce new lignt or ~
glare? . k
E
xp 1 an at ion : ~-i St ~C~-r~-~S
(8) Land Use. Wi 11. the proposal result in the alteratioii of
the present or planne ar~d use o~ ared? v~
- Explanation: c_
(9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: ~
(a) IncreQse in the rate of use of nay natural resources?
(b) Depletion of any non.renewable natural resource?
Explanation: ~
(10) Risk of Upset. Does the propcsal involve a risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including,
but not limited tr oil, p2sticides, chemicals or radiation) /
in the event of an accident or upset conditions? t~
Explanation:
(11) Pojpulation. Will the proposal alter the location, dis-
tribution, density, or,growth rate of the human popu-
lation of an area?
Explanation: Ly kA-44.) C-L,D
(12) Housinqe U1i11 the proposal affeCt existing housing, or /
create a demand for add.itional housing? t~ •
Explanation: e- c, Lt-
~
r-
' - Yes Maybe No
whir'.z nay modify the channe3 of a Yiver or stream, /
or t he bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? ~
E Yp i arz a t i on :
(2) Air. Wi7.l th° p'LOpJSaI result in:
(a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air ~
qual ity ? ~
(b; The creation of ob3ectionable odors? • ~
(c) Alteraiion of air movement, moisture or
temperature, or any change in climate, either `
locally or rzgional
Explanation:
(3) Water. Wi11 the proposal result in:
(a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water mevements, in either marine or fresh ~
wate•rs?
(b) Changes in aasorction rates, d-rainage patterns,
or the rate and amount. of surface water runoff?
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood /
waters?
(d) Change in the amount of surface water in any `
water body?
o (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any altera-
tion of surface water quality, including but not /
limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbi- ~
dity? _
(f) Alteration of tne direction or rate of flow of /
ground waters?
(g) Cnanqe in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations?
(h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either
through diArect inDection, or through the sEepage
of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne
virus or bacteria, or other substances into the d
ground waters? (i) Reduction in thz amount of water otherwise
- available for publi )-at r up lies?
Explanation: '
(4) F?ora. ti+Tiil the proposal result in:
(a) Cnange in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of ilora (including trees, shrubs, ~
grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of flora? f~
`T7`
~
Yes maybe PTo
!131 Tranz-iorr.aclor,CLr-~~~a:-Oil, Vdil.~ tl-►e propos~.l result in: /a
LdY' movement? Z~ ~
-l CEn_ ' adr aitionai ti~eh~..~
c?~ation o
tQ
(b) Effe; ts on existing parking faciiities, or demand /
V
for new park tng?
(c) Impact upon existar.g twsn ;p~station systems?
(d) A1terations to prc--sent pattErns oz circulation or ~
movemenc oi people andior goods?
(e) Alterations to «at Erborne, xa.L.L or air traffic: ✓
(f) InYrea5e in r_re-ffzc hazards to motor vehicles, ✓
bicyclists or pedes ans? _
E Xp I. a n 3 t i O?1 :
\
(14) Public Servicese WilL the propos3l have an effect upon,
or result in a need ror nec-; or altered governmental services
a.n any of the following areas :
(a) Fire protection?
(b} Police protection: I/ 11
(c) Schoo? s?
(d) Parks or other recrestionai facilities?
(e' maintenan,:e or' public fa:ilzti=_s, InzIuding roads?
(f) Cther governmenta servire :
Explanation: MIPI.N
<
o(15) Enexc. W%11 the prcposai resulr in:
(a) Use of substantzai aanounts af fuel or energy? ~
(b) Demand Lipon zxisting sources of energy, or require /
the development of new sources of energy?
Explanation : ,
(16) Utilities. Will the proposal resuit in a need ror new
systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
(a) Power or natural gas? ,
;b) Communications systems?
(c) Watcr? ~ .
(d) Sewer or septic tanks?
' e) Storm watex drainage? ✓ -
(f) Solid waste and disposai? ~
Explanation: 4M-U.4.e -a--
(17) Human Heaith, Wi11 the prop.?sal result in the creation of
any health nazard or potential hP,af6'•Iftazard (excluding
mental healzh' ? F '
Exp 13nution : w ^ •
G ZI,~
'f •"r, ~ ♦
r ~~`~~~~'~''i
~y
s ~ ♦
A '
` Yes i~~be No
~
(18) Aeathetics. Wi11 the proposal resulr_ in the obstruction
o-4: any scenic vista er view open to the pubiic, or will
the p•roposal result in the creation of an aesthetically /
of'Lensive site open to public view? r/
Explanation: ~
(19) Recreation. tidill the proposal result in an impact upon
the quality or quantity of existing recreational ~
opportunities?
Exp lanation :
(20) Archeological/HiLtoricale Will the proposal result in an
alteration of a significant archeological or historical
site, structure, object or building? V/
Exvlanation :
(21) Additional Infozmation.
III. SIGNATURE -
I, the undersigned, sfiate that tc the best of my ilcnowledge the abovc information
is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declara-
tion of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should
there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
Proponent: i ,
Address :
Phone :
Person complzting £orm:
Phone : e!~~ ~ Er 9
Date : ~2_~t~C.~~
.
Al
~
'10,
Q~p`
. ~ ~
¢ ~ M
VAz-L-,,=-r V6W
FAfl
~
C-r-o T-,q R 1,E5
FLAN1V11IG COMMiSoolON
~MID
B OAR3 DF ~ OU~TY COMMISSI ON£I~
~CTI ON
rDATE ACTIC3N TAKEN . RECORD OF ACTIO11F
~
C0A1 W'TZo ~ 641, Co I ,3
b~' ~l~ ~
A-P
~ . 4 0 F
~~lAl G- ~
• . , a.. ~
- • -s • ~~-v ~
~ ' ~ . .
r r
, - _
~
It
r
w
~
Turn Down Is '
.
Uliven to- Plat
One of three praposed hous- Way Addition, both at 18th and
InK develapments fn the sauth Sullivan.
Vera area under fire by lacal When the planning cQmmis-
residents was vetoed Thursday sion originally recommended
by the Board af County approval fQr the Guthrie plat,
Commissioners. they were actirtg on a pollcy
Commisslaners overturned when they had formed which the county planning coinmis- u-sed 24th as a dlvidinK llne be-
sion ruling that Guthrie's tween suburban and acreage
Valley View 7th additlon should developments. New plats south
be approved as a preliminary of 24th were to be oE lower
plat. They had heard an appeal density.
to thIs decisian in August, but The Vera Valley Citizens
had withheld their decision P 1 a n n i n g c o m m i t t e e,
imtll after hearing appeals on origianUy formed to appeal
two otter preliminary ptab in this plat, contended that the en-
the same general area. tire area should be considered
As praposed, the Cuthrie ptat for law density development. ,
-was foc 14 lots on 4.7 acres. It Tlmt same group is appealing '
was tocated on the west side of tk other two plats and is a
R-oqres9 north of 24th. party to the recent request that
the area's aqulfer be declared
NO DECISION was given a"sole source" R ater supply, a
last week by the comm~s- move ahich, if arcepted, could
sioners an the other two plats
under cansideratiott-Ridge- restrict new housing develop-
~,n~ ~ ~ area.
mont Additlon aad 5ulllvan
~ . County cammissianers also
acted Thursday to transfer
care, custody and manage-
ment of lhe Fairgraunds Ball-
park to the Spokane Interstate
Fair board.
ACCORDING TO Ray Chris-
tensen, chairman, the comrriis-
sioners made thc switch so ihat
the park could be used for
purposes other than profesr
sional basebaU in an effort tq
bring in more revenue:
Cammissioner Harry I.arned
noteci that expenses eaceeded
revenve last year at the ball
park.
According to Ray Meenach, 1
falr manager, the fair board
I has had to subsidize ball park
maintenance for the past
several years.
Commissianefs stipulated
that events scheduled into the ball park may not interfere I
with the basebaU season.
OtherK ise fair board members
have the okay to schedule
sperial events there, including
some Interstate Fair actfvities
if desired
~
a
,
. , ,
PE-1025-76
• ~ t~-- 'r • ~~IK" 1 •`~l
~
i
. ~ .
aIP
`1 Y
`I
• L ~ % ~ ' i ~ l'e1,I r _ . _w , '.h
! f " t •
SPOKANE COUfiTV GOURT HOUSC
FORM FOR (PROPOSED/-F-INAL) DECLARATION
OF (6-I6gI-r-I~~A1EE/NON-SIGNIFICANCE)
Description of proposalPreliminary Subdivision Guthrie's Vallev View 7th Addition
Proponent Mr. Rick Guthrie ,
Location of Proposal SW 1/4, NE 1/4, Section 26, Township 25 N., Range 44 EWM
Lead Agency Spokane County
This proposal has been determined to "(have/not have) a significant adverse
impact upon the environment. An EIS (is/is not) required under RCW 43.21c.
030(2)(c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
Responsible official Mr. Ray Christensen
Position/Title Chairman, Board of Countv Commissioners
Date SEP 2 3 1976 Siqnature '
(3) If the form is for a declaration of environmental significance, the
lead agency may add to the information contained in subsection (2) of this
section a listing of those environmental impacts which led to the declaration,
tcgether with a brief explanation of what measures, if any, could bF taken
to grevent or mitigate the environmental impacts of the proposal to such an
extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration and issue a
(proposed/final) declaration of non-significance.
~
\
- '
Spokane, S 2D~~~ _
Spokaae County Plaisniag Coauaissioa _ •
North 83.1 Jeffersoa Street
Spokant, Washiagton 99201
Dear Sirso
.
- 0 oxin _ility easeme~t t the final P].at of e
_~!~'~rould be 6atisfacy.arF to • .
Paeif orthweat Bell.
-
. .
Rightrof-Way agent -
~2-
GDF:mr - -
. ~ .
R E E V C
AUG 2~-~VO
brunrmvt k.u~l'~ I
NtANNNG COMOSb#UN
RE:C:EIVED
19 7 'n
'32 1 8 1976
Go ur:ry Commi s s ioners
COl;.~:'Ly O i SpOKaTIe
bDo.~G.je, Washington
~
~.~.011: Vernon W. O.zl ~
and ~
Clerk of the Board ,
c d v
~.i.'.avJ.~r~~l♦ . y .
0~~~.ce represents a large group of Spokane
~:orneocaners concerned about increasing
'4y~_Y" ty-oe deveZopment in the Spokane Valley in
,.:e ~,rca af Sullivan Road, 16tn Street and 24th DEL CARY SM17}-i
!sVeY°iuC'. LAWRENCE CARY SMITFi
MIGHAEL E DONOHUE
~.l G -Leic `er to the Board dated July 20, 1976, thi s J PARKER GOMPAU
groulD r~quested a public nearing concerning the
proposec. Guthrie Valley View 7th Addition on Pro-
r,r~s.:), .aoua north of 24th. Appropriately, a hearing
47 u..y I.r aii%rZd for August 19, 1976, at 2: 00 p. m. 613 SPOKANE & EASTERN BLUG
SPOKANE, VJAS}iINGTON 99201
il"..erim tw0 additional zoning changes from PHONE (509) 624.3241
4U.LGl ty;~~e use to residential use have
ap',oroved ay the Planning Commission on the
:a.~~ ; staff recommEndation, in the immediate
«djacent a-rea of the proposed Guthrie addition.
Gre the Sullivan Way and the Ridgeview pro- `
jVse" adGalt1G22S.
.Nceulzss zo say, the homeowncrs are equally con-
:cr ;4d about tr.e impact of these additions, and
~::e a-so requesting a-public hearing on the issue
c~ `~x~~.r approval.
'ime the homeowners respectfully request
%:L.e Looard to continue the public hearing concerning
Gutnrie addition until a date when it can be
:.cara -cogether with hearings on the Sullivan Way
4:.a Ridgeview additions.
ti~ree hearings are held together, the issue
of c:~;:y -;.ype development in this area would be pre-
~:~Y.~;:c. its proper perspECtive. In addition,
pa•r-cies concerned would be able to save pre-
c+o~.~ time and money by such a presentation.
~.«CC-f.'1y r
..:'fi._.1;CE CARY SNIITH RECEIVEn
b ✓ / J
ailG 19'~3
WVft%vt wu+v 4 y
NLAM11VG COMAAI%ON
~
July 9. 1976
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, Washington 99210
Gentleeaen:
Rs: Preliminuy Subdivision and Zone Classification Upgrading
PE-1025-76, Guthrie' s Valley View ?th Addition
ZE - 77-76. Agricultural to Singla Family Residential (R-1)
We the mndersigned hereby oppose the building of 14 houses on the 4.71 acres
located in Section 269 Toxnship 25 N. 9 Ranga 44, E.W.M. The DI 1/2 af Trsat 208,
Vera, except the North 110.00 feet of the Esst 330.00 feet thereof, and the
Fast 132.00 feet of the N 1/2 of Traat 209, Vera, as sponsored by Rick Guthrie,
Eaat 12709 Sprague Avenne. Spokane, Washington.
We feel that nore than one single fami],y dwelling to the aare is entirely too
nany. We are also opposed to ahanging zoning of this area of the Va11ey Yrom
agriculture to s3angle family residential. We all oxn at least one aare, and
are living her,e beaauae tire desire to be in an agricnltural area and xould like
to see this part of the Valley remain that way. We also feel that t,he nwnber
of honses propcsed, oreating suah a density of population, Will def'initely add
to the pcrobles of contamination of theaquifer wh5.ah is certainly of prime
importanae at this time. Also, haa there been any study of theAnvironmentsl
iaipaat for such density of this area.
R,espectfnlly snbmitted,
~
ay
/1 c
10 ~2 ~.f z
.
~
-7 9- D~--
. ~
722-
~ -
. ~ .
~ .
REC04 Ewo !VE I
~rur~vt ~;u~~o ~ Y JuV 99 1976
PIAIVNING MMMISSiOiV
Spokana Cownty P'lsnning Commission
Spokane, washington 99210
Gentlemen: • "
Re' g'reliminary Subdivision and Zone Claasifiaation Up$rading
PE-1025-76, Guthrie'a Valley Yiew ?th Addition
ZE -7'j-?60 Agricnltural to Singla Famil,y Reaidential (R-1)
We the urtciersigned hareby oppoae the building of ~ 14 housea on the 4.71 aarsa
locateci in Seotion 269 Townahip 25 N. , Range 449 E. W.M. The N 1/2 of Z~raot 208,
Vera,p eozcept the Alorth 110.00 feet of the East 330,00 feet thereof, and the
East 132.00 feet of the N 1/2 of TSraot 2099 Verat as sponaored by Riok (3nthrie,
East 12709 Sprague Avenue, Spokane, Washington.
We fgel that more than one single family dwalling to the aore is entirely too
many. We are also opposed to ehanging zoning of this area of the Yalley from
agriaulture to single family rasidentialo lie a11 oxn at least one aore and
are living here becanse xe dasire to be ira an agrioultural area and Kould like
to see this psrt of the Valley remain that xay. We also feel t.hat the number
of homses proposed# ereating such a deansity of population, will definitely add
to the problem of contamination of the aquifer which is certainly of prime
irmportanoe at this time. Also, has there been any study of the Uvironmental
impact for sueh density of this area?
Respectflilly suhmitted, 1 ,
Gb
~,~y~,
I * 1 r 1 ~ ~ F
r . e
t-i
~ 1~
~jLL~j ~
l/
j ~
~~~1Eo~ .~~ar~C'~~~~~~~, L ~ ~,~eJ ~J ~~,~r.►~.~,~e~ ~b,~~
e
3 _ ~ c ? ! ►~,:?.,F' :'4iL.r /
"
-z~ e- (/tl
Y
• ~ 0 , ! 4 ~
r '
Jn1y 9. 19?6
Spokane County PLnning Comnission
Spokane, Washington 99210
Gentlecnen o
Ret Preliminary Subdivision and Zflne Claasifieation Upgrading
PE-1025-76, Guthrie•a Yslley Viex ?th Addition
ZE - 77-76. Agriaultural to Single gamily Rssidential (R-1)
We the undaraigned hereby oppose the building of-14 housee on the 4.71 acres
located in Section 261, Township 25 N. , Range 449 E.W.M, The N 1/2 of Traat 2089
Vers, except the North 110.00 feet of the East 330.00 feet thereof, and the
East 132.00 feet of the N 1/2 oY Traot 209, Vera, aa sponsored by Rick Guthrie,
East 12709 Sprague Avenue, Spokane, Washington.
We feel that more than one single family dwalling to the aore is entirely too
mar~p. We are also opposed to ahanging zoning of this area of the Valley fron
agriaulture to singla familq residential. We all oxn at least one aore and
are living here becanse we desire to be in an agricultural area a»d Would like
to aee this part of the Valley remain that wa,q. We also feel t.hat the nnmber
of houses proposed, creatixig such a dealsitq of population, xill definitely add
to the problem of Qontamination of the aquifer which is certainl,q of prime
importanca at this time. Alao, has there been any study of the~lnvironmental
impact for snch density of this area?
RespectfullY snbnitted,
, • ~ ~ ` ~ ~
~
~.Lf
,a3O l
~
&-,3 : .
'(rr7
vr)p
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COl`M4ISSIONERS OF SPOKANE OOUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN TllE MfATZ'ER CONCERNIIiG PE-1025-76, ) NOfTICE
GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEW 7th ADDITION ) OF
ZE-77-76, AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE ) PUBLIC HEARZNG
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - GUTHRIE,Sponsor )
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners
of Spokane County, Washington, will hold a public hearing at
2:00 P.M., August 19, 1976, at their office in the County
Courthouse, to consider the above mentioned preliminary
subdivision and zone classification upgrading on property
located in:
Section 26, Township 25 N., Range 44, E.W.M.
The N 2 of Tract 208, Vera, except the North
110 feet of the Ea.st 330 feet thereof, and the
East 132 feet of the N 2 of Tract 209, Vera.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that any person interested may appear
at said hearing and present testimony either for or against
the recommendations of the Spokane County Planning.Commission.
BY ORDER OF THE BOAP,D this 22 day of July, 1976.
VERI\ION W. LAND
CLERK OF T~ BOAR
y
~
Rosa ne Montague, Deputy 1 Y
,
•
MINUTES
JULY S, 1976
,
v'A
.PRELIMI~,TARY SUBL'IVISION AND 2"QNE CLASSIFICATION UPGRALtING
PE-1025-76 GUTI-iRIE'S VALLEY VIEVti SEVENTH ALIDITIGN: GUTHRIE
ZE- 77-76 AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1)
Planning Comm'Lssion Recommendatfon; Approve, subiect to the followina
conditions: Vote was unanimous)
A , REA S G :
1. A"logical expansion" of suburban type lot development whfch can
provide economic housing for the South Opportunity area.
2. The existing school site at Adams and 24th could be used with hfgher
density developmento Also, extstfng Elementary School serving Vera
Tracts is at capacity with 570 students.
3. Water, power and fire protectfon have the capability to accomr.lodate
the increased density.
4. Existing rnads are approprfate for suburban density, plus subutbap
density development provides for future rights of way neces sary for
replatting to higher densitfes if needed via the platting process which
is not the case with rural density segregatfons.
B. CONIDITIONS:
1. That the plat be designed as indicated on the preliminary plat of
record and/or attached sheets as noted.
2. That a statement be placed in the dedication to the effect that no
a,°ore than one dwelling structure be placed on any one lot, nor sha.ll
un~,T lot be further subdivided for the purposes of creating additional
lacs or building sites wfthout filing a replat.
3. That the plat provide for right of way width for streets as indicated
on the preliminary plat of record.
4. That appropriate provision be made that the following described
property be held in trust until the continuation of the streets be dedicated
or deeded: A 1' strip at the ends or edge5 of all streets that terminate
or border the plat boundary. (Temporary cul de sacs are required
when streets terminate at the plat boundaries.)
S, That appropriate street names be indicated.
- 8 _
<
MINUTES
jULY 9, 1976
PE-1025-76 GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIE'tiAP SEVENTH ADDII.'ICN (Continued) '
6. Jhat appropriate utllity easements be indicated on copi es of the
approved preliminary plat for distribution to the Planning Department
and the utility companies. Written approval of the easements by the
utility company must be received prlor to the submittal of the final plat.
7. That a plan for water facilities adequate for fire protectlon be approved
by the water supplier and fire protection district. Said water plan must
also have'been approved by khe approprfate health authorities.
The health authortties, water supplfer (purveyor),
arld fire protectton district will certify, prior to the filfng of the final
i:lat, on the face of said water plan that the plan is in conformance with
LRefr requirements and will adequately satisfy their respective needs.
S«id water plan and certification will be drafted on a transparency
suitable for reproduction.
The water supplier (purveyor) will a lso certify prior to the filing of
the final plat on a copy of safd water plan that appropriate contractual
arrangements have I?een made with the plat sponsor for construction of
zhe water system, in accordance with the approved plan, and in accord-
ance with a time schedule. The time schedu 'Le wi11 provide, in any
case, for completfon of the water system and inspection by the appro-
prfate health authorities prior to applicatfon for building permits within
the plat. The contractual araangements will include a provision holding
Spokane Counzy and the water supplfer (purveyor) harmless from clafms
by any lot purchaser refused a building permit due to the failure of the
plat sponsor to satisfactorily complete the approved water system.
The plat dedtcation wtll contain a sfiatemcnt to the effect that the public
water system as approved by County and State Health authoritfes and
the local ffre district and water supplier (purveyor) wfll be installed
within this plat, and the subdivider will provide for individual service
ro each lot prior to sale of each lot.
NQTE; The Spokane County Health District has determined that the
soil conditions in the plat are suitable for on-site sewage disposal
svstems on each lot.
3. '1'r:at a certificate of title be furnished the Planning Commission prior
to the filing of the final piat.
9. That the prelfminary pla[ be given conditional approval to August 1,1977
10. That streets be fmproved to standards established by Spokane County
or a bond to cover the cost of such improvements be furnished the
County Engineer. The bond may also cover the cost of "as buflt" plans,
engineering costs, and placing of final center lin'e monuments.
- 8 a -
PE-1025-76 GUTHRIE'S VALLEY ViEVr SEVENTH ADDITION (Continued)
11. That profiles of streets, cross sections, proposed grades, and drainage
plan of the plat bE submitted and approved by the County Engineer and
hy the Planning Director before the final plat is drawn. Prior to
acceptance of the Improvements or release of bonds, a certificate by a
registered civil engineer oF licensed land surveyor will be requtred
indicatfng that all improvements have been installed to the lfnes and
grades shown on the approved construction plans.
12. Conditfonal approval of the plat is gfven subject to the dedfcation of
the right of way to the public and approval of the road system in the
plat by the County Engineer.
13. That a name be indicated before the final plat is filed; such name to be
c&.;;,roved by the County Assessor and the Planning Staff.
C o VERA TIP~TS DENSITY ANALYSIS:
The purpose of thfs analysis ls to evaluate the development pressures on the
Vera Tracts and make a recommendation for a density policy to accompany the
Planning Commission's recommendation on this preliminary plat.
The present character of the Vera Tracts is mixed densities wlth a predominant
rural nature. The existfng ownerships range from 10, 000 square feet Single
Family lots to the original Vera Tracts of 10 acres with farming and/or grazfng.
The lonq rancte land use element or the Comprehensive Plan calls for residentfal
for these Vera Tracts.-The Park and Recreation Pian adopted 'tn 1961 ca11s for
12, 000 square fe`t lots or suburban densitites for elementarY schoo.l and park
siting within "Afrport" neighborhood bounded by 16th, 32nd, Evergreen and
Sullivano
The circulation element of Comorehensive Plan pre-sentlyifdentffies 16th and
Sullivan as major arterials, Evergreen and 32nd as secondary arterials, and
Adams and 24th as collectorso The County Engineers are presently proposing
changes for Evergreen and 32nd to be upgraded to major arterials, Adams to be
a secondary arterial.
The public facilitfes eiement of Comprehensive Pian calls for an elementary
schooa ;.-~e located at Adams and 24th.
The Coraput2r density summary of Vera Tracts indicates that of the exfsting
ownerships 41% by number are less than one acre in size and 59% by•number
are one acre and larger. The ownership most often occurLng is 1.5 through
S acres C 38% of all ownerships. Also, the net density of Vera tracts
ownerships by number i s. SDo U./acre occupied and .28 D. U,/acre vacant
(1Vo dwelling) making a toral net density of .36 D.U./acre (or 207 acres/lote)
The density map indtcated visually the ratios by volumee
- 8 b-
.
PE-1025-76 GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEVv SEVENTH ADDITION (Continued)
BuildinQ permits in Vera Tracts ^ince 1972 through 1975 range between 8 to 11
permits each yesr for a total of 39 building permits. This indicates a
continuing trend to segregrate for purposes of single family dwellings,
Kev p~lY-lic services were contacted and responded in writing to the question
of de r:~~y in the Vera Tracts.
1. Central Valley School District has used a density of approximatel y
4 D. U./acre in the planning of the future elementary school on the
exfsting owned 11 acre site at Adams at 24th, but responds to popula-
tion demands to justify construction,
2. Vera Water District & Power has made intensive studies to provlde for
either suburban or rural type development in Vera Tracts.
3. Spokane Valley Fire Department has indicated Its abiltty to provide
adequate fire protect:Qn for suburban type densfty developments.
4. Spokane County Engineers indfcate that adequate roads exist for subur-
ban population density.
Suburban development surrounds Vera Tracts on the west, north and easC; and
one suburban development to the south. Increasing "suburban" type subdivi-
sion activity Is present to the northwest with the approved Preliminary Plat
"Early Dawn l st Addition" and to the north wlth the approved Preliminary plat
"Si's Subdivi sion". Also, recent communication with developers indicate
intentions to subdivide wESt of Sullivan and just north of "Timberlane lst
Additton" and along 24th Avenue near "McLaughlfn Addition".
D. STAFF EJ N«IRONNENTAL REVIEVV:
As required in WAC 197-10-320, the stafr of the County Planning Commission
reviewed the environmental checklist submittEd by Nir. Rick Guthrfe for the
Pr eliminary Subdivision of theGuthrfe's Valley View 7th Addition. The propo-
sal is located approximately in the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 26,
Township 25 IV., Range 44, E.W.1VI., west of and aOjacent to Progress Road,
about 320 feet north of 24th Avenue. The proponent is requesting to subdivfde
4.71 acres of land into 14 lots for single family dwellings creattng a gross
denslty of about 3 untis per acre. The site fs located on relatfvely flat
terrain currently covered by active pasture land vegetation.
The staff 'review has identified four potential areas of environmental impacts.
First, and common to all subdivi sfons, is the incease in motor vehicle traffic a
and all effects associated therewith. These would include such impacts as
increased air pollutfon, specfflcally carbon monoxide, increased noise, and
increased public safety hazards from trafflc.
-8c-
N4INUTES
jULY 9, 1976
PE-1025-76 GUTFiRIE'S VALLEY VIEW 7TH ADDITION
A second potential environmental impact area considered was the increased
demand on public services and utf.lities. Thfs would include such factors
as fncrea: ed requirements for police and flre protectton, provision of
additional school, park, and recreational facilitfes, and additional mainten-
ance requirements on all county facilities and roads. Thf s would also
include such impacts as assocfated with extension of utility lines (power,
natural gas, telephone) and the provisfon of suitable long term sewerage,
domestic water, storm water runoff, and solid waste disposal e
A third potential environmental impact revealed by the staff evaluatfon
involves the subsurface injection of sewage effluent and storm water runoff.
This waste water placed at a depth will percolate downward toward the aquifer
rather than evaporating back into the atmQSphere as under natural conditions.
A portion of the contaminants will likely be filtered out of this waste water,
but the resulting quality has not been determined yet. A total of 6.35 acre-
feet of waste water will be generated annually by this plat, 4.25 acre-feet
of which will be storm water runoff.
The finEtl area of potential impact fnvolves the conversion of productive
agricvlla:al land to suburban density residential. Currently all of the 4.71
acre sile is used as active pasture land and the proposed will replace this
wxth single family residential uses of a gross densfty of 3 units per acre.
The conclusion of this environmental checklist revtew is that no significant
environmental impacts will likely result from the proposal. Therefore, it is
recommended that a Declaration of Non-Slgnificance be issued and an
environmental impact statement not be required.
E. ZONING RECOMNIENDATION:
Planning Commission Recommendation: Appr ove Guthrie's Vallev View 7th Addition
as indicated on the preliminarv plat of record to Sinqle Family Residential (R-1)
Zone Classiffcation upon the filinq of the final plat.
REASONS:
1. The fourteen (I4) lots in the subdivision have been disigned to
accommodate single family residences.
2. The Planntng Commission has beEn routinely upgrading similar
residentfal plats in the area to the Single Family Residential Zone
c.lassification,
3. The Planning Commission is of the opinion that none of the lots wfthfn
the subdivfsion have disaclvantaged relatfonships which would warrant
duplex zoning.
- 8 d -
.
PE--1025-76 GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEW 7th ADDITI ON, (Continued)
The Single Family Resfdential Zone prohtbits duplexes, animal keeping
other than household pets, mobile homes, and home occupations.
F. GENEt".1L DATA;
1. Location: Section 26, Townshfp 25 N., Range 44 E.W.M.
The 1V` 1/2 of Tract 208, Vera, except the North
110 feet of the East 330 feet thereof, and the
East 132 feet of the N 1/2 of Tract 209, Vera.
2. Sponsor: Rick Guthrie
East 12709 Sprague
Spokane, WA 99216
3. Surveyor: Land-Mark Surveyors
S. 726 Llberty Drlve
Lfberty Lake, VVA 99019
4. Sit e Size: 4.71 acres
5. Number of Lots: 14
6. Land use proposed by sponsor: Single Family DwEllings
7. Existing Zoning: Agrfcultural, established March 27, 1942
8. Advertised Zone Upgrading: Single Family Residential (R-1)
9. Water Source: Vera Water and Power District
10. School District: Central Valley School District
_ge -
t
SPCKA.~tE COUIvTY ENGINEER
ROAD nEPARTMEIN7
SUBDIVISZON SECTZON
T0: SPokane County ?'lanning Cortmission DATE: JulY 6, 1976
FROM: Robert S. Turner-a County Engineer
SUBJECT: Standard Plat Conditions
A
We recommend approval of the plat of Guthries Valle}r View 7th AddYtion PE-1025
,
subject to the following conditions:
that conditional approval of the plat is given subject to dedication of Right of
Way to the public and approval of the road system in the plat by the County Engineer;
that plans, profiles, and cross sections showing proposed street centerline and curb
grades be submitted to the County Engineer for approval prior to construction and
the filing of a final plat;
that drainage plans and design calculations showing the grades and aligrtment of drain-
age facilities be submitted to the County Engineer for approval prior to construction
and the filing of a final plat;
construction within the proposed public streets and easements shall be performed
under the direct supervision of a licensed Iand surveyor, who sha11 be responsible
for perpetuating all evidence of the location of survey monuments which may be
disturbed during construction and who shall furnish the County Engineer with "As
Built" plans and a certificate in writing thaC all improvements were installed to
the lines and grades shown on the approved co nstruction plans and that all disturbed
monuments have been replaced;
no construction work is to be performed withia the Public Right of Way until a permit _
has beea issued by the County Engineer. AI1 work is subject to inspection and approval
by the County Engineer;
all construction within the Public Right of Way is to be completed prior to filing
the final plat or a bond in the amount estimated by the County Engineer to cover the
cost of construction of improvements, construction certification, "As Built" plans,
and monumentfng the street centerlines shall be filed with the County Engineer.
In our opinion we have adequate roads in this area to provide circulation for hibh
popubation 3ensity.
r
r-
* ECONOMY *
DR GEORGE M. EISENTROUT RESPONS! DIRECTORS
3apenntendent KATHY M PARSONS . Prmdent
Opportunity
CHARLES G. STOCKER DR BRUCE L. GEHMAN , N~cePrestdent
AsafatantSupenntendmt Centra Va ey Schoo District No. 356 JANET B FISCUS ...~y ~k
na~~rn~~ s~~
N E I L D. PRESCOTT, JR. OF SPOKANE VALLEY RICHARD H IVESTER . oPpom-ty
Aamlstaat Suptrintendent 123 S. Bowdish Road Telephoee 9246851
Eduatlonal9ervias - SPOKANE, WASMINGTON 99208 DARRELL A. THOMPSON . On~rt-AY
EDWIN J. MIKESELL
Manrger of Budinrse June 29, 1976
Sesvloea
Spokane County Planning Commission
N. 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99201 _
Attention: John Nunnery
Gentlemen:
You have inquired as to the School District's planning for an
elementary school at 24th and Adams. It would appear that our
planning assumed a density similar to the Early Dawn Addition
density--approximately four units per acre. However, if there ,
are valid reasons for the Planning Cominission determining other-
wise, there is no reason why school planning could not be
adjusted.
Resp fully,
' George . Eisentrout
Superintendent
GME:1
RE^rIVED
JM3 In
CVU~~Iy
PLAANNING CUNIINISSiON
~
a
/ ~~✓:4~ ~ , 6 ~ ,
~
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASNINGTON
IN THE MATTER CONCERNING PE-1025-76, )
GUTHRIE'S UALLEY VIEW 7th ADDITION ) COMMISSIONERS'
ZE-77-76, AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE ) DECISION
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - GUTHRIE, Sponsor )
This being the time set by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County, Washington, to render its decision concerning the request of
Rick Guthrie, East 12709 Sprague Avenue, Spokane, Washington, for the
above preliminary subdivision and zone classification upgrading; and
The Board having received the recommendations of the Planning Commission
contained in the Commission's minutes of July 9, 1976, which approved,
subject to conditions, the above mentioned preliminary subdivision and zone
classification upgrading; and
The Board having conducted its own public hearing on August 19, 1976, at
the request of William R. Uteckt, etal, and after visiting the site and
reviewing the testimony; and
The Board being fully advised in the premises did determine to deny
this application of Rick Guthrie for the above mentioned preliminary
subdivision because of the density of said plat. The Board directed the
interim Planning Director to prepare Findings and Order setting for
the Board's action in this matter.
DATED this 14 day of October, 1976.-
VERNON W. 0 AND
Clerk o he oard
'
by•
Rosa~ne Montague, Deputy C erk
,
. . .
( + r ♦ (
iMI NUTES
~ ' ~ jU LY S , 19 7 6
• .i a - J 3
PRELJIVnNAP,Y SUBDIIIISION AND : 0i1TE CU.S~Ii'ICATION UPGRADItiTG
PE-1025-76 GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIM1<< SEVEIVTH A~DITIGN: GUTHRI£, ,
ZE- 77-75 AGRICULTURAL TQ SINGLE FANIILY RESIDEN`lIAL (R-1)
Planning Comm;ssion Recommendation; Approve, subiect to tne followtnq
conditions: Wate was unanimous)
A, REA.SG1',,=: -
A"logical expansion" of suburban type lot development which can
provide economic housing for the South Opportunity area.
2. The existing school site at Adams and 24th could be used with higher
den5ity development. Also, existing Elementary School serving Vera
Tracts is at capacity with 570 students e _
Vi,Tater, power and fire pcotection have the capability to accomr.lodate
the increased density.
' 4. Existing roads are aopropriate for suburc-an density, plus suburban
density development provides for future rights of way necessary for
replatting to higher densities if needed via the platting process which
is not the case with rural density segregatio,zs.
B. CCNDITIONS:
1. That the plat be designed as indicztad on the preliminary plat of
record and/or attached sheets as r.oted.
2. That a statement be placed in the dedication to the effect that no
ii:ore than one dwelling structure be placed on any one lot, nor shall
~.n•~lot be further subdivided for the purposes of creating additlonal
lcco- or building sites without filing a replat.
3. That the plat provide for right of way width for streets as indicated
on the preliminary plat of record.
4. That appropriate provision be made tha} the following described
property be held in trust until the continuation of thc stzeets be dedicated
or deeded: A 1' strip at the ends or edges of ali streets that terminate
or border the plat boundary. (Temporary cul de sacs are required
when streets terminate at the plat boundaries.)
51 That appropriate street names be indicated.
- 8 _
. .
vINUTES
jULY 9, 1976
PE-I025-76 GLT?'r,RI£'S VALLEY VIE-A' SEVLNTFI, P L~DITIGN (Conkinued)
o. That appropriate utility easements be indicared on copi es of the
approved preliminary plat for distribution to tne Ptanning Department
and the utility companies. VU'ritten approval of the easements by the
utility company must be received prlor to the submittal of the final plat.
7. That a plan for water facilities adequate for fire protection be approved
by the water supplfer and fire protection district. Safd water plan must
also have been approved by the appropriate health authorities.
The health authorities, water supplier (purveyor),
and fire protectton district will certify, prior to the filing of the final
on the face of said 4vater plan that the plan is in canformance with
tr-eir requirements and will adequate.ly satisfy theix respective needs.
S«id water plan and certificatton will re drafxed on a transparency
suitable for reproduction.
The water supplier (purveyor) will a!so certify prior to the filing of
the final plat on a copy of said water ptan that appropriate contractual
arrangements have been made with the plat sponsor ior construction of
the water system, in accordance wtth the approved plan, and in accord-
ance with a time schedule. The time schedu le cvitl provide, in any
. case, for completion of the water system and inspection by the appro-
priate health authorities prior to application for building permits within
the plat. The contractual argangemenCs will include a provision holdtng
Spokane County and the water supplier (purveyor) harmleass from claims
by any lot purchaser refused a buildtng permit due to the failure of tre
plat sponsor to satisfactorily complete the approved irJater system.
The plat dedication will contain a seatement to the effect that the public
water system as approved by County a,za State Health au-Lhorities and
the local flre district and water supplier (purveyor) will be installed
withfn this plat, and the subdivider will provide for indfvidual servi.ce
to each lot prior to sale of each lot.
NQTE; The Spokan` County H2alth District has determined that the
soil conditions'in the plat are suftable for on-site sewage disposal
Et,stems on each lot. -
a. T'L:.at a certtficate of title be furnished the Ptanning Commission prior
Lo the filing of the final piat.
9. That the prelimfnary p!at be given conditional approval to August 1,1977
10. That streets be improved to ste-ndards established by Spokane County
or a bond to cover the cost oi such improvements nE furnished the
County Engineer. The bond inay also cover the cost of "as built" pians,
engineering costs, and placing of final center line monuments.
- 8 a -
. ~
. ~ . r
~
PL-1025-76 GU i'?PIRIE'S VALLEY ViDir SEVEIvTH ADL)ITION (Contlnued)
11. That profiles of str2ets, cross sections, propased grades, and drainage
plan of the piat bE submitted and approved by tha County Engfneer and
by the Planning Director before the final plat is dravun. Prior to .
c-icceptanc` of the improvzments or release of bonds, a certificate by a
~ registzred civiI engineer or Iicensed land surveyor will be requlred
indicating that all improvements have been installed to the lines and
grades shown on the approved construction plans.
12. Conditional approval of the plat is given subject to the dedication of
the right of way to the public and approval of the road system in the
plat by the County Engineer.
13. That a name be indicated beiore the final plat is filed; such name to be
e,r,roved by the County Assessor and the Planning Staff,
C . VERA iI;~'.,-"1TS DENSiTY ANALYSIS: 'd -
The ur ose of this analysis is to evaluate the jPVelopment pressures on the
era Tract~ and make a recommendation for a density policy to accompany the
Planning Commission's recommendation on this preliminary plat.
~ Thipresent chof the Vera 'racts ia mfxed denstties wlth a predominant
rural nature. The exf sting oyvnerships range fr m 10 a ~00 sauare feet-alncrLe
ts to the original Vera Tracts or 10 acres with farminq and/or grazing.
V` ,
The lonQ ranqe land usz_ elemznt of the Cornprehensive Plan calis for residential
for these Uera Trar- s. The Park and Recreation Plan adoAted i,a 1961 calls for
12.000 ~ua►-P feat -Lnrs nr qt,h,tlr~an dansis tor elementary school and park
siting within "Airport" neighborh.ood boundel by 16th, 32nd, Everqreen and '
Sullivag.,
The circulation element of Co_mprehenisive Planr pre sentiyiidentiiies 16th and
Sullivan as major arttrials, Evergreen and 32nd as secondary arterlals, and
Adams and 24th as coliectors. The County Engineers are presently proposing
changes for Evergreen and 32nd to be upgraded to major arteriats, Adams to be
a secondary a rterial .
The puhlic faciliti,es element of Comprehensive Pian calls for an elementary
~ - ~
school ;:,e located at Adams and 24th.
r,
The Cora outer densitZ summary of Vera Tracts indtcates that of the existing
. owne, rs 1/e b are less than one acre in sizP.and " bv nt?mber
are c~` Iara
The ownership most often occurLng f s 1.5 through
5 acres C 38% of all ownerships. Also, rhA ne;.densit%~Lof Vera tracts
ownerships by number is . SD.U,,/acre ocr nd .2-0; E_i7_/a rP vacant
kNo dwelling) making a total, net density of .36 ID.U t,/acre tr 2.7 acres/lot.)
-*The density map indicated visually thz rattos by volumeo
o
_ 8 b_
,
PE-1025-76 GUTEHRTE'S VrLLEY VIDJb' SEVENTH ADDITION, (Continued)
Buildzng',pzrmits in Vzra Tracts -ince 1972 throuqh 191,+5 range between 8 to lI,
pPrmits esiab. year for a,total of 3' buLidinct pe . This indicates a
continuling trend to seqreqrate zor purposes of sinqle family dwellings.
Ke )-t,,1Li%-- services were contacted and respond2d in writing to the question
, ~ -
of de r_: `Ly tn the Vera Tracts.
1. Central Valleu School QLstrict has Uagd a degsitv of annrnxi m~tr~l__v
4 D. U.,/acre in W ,planning o-f th2 futurP,, , lel en.tary school on the
existing owned 11 acre site at Adams at 24,,~h, but responds to popula-
ti no demands to justify constructiono
2. VPra Ili:ate M_std.-ct & PowPr has rnade inrensive srudies to provide for
either suburban or rural type development in Vera Tracts.
3. S o a alley Firz Department has fndfcated Its abilfty to provi3e
adequate fire protzct;on for suburban type dznsity developments.
~ 4. Sr ' eers indfcata that adequate roads exist for subur- _
. ban population density.
, Suburban devnlopment surrounds V2ra Tracts on the wesr, north and, eastL and
" ne suburban developr*+.ent to~h,P GsZuth. Increasing "suburban" type subdivi-
` sion activity is present to the northwest with the 3pprovzd Preliminary Plat
"1 F~jy ~awn 1 st ,~ddit~oand to the north ~vith the approved Preliminary plat
"Si's Subdivi sion". Also, recent communication with developers indicate
r intentions to subdivide west of Sullivan and just north of "Timbzrlane lst
°Aadition" and along 24th Aveanue near "McLaughlin Addition".
_
D. ST~:FF '~<<7IRONMENTaL REVIE~'~':
As required in jl1TAC ? 97-10-320, the staff of the County Planning Corri,nission
revfewed the environmental checklist submitted by Nr. Rick Guthrie for the
Pr-eliminary Subdivision of theGuth.riE's Valley View 7th Addition. The propo-
sal is located approximately in the S111 1/4 of the NE 1/4 oz Section 26,
Township 25 N., Range 44, E. W.IV.I., west of and adjacent to Progress Road,
about 320 feet north of 24th Avenue. The proponent is requesting to subdivide
4. 71 acres of iand into 14 Iots for single famlly dwellings creating a gross
density of about 3 untis per acrz. The site is located on relatively flat
terrain currently covered by active paskure land vegetation.
The staff review has identitied four potential areas or" environmental tmpacts.
First, and common to all subdivisions, is the incease in motor vehicle traffic
and all effects associated therewith. ThesE cvould include such impacts as
increased air pollution, specifically carbon monoxide, increased noise, and
increased public safety hazards from trafflc.
,
-8c.
1
• -
♦ t
NINU 1 ES
jULY 9, 1975
PE-1025-76 GUTHFIE'S VALLEY VI~%~- 7?'H ADDITIOI•T
A second potential environmental impact area considered was the fncreased
demand cn publtc services and utilities. This would include such factors
as increased requErements for police and fire protection, provision of
additional school, park, and recreational facilities, and additional mainten-
ance requirements on aIi county facilieies and roads. This would also
fnclude such impacts as associated with extension of utility Iines (power,
natural gas, telephone) and the provlsion of suitable long term sewecage,
domestic water, storm water runoff, and solid waste disposai.
A tr.ird potential environmental impact revealed by the staff evaluation
involves the subsurface fnjection of sewage effluent and storm water runoff.
This waste water placed at a depth will percolate downward toward the aquifer
rather than evaporating back into the atmosphere as under natural conditions.
A portion of the contaminants will likely be filtered out of this waste water,
bufi the resulting quality h`s not been determined yet. A total of 6.35 acre-
feet of waste water will be, generated annually by this plat, 4.25 acre-feet
of which will be storm water runoff. The ~ina1 area of potential fmpac[ involves the conversion of productive
agricul-Lu:-al land to suburban density residential. Currently aIl of the 4.71
acre s-:Le is used as active pasture land and the proposed wi.ll repiacz this
with single famity residentfal uses of a gross density of 3 units per acre.
The conclusion of thfs enviconmental checklist revlew is that no significant
environmental impacts will Iikely result from the proposal, lherefore, it fs
recommended that a Declaration of NOn-Significance be issued and an
environmental Impact statement not be requfred.
E. ZONING RECOMNIENDATION:
Planntng Commission Recommendation: Aqpr ove Guthrie's Vallev View 7th Addition
as fndicated on the preliminarv plat of record ro Sinqle Family Residential (R-i)
Zone Classificatfon upon the filinq of the final plat.
REASOItiTS: .
1. The fourtpen (14) lots in the subdivision have been disigned to
accommodate single family residences.
2, The Planntng Commission has been routfnely upgrading similar
residentfal plats in the area to the Single Family Residential Zone
classtfication.
3. Thp, Planning Commission is of the opinion that none of the lots within
ri~~ subdivision have di5advantaged relationships which would warrant
duplex zoning.
- 8 d -
. ,
, f P
~
PE-1025-76 GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VILV`i 7th AD:,DITI CN (Continued)
T he Sir.gie Family Residential Zona prohibits duplexes, animal keeping
otrier than household pets, mobile homes, and home occupations.
F. GENE L~ Ij DATA; "
1. Loc3tion; Section 26, Township 25 N., Range 44 E.W.'MI,
The iv'' 1/2 of Tract 208, Vera, except the North
110 feet of the East 330 feet therzof, and the
East 132 feet of the N 1/2 of Tract 209, Vera,
2. Sponsor: Rick Guthrie
East 12709 Sprague
Spokane, WA 99216
3. Surveyor: Land-Mark Surveyors -
S. 726 Liberty Drive
Liberty Lake, WA 990I9
4. Sit e Size: 4.71 acres
S. Number of Lots: 14
6. Land use proposed by sponsor: Single Family Dwellings
7. Existing Zoning: Agricultural, estab[ished March 27, 1942 -
8. Advertised Zone Upgrading: Single Family Residentf.al (R-I)
9. Water Source: Vera Water and Power District
10. School Distric[: Central Va!ley School District
-8e-
No. ~~O- 1064 .
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
FINDINGS AND ORDER REGARDING PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL AND ZONE
CLASSIFICATION UPGRADING - PE-1025-76, GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEW #7:
ZE- 77- 76 , AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) : RICK GUTHRIE
WHEREAS, the Spokane County Planning Commission did, after public hear-
ing on July 9, 1976, forward to the Board of County Commissioners a recommenda-
tion that the preliminary plat to be known as Guthrie's Valley View #7 (File number
PE-1025-76) and zone classification upgrading (File number ZE-77-76) be approved,
and
WHEREAS, William R. Uteckt, et al, did by letter dated July 20, 1976
request a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to present evidence
and testimony against the recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve
the above-described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners did hold a public hearing on
August 19, 19761 to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission and
testimony and request of the applicant, objector, and other interested parties, and
WHEREAS, at said hearing opportunity was afforded those favoring and those
opposing the above-described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, the
Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County having fully considered the testi-
mony given, the records and minutes of the Planning Commission, the environmental
assessment, and all other evidence presented, and having personally acquainted
themselves with the site and vicinity in question, does hereby find:
lj That the proposed plat does not exemplify a density that would be
compatible with the surrounding area.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners does hereby concluded
that the above described finding is sufficient and controlling and the proposed plat
is denied.
DATED this i~ daY o f ~ 1976.
,
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
RnnQ
''°T'Tr ~ i 1 INt
COUNTY C01"HAISSfONERS
RAY W. CNR4SYENS-FN, C}W
j
tKKY . OPET
lIARRY M. LARNFD
ATTEST:
Vernon W. Ohland
Clerk o =the Board
V~
B y:
~ Deputy
'l
.
~Q~G3 ~i$f~~buGoPS 0~ WaPer 0- ~Ir"nfer
a~C~CCs GQ
~
bfll NORTH EbEF2Gf2EEN
vERADAIE, bdASHlNGTOsv 99037
June. 29, 1976
Mr. John Nunne ry
Spokane County Flanning Office
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99201
Dear Mr. Nunnery:
In response to your inquiry of Mr. Jobb of our organization in
regard to our utility service planning to meet future growth.
We have made intensive engineering studies of both our water and
electric system and have developed plans for service to meet the
needs of our service area as it develops. These plans will
accommodate intensive or sparse development, whichever is approve d
by the Spokane County Planning Organization. It is no our role
or our policy to dictate the type or amount of growth that will
take place by manipulating utility service.
I trust that this letter will answer any questions that you may
have in regard to our planning for growth. If it does not, please
contact us again and we will try to get the answers that are needed
by your organization.
Very truly yours,
. kJ
. W. Custer
General Nianager
JWC : db
R E IC'0* E I V E D
JuL ! ~
Sl-v"vE CUUiiTY
PI.MNIlVO COMMiSS10N
~ »
• .
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHII`IGTON '
IN THE MATTER CONCERNING PE-1025-76, )
GUTHRIE'S VALLEY VIEW 7th ADDITION } COMMISSIONERS'
ZE-77-76, AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE ) ACTION
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Guthrie, Sponsor )
This being the time set by the Board of County Commissioners
of Spokane County, Washington, to render its decision concerning
the request of Rick Guthrie, East 12709 Sprague Avenue, Spokane,
Washington for the above preliminary subdivision and zone
classification upgrading; and
The Board having received the recomnendations of the Planning
Commission contained in the Corrmission's minutes of July 9,
1976, which approved, subject to conditions, the above mentioned
preliminary subdivision and zone classification upgrading; and
The Board having conducted its own public hearing on August 19,
1976, at the request of William R. Uteckt, etal and after visiing
the site and reviewing the testimony; and
The Board having received requests for special hearings on two
additional plats which are located in close proximity to the
proposed Guthrie's Valley View 7th Addition did determine to
postpone their decision to a time no later than October 15, 1976.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD this 2 day of September, 1976.
" VERNON W. OHLAND
Clerk e Board
b
osanne Montague, Deputy erk
r
5noKAr~~ VALLEq FIRE DEPARTIAENT
~~~1 7~ ~"4cee~w Va. ~/V& /
EAST 10319 SPRAGUE AVE. • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206 • TELEPHONE (509) 928-1700
June 24, 1976
Mr. Dwight Hume
Acting Di rector
Spokane County Planning Commission
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99202
RE: Guthrie Valley View
7th Addition
Dear Mr. Hume:
It is the feeling of this department that adequate fire protection will be
provided for the above referenced plat provided adequate fire hydrants are
installed.
Sinc Jely, ,
.
A1(Cook.Lt. of Inspectors
Fire Prevention Bureau
AC:cy
~
► r~ n ` f a ~
` 24
S~~'~vE
~V~tt G~U~i ,
, ~ ~
Q'~M/
~ PR~'' "'ENT' FIRES ~~~E T'~ VES ~
5PO~ANE VALLE(I -FIR~ ~E~APlAENT
EAST 10319 SPRAGUE AVE. • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206 • 7ELEPHONE (509) 928-1700
July 1, 1976
Mr. Niight Hume, Acting Director '
Spokane County Planning Cotrmission
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mr. Hume:
The following zone changes and preliminary subdivisions have been r°eviewed for
adequate fire protection:
~ i
PE-1020-76 ~ . .
ZE- 72-76 - Ma. ~ns and hydrants needto be,~ stalled in this area.
PE-1021-76
ZE- 73-76 - Mains and hydrants needato be inst,alied in this area.
~
PE-1023-76
ZE- 75-76 - Mains and hydrantsCneed to,be installed in this area.
~ T ~ J ~
PE-1025-76 ` ~
~ ZE- 77-76 - Mains and hya ts need to"be "ainstall ed ~i n thi s area.
;
P E-102 6- 76 a 'e; t ,
ZE- 78-76 - Mai.ns anda:hydrants need to beii nstal 1 ed~i n thi s area.
'
PE-1029-76
ZE- 81-76 - N1ai ns - and hydra'nts need to. be i nstal l ed i n` thi s area.
ZE- 53-76 -°Mains\and hydrants need to be i nstal i ed',i ny-thi s\area .
~
ZE- 40-76'y.- Mai ns,and hydranfs - need to be i ns tal l ed i n~thi s area:.
ZE- 45=76 y- Mai ns and hydrants _ need to be, i nstall ed--i n Tth,i s area1.
~ u
ZE- 56-76: There are existing mains in;.this.area but hydrants'wi_11 be
.'___needed. y
U ~ PRE VENT FIRES SAVE LI VES J
~
M
RFCEIP Date ~19
4731
~
Received From ~r
Adclress
Ifars
~
~-Lo %5- 7&6 _
ACCOUNr HOW PAID
nMr OF •z}-i OCA ~E COi1Ni"Y ALANMNc; r'
_AcCaurar [AsH 0MWSS1+0At
.
AMt. PaiD GrAECK
BALAN[E r M(1NE-Y
~ G11E I ~ CPRER ~
SK6446
~
~
y r•~ ~ SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
Inter-Offi ce Communi cation
rN D~
Date: June 16, 1976
T0: Spokane County Planning Commission
FROM: Eugene C. Prather, R.S. ~
SUBJECT: Proposed Preliminary Plat - GUTHRIE VALLEY VIEW 7TH ADDITION
1. Reference : Sketch of sub ject presented by Boatwri ght, recei ved by
us on June 14, 1976. Pending receipt of a formal map, we reserve
the right to withdraw approval of any specific lot in the proposal.
2. The topography and soil in the lots are suitable for installation
of individual on-site sewage disposal systems.
3. Uera Water and Power District has indicated it can supply water
to the plat. We recommend that before signing the final plat:
a. The sponsor pr•esent evidence that the plat lies within
the filed service area of the water purveyor.
b. The water system provide for fire protection.
c. All contractual agreements for wate r service be complete.
dr
cc: Land-Mark Surveyors S. 726 Liberty Dri ve
Liberty Lake, Washington
` ; ; : •••rx z i,
y ..a s ~ Oi -f~
. , , , ~ ~y
cci6vll1vlAsSfON
SCHD-ADM-118
, .
ioe-
~u n o i -3 , 1.976
Planninq Director & Healttq Dizector
Spokane County Pianning Commf ss ion
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, tiashington 99201
RL: Guthrie' s Valley View
° 7th LAddition
Dear sirs:
This lettez is to verify that ttio Vera Water &Power
District can supglX power and water to the Guthrfe' s
Valley Viea 7th Addition, praviding the developer complies
with the District' s poli.cies, rules and zegulations.
Biricerely.
.l'f ll.iatn J. .~obb
Assistant Manager
WJJ : h1
?,z~ :
~ Awa~
5
~
~
PE-1025-76 & ZE-77-76
In the matter of a hearing to consider the application of Rick Guthrie, East 12709 Sprague
Avenue, Spokane, Washington, to file a plat to be knowxi as Guthrie Valley View 7th Addition.
Also to consider changing the Zoning Map from Agricultural to Single Family Residential (R-1)
on the property described below, such zone change to become effectfve
only upon the filing of a final plat, or plats, of such property. The property being platted is
described as the N 1/2 of Tract 208, Vera, except the N 110.00 feet of the East 330.00 feet
thereof, and the East 132.00 feet of the N 1/2 of Tract 209, Vera in Section 26, Township 25 N. ,
Range 44, E.V1T. M., Spokane County, Washington.
(We s t of Progre s s Road, approxima tely 300 f ee t north of 2 4 th Avenue.)
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF 1rlASHINGTON )
) SSo
COUIVTY OF SPOKANE )
0D., .
, Being first duly svrorn, deposes and says.
5-
That at all times mentioned herein he was, and now is, a citizen of The United
States, a resident of Spokane County, Eaashington, and over the age of twenty-one
year s o
That on v r Z~ , l~V, he personally posted three (3) true
and correct copies of the hereto attached NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING at the
following places in Spokane County, to-wit:
PZ .t~
0
1 4
20
. i~
3.
Subscribed and sworn to me
19
N4TARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASH:CNGTO-N
Re siding at Spokane, 6aashington
"E X H I B I T A"
PR'*4 IMINARY PLAT APPLICATION F-~RM
. ,
, Total Amount of Land in this Subdivtsion: `-f 1 7/ L~res
Proposed Density of the Plat: ~Lot ~ Gros s Acre
Area Total Amount of Adjoining Land Controlled by this Owner or Sponsor: Acres
and Proposed Use of Controlled Adjoiriing Land: 1,~/~~ -P
Distance What is the Driving Distance in Miles to the nearest Fire Station?
Shopping Facilitie s?/Az- 'A, Municipal Boundary? __04~10 Paved Street or High-
way? ~
Indicate the Proposed Land Use of the Plat: ~ Single Family Uwellings
Duplexe s Multi -Family Dwell g Units Mobile Home s
Land ( } Other (Describe) % ~g * `e---
U se De scri bE any Non-Residential Ulse s Proposed in the Plat.~`~
What is the Pre sent U se of the Property Proposed to be Platted ?-f
Dc yuu Plan to Flle the Plat in its(1-ZEntirety as Proposed, or Will it be a Multi -Phase
Levelopment? .
To What Level of Improvement 'I1 Streets be Constructed Minimum) Gravel
( ) Curb & Gravel ( dCurb & Paved
What is the Time Period Expected for Complete Developme nt of the Plat (i , e., Streer
Improvements Improvements Completed, Substantfal Percentage of the Lots Occupied? t
Is Dedication of - ny Land for Public Use (Parks, Schools, etc. ) contemplated?
O No ( q Ye s De s cri be :
Indicate the Size of Units Proposed to be Constructed: Ft.
Number of Bedrooms: o"-15Z`F 3 ~
Will Buildings be Built on the Lots Before They Are Sold ?(,-r-"-~No Yes
Will any Special Deed Restrictions be Included in the Sale of Lots j Yes (~-Wo
If "Ye s Explain:
Indicate the Proposed Method of Sewage Disposal: (#--rSeptic Tank Lagoon
( ) Treatment Plant ( ) Other (Describe) Indicate the Proposed Source of Water Supply: Individual Wells Private
Communa.ty System (kePublic System
Indicate Method of Extending Senrice to the Lots (Dwellings): (vl"'Utility Easernents
Utilities - Underground Utilfty Easements - Overhead (r,--rUtilities in Streets -
No Easements
Indicate the Distance from this Proposal to the Nearest Existing Water Main: 0 Ft.
Indic ate Si ze of Ne are st Main: VI",l In.
List Utj.lfty Companies or Districts Expected~ to Provide Service to this Plat:
Electricity Gas I Water Phone~~ 40"z-~
~ • -
P ROP OSE D PLAT NAME. "7e- S- yo ~~~.~~.a--~ ~•v~ ~ r~
p B I, The Undersigned, have completed the fnformation requestea, and the Preliminary
A E~ASylat has been prepared by me or under my supervision in accordance with the requlc~e
° nts of the Spokane County Planning Commission and the laws of the State of
y ~ W hington.
e ( Signe d) Date
, os44~o (Addre s s ) P hone 7 6 F ~
, ~,~0 ~G! ST ER C a
NAC LAN~
the sponsor af this proposed subdivision, am the
owner builder agent (11 option Holder contract holder of tne
property proposed to be platted; and have completed the information requested of ine
axid do hexeby te stify that it i s correct and accurate.
(Signed) `~i Date
(Addres s ) jl W~~ ~A Pp one 2ajp
, .
N OTARY D ate
THIS PART TO BE COMPLETED BY PLANNIk6 COMMI'SSION `STAFF ONLY,, ~
we& Plat Name: l tlat File Number: F~sw A - Date Submitted: 1 6dA
Planning Location: S ;Z&_TR_± ~ Number of Lots:
►
Comrrdssfon Existing Zone Classifica1.ion of the Area Prop se to Be Platted: 13 ~
Inforr,iation Zoning Classification R,e.'com e ded by Staff: ~ ~
~ Prelimin~'Y Plat Fee: $ Checked By:
~
~S~ r
'
~ aSurveyors
PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS
SO 726 LIBERTY DRIVE ■ LIBERTY LAKE, WASHINGTON ■ 255-6159
EXHIBIT B
GU'TIIRIE' S VA:GLEY VIEW 7TH ADDITION.
I,EGAL DESCBIPTION
North 2 TRACT 208, VERA (Except the North 110900 feet of the EAST 330.00
feet there.of) and the BAST 132.00 feet of the N 2 0f TR.ACT 209, VERA in
the County of Sp kane and in the. State of Washington.
~ oF s
~
0 944 ~
F
JSTER~~
L LANO
~
~
~
~
~
J ~
UN ~
9?
v~
~~o~
~ ~
~
~+~u ~r~e h~reb~ n~t~f i~d, th+~t or~
~~r~~ 1~~s ~It ~'1~Q~Jr g.~t~
~~y i~ Ct~nf+~r~r~~e Ro~r~ A, ~lila~l+~rr Av~nu+~ En-
~~~r~c~~ ~~c~l~~r~~ ~c~ur~t~r Co~urt H~us~ An~rex, ~pokan~,
Il~c~~hi~c~t~n, The ~P~KAI~E ~C~UNT'~ PLA~N~~C ~~N'l~Vll~=
1N1~~ Cf~I~C~L~~t ~~~~I[ ~t+~q~'1~1~ ~~NSII3ER T~IE ~PPL~~p~'It~l~ C~F
F~ICK ~t~T~R~E, EAS'T ~27Q9 ~PR~iGL~E A1T~N'~E, ~F{~KAA~~, ~"'ASI~N~TUN, F"IL~ ~ ~LAT ~4 B~
~N~}~fl~ GU~'~IR~E ~IALL~ VTE'~V 7TH AI~~I"~~~N. AI~~ ~C~NSIL~~R ~I~iA~1~ING ~~E Z~NiN~
Iv~.~P F~t~M A~RI~~I~T~J~L T~ ~~I~~L~ FAM~LY ~SIDENT~ ~N T~E PR4PE~TY ~~SCRIBEI~ BELQ~IV,
SUCH ZC~N~ ~~~~E T~ ~E~+~ME ~FF~~C'~IVE ON~Y ~T~(~N T~IE F~ZING ~F A FIN~~ PLA'~; 0~
PLA'~, {~F ~U~~I p~~PERTY. PE-~1~25-7f anr~ Z~ -7~-76
. .
G~~r~~~ ~~e~~pt~~n ~ ~r~e~: s~~~~~~ ~~~n~~~~ ~.~,n~.
T~~ of Tr~ct ~4 U~r~, e~~ept ~he N I~~,~~ fe~t a~ th^ ~a st 33~ f~~t th~r~~f, an~
~I~~ E~~t ~3~.~J0 f~et ~f the ~i 1/2 af Tr~~t ~'er~ irc S~~c~~on ~6, Tc~w,n~4~~p IV., R~n~~ 44
~~"~,~vl., ~pc~k~ne ~aunty, VV~shingt~n
~'est af Fr~~r~ss R~d, ~ppr~xir~~t~ly 3~~ ~~~t n~~k~i ~f 24 th Avenuey.
FC3R F1~RTH~R I~E~I~IL~ c~nt~ct the Spc~~~n+~ ~a~r~~y
Pl+~n~ir~~ ~C~mmi~si~n, Pub~~~c 1Nv~rks Bu~~+d~~~, ~11 ,l~~~~~-
~~r~ ~tr~~~, ~p~l~a~~e,11~'~~h~i~n~tar~.
1'sI ~v~~~.~ Actir~g Qtf~c~ar of Pla~nn~ng
3pokan~ ~Co~niy ~laening ~ommisaion
FORM B~4PLkG. COMM. 9•~E~
I
71o GwA*A' s poall guv- ~ Ad* mw. _
At; P-o!9 10,
sx
-
. ,
c~
f. - - - - - - - - -
~
~
~
oolo~
A041-
.
)P ~ _ .
'po t_m P - ~ . _ - - - -
- 714-
- - - ~ - ~ _
_ _ - - - -
Ator
~
4 ~ 0
~
.
• ~
p! ~
44 (
DR41AA*
~ ' • 1441- oook~ A4% ,~il` •
~ ~
I' oi4& 04~ .0044W 04
•
I ~
I
I
MAJ
M
~
I
I I ~
t
V-000~
~
c~
,
~
„
~
&WIttaI5
AJP
~
~I y~t _j~s , •
Y- ~
~ • ~4+t ~ ~
~
~ ~ .
*
~
°
~
~
tv~-~--
JJj~~•
~
, /s(I( b ~f/~~~
~V ✓ ♦
. 1~r~~~~~~ •
~ r
/
e
~
~ ,
•
, r• `~~~~''"r` ~
, ~ i~ ~ ~ ~ • ~
.l~
~ r -
~i{~ _
~
~z~.~ c~ -
. -
~ ~
IA ~A~ ~ ~ s
~ ~1~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~c~-~- ~
C5 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ -
~ ~ ~3
~ ~ ~ , , .
~t:~~- - _
~ ~ " ~ r,~• - ~ {
.
. ~ ~
~
t
~ ~i"~`'~ ~ ~ .
` c~ ~ ~ 'f~'1~
fi1~ 9'S . ~ • ~
_ C~~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~
,
~
M
1
ol
~
f p • y
Ar-
~ ~y I
~
I I
APPLicaTZaN pxocESS :
Appl f estion. . . . . . . . . . . ~
E1V il`Orm@Iltal Qle Ckl i9't . . . . . . . f
Five (5) Plat Mape . . . . . . . .
Zwo (2) Parcel Mape . . . . . . . .
' Legal Description. . . . . . . . :
Health Diatrict . . . . . . . . .
Water Diat.rict. . . . . . . . . . ~
;
Payrnent and Receipt . . . . . . . . :
County Utility Departmdnt . . . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . . r
f
. . . . .
REVIEW PROCE.SS 2
Deliver Preliminary Plata Zb:
Ehgineers. . . . .
Utilities. . . . .
Health District. . . ,
Incorporated Cities . ~A
State Hi ghway 8. . . i?
Zoning Detezznination. . .
Old Plan Review . . . .
Lot Sizea . . . . . .
Road Alligment & Stub Street
S:ECRETARI.AL PROCESS: Owmerehipa . . . . . .
slope . . . . . . . .
Drainage. . . . . . .
Gheek Legal. . . . . . . . r~ Fire District Ntemo . . .
A.saign Zone Change Nwaber ~ Ordinance Compliance. ~
Affedavid of Posting. Exiating Land Uee Plan
Printer . . . . . . . . . Mavironmental Checklist Review ~Property Owner Notificatiorl . . i
Threahold Deternination.
Agenda Page. . . . . . . . ~~u/~ Agenrcia Maps. . . . . .
Legal Notice . . . . . . . C►it~v~ Poating Notioe. . . . .
~ ~r~.CJ. -L ~i- - - - • • • • _ • • •
• ~ • • • •
4302
• • • • • • •
sPEcIaL REO s!
. f ~ _ ~it.~- J•~tA-'~ !i~. t~' ~Y : • r l~ . .
.
► !
; ;t • - : - ~ . , ~f cc t , T ' 1 : t ~.t~~f~t.'• (
' • • . . . . . .
, ' ~ . . ' . . ~'~~.~i` i ..-~aalf. - Clr.t:~J~ c.L/~~l.~(-. A.. I~~~ ' ~'`Cly..~ _ • ~
t
CA.
;
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
. i
~
~ J u I~I k F. ~ '~,a ~ ~ , t,~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ P fi ~ ~ N ~ I ~ 'f L~ ~V ~ ~ ~ Q ~C ~j i _ _ . _ e~-- _ _ _ _ S~~~ANL~ C~I~NT`~ L~l~l~ F I~.F - - ~ ~
~ _ r ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ I~ T C~~. QQC'~M~
- ~ ~ ~G - NUh~~'~~ C~~~~~k ~~SESSE~1 G~r~vER LE~~tL ~~S~:~RI~~It~P~ J~ PR~IPFR~Y TAXPAYE~t
~.-k-
~b~~+i-1Ci3 T~eC~~~~i4~ UT~CHF ~ VERA f~2~}3 UTE~'~iT CH~ST'~R
NlVI{~G C~4MMiSSION ~ S~'~KAi~JE C~~J~T~' PLA ~ 1~t~~} ~~R~~R Rf!
WP~~~S l~t~TlFl~a DR~P~~2TY 0 GR~~'~~CR~S 11A ~~?G1~ ~
{ ~ - r ~ C~ ~ ~ . ~b~~rl-~~117 ~~.~57~ P~~S C~UKC~-~ ~'E~A 51J2 ~,.G~ ~A1E:_ • PI~~~~`~~~R1f ['F IN~. ~Mf~
53b - . _ ~~F. - v
C(I~~JR i~ AL~'~~ ID 83~14
- ~6~~1~~°~Ib 73G~~~~,a~J ~t~l~ ~HAEN~I~~ YE~A ~I~1Z PQC ~ST 5~~ SP~ ~ . ~ _ ~ -
. 13 ~~.556~ ~ ry r ~3
Y . * r ~'b~~Y~~b~~ ~~7~~4A M R ~l~lTS~~J . 51~2 ~~f ~~Q9 WAT~~~ ~Qlell a
M ~ _ n.~m - _ ~ v.~._ - E ~t ~ F ~ ~ ~ D ~9 R D r C ~3C A ~ ~
V~RA~+~L~ Y~d~ 9~C3~
E
~ ~ ~ ~ 26~4L=1~~~ 1~~►9~~C H N rI~ATGI~ 11~~t~ ~T $~0~ ~4t5~F~ N~~lT~N I~A'RE~Li}
` F 511~ EXC ~?~~F~ ~4~ ~T~f t~~rF ~ ~ _ ' ~ - Y~R,4~Al~ ~f~
y = _ . . _ _ - . " _
' ~ . . ~ . . ~ ~6~4~ 1~3C 5~~32~~ R BA~IT i~y 'VE~R+4 ,~~3ZFT E,~~4~T 8All~T ~~LME~ R
~ ~F 5I1~ ~~Q9 E ~#~~1 ~~~H AV~ _ - - - - _ R_~.~~.~~._ V~~AL'Al ~ WA ~94~~
~65~1-1b~Z T~1'S4~iB ~~JN f~ A9V~~R~~N V~~tA ~1IZ ~f ~13ZF~ Ld1~C 15T ~FE~ S~L - - - - ~~49 - - ~ ~1 ~+1~9kc~3
, 26~~r1-1~~~ ~►~~~~h~ C~ UT~CHT V~R~ N11C' ~3~(~' HllT~~I S~~l GI ER1` R S B . _ _ _ _
- - M1#Z ~]iF ~C~-- - - S. CZ+~2 P~C+~RES~ ~D
'~~~+4~A~E WA ~'~~37
r.~~., a t=, - - - s n- - s._-~~g~~ _
~b5~1~15~7 i:9~74~f3 '~~~1 ~l7~CHT ~ V~RA S11~ ~~1 ~~(3~ l1'~fC'N~ WIL~TAi~ ~
~E 14~~~ ~4T~! AV~ Y~R4~AL~ ~!A '4~2~f~
~,.~_c. , 2~5~~-15~8 ~`8~99~~ ~ R U~~CH~ V~~+4 S15$.~~T 511~ ~1fiECHT ELhIER R ~
~F ~ 1J~ ~Z~~ S ~3~0 PI~~!~R~'SS ~b - - ~ - . V ~ R A A ~ ~
- ~ l~ 4~ ~ G~
~b5~r~-15~~ 4,~I15LC E' EAST~IAt~ W~~A h~15~.~~~ ~F 511~ ~ASTI~AI~ BRE~iT ~ ~ ~F ~IIZ ~ ?~~4 ~RCGRESS R~
~ VER~Q~AI~ W~ 99437
_ _
~~5~4-G~19 ~~~B~r~C L A~I~ER ~ ~ YER~ W~~(l.~bF~' EQU3T,~BLE S~l
~ ~ 0~ F ~i 1 ~ 4 1C 4 15~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Zb5~i4-C~I~G ~99t~b~~C K~I~NETH ~~~l,~T A ~Z14 L~~~l.7~FT~Q~ - ` !P~~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~5Z.~5Ffi C1F "J~l~ ~i ~49~
, j , : 3~ C ~ ~ ~ J~ ~ ~ e _ . , R__ ~ - - -
~~544~-C114 1~C~6~~~~3Z RC~~T F GI~~~ V~R,~ 1~1.~~~T Q~ ~ N~ ff3T ~ GI~
E3~3y ~i7F1 ~tiI11 OF ?Z14~ ~ 14~+~Z ~4~H AV~
V~R~,[1ALE W4 ~9~^3l
~ ~
~ ~►4-` 4 ~r 7 ~ M a~ I~IL~ ~ ~ FT ~ . ' ~~5 u~~~1 bl 5 C ~ ~'~R~ ~~1 ~'i2~.~1 ~ Qh~~ ~ ~IDE ' I~ ' ~ , , n p~
~ ~ , ~~~r ~r~~ ~~to ~ r~ _G ~ _ _ - . ~ ~ ~ - _ ~
~b54~i-~L~ l x~ ~5'~~~~~C r L►~C CL~M~~ " YE~R~ 51. ; F F I t~ ~UT S~V ~K 4Z 4 ~ ~
, ~ ~ ~w - - fi i c_ I`~~~*~ N ! . ~ 3 Y ~ ~C~~7 7 c~ ~ ~ ~.~i4 _ _ - - - ~ _ _ _ ; _ e~_ ~ _ ~ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ ~ _ _ a.~
Z~~~~,~~14 ~~~15~~ ~~~w~E~~ ~~~P~C v~R~ ~43~' N~~~' Ca~~ o~~ F
~ 4 F IRVI ~Y ~LK ~1~ a 5~ A ~4I E
S~~KANE W~ 99~~7 ~
~
~6~~4~-~G~1~ ~I~~~4$ f~~fi~tE~~E N~'~~AG w~'RA ~I~~t ~1~ Ek~ ~430' CIF 5IV~4~ FR~N1~1.I~ J 5 ~~~7~~~t~GRE~S-~~ N30*
V~Rl~~A~.E WA ~9~37
INPUT ~~AR[~~ P~~CE~S~~; i~~7 CtJ~RESPC~I~Z~~G PA~~~I~S~ ~~~lNO Q~ F~i~
~~I~~~iR~Y ~AT:~~ IN~~IT ~+~f~~5 PtlR~~l~ PR~~T k~~~1E~ ~+H M~ S5
~C 1 ~ 1 .~~6b .40fCr ~4.OCL~~
~ :
>
E • r ~ _
~ ~ ~ N
~ w ] f:
4 _ - _ . . _ . _
L r,
_ . ~ _ _ Y .
~
1 . i , +