ZE-31-73
r
OFf ICF OF TNE SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPADtT11iiENT
Wto Id^01
To -
From_
Subjett ;4~&,
G
.
~
' MINUTES
jUNE 13, 1975
ZO1VE CHANCE
VIOBILE HOME ZO1V'E: BASCETT-k
ZE-311-731 - AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDFNTIA T
(Oriqfnal proposal confiinued at the September 21, 1573 hearing for
an fndefinite time to allow the sponsor to improve the existing
facility and to redesign the proposed mobile home addition.)
Planninq Commission Recommendation; Approve to Residentfal 1Viobile Home
Zone * subiect to the followincr conditions: (Vote was unanimous e)
A e COiVDITIONS:
1. Installation to Spokane County standards of curb, paving to existing
oil and drainage control along Montgomery Drive.
2. Approval of access by the Spokane County Enqi neer's office prior to
release of building permfts.
3. Approval of a trailer court desfgn for the advertised property by the ~
Zoning Adiustor (such application shall be made within six (6)
months.) The trailer court shall not exceed twenty four (24) units
in Phase I. The designated lot shovrm on the submitted plan for elimi-
nation shall be established as a"tot" playground or similar open
space area. Pinecroft I and Pinecroft II shall be physically connected
by a 20 foot paved roadway a s indicated in the revised submittal.-
NOTE: Additional Zoning Adjustor hearinqs may consider trail er court
develop ment of Phase II (area currently occupied by residence).
4. Installation of 3cn ains and fire hydrants fn accordance with the require-
ments of the Spokane Valley Fire Marshal. If water flows for fire
protection prove insufficient (See l,-mttpr from jim Kearney, Spokane
Valley Fire Marshal), supplemental water €lows shall be provfded by
either connecting with a public water system or establishing a well
and pumpfng system witbin the southwest corner of the pro ject.
,
f
5;,1 The water supply system and the sewage disposal facilities shall be
approved by the Spokane County Health District and state agencies
exercising jurisdiction.
B. REASONS INCLUDING ENVIRONI/IENTAL ASSESSMENT:
1. The advertised property abuts a railroad track and is an expansion of
an established mobile home park. The Commission fs of the opinion
that the parcel would not readily develop for standard construction
residences because of its proximity to the railroad and developing
industrial properties e (Cont'd)
- 8 -
f (
ZE-3.1-73 - AGR TOORMH (CGnt'd)
2. The trailer court would have indirect access to the arterial system
via Montgomery Drive e a se conddry arterial serving an industr.fal area.
The site lies on the edge cf a residential neighborhood with a trailer
court to the east, older homesites to the north, the railroad tracks
and a trucking facility to the south, and developing industrial pro-
perties to the we st .
3. The sfte is situated on the floor of the Spokane Valley between a
residential neighborhood and a developinq light industrial corridor.
The conditions of approval will assure proper spacing in the trailer
court and utility systems and roadways will be designed to protect
the health, safety, and qeneral welfare of the ocupants. Because
surrounding properties to the south and west are zoned Restrictect
Industrial, the performance standards of that zone will maintain
environmental quality for the area. The area f s served by adequate
utility and road systems.
4. The sfte f s within an urbanizing area. The zone change pmpo sed
wo,uld have no greater effect upon the topography, geology, biological
and botanical characteristics, atmospheric and aquatic conditions
and other natural development than uses previously established in
the area. The Commission, therefore, concludes that an environ-
mental impact statement is not required for the project.
C . GENERAL DATA:
.
1. Location: Section 9, Townshfp 25 N., Range 44,
E.W.M. Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecroft
First Addition, including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon Avenue
to be vacated.
2. Applicant: Pete Lascetta
E. 1""`) IUsansffeld Ave.
Spol:aik.., WA 99206
3. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 acres
4. Existing Zoning: Agricultural, established April 24, 1942
5. Proposed Zoning: Resfdential Mobile Home Zone
6. Proposed use of property: Mobile Home Court
7. Application of Zoninq Provision: Chapter 4.21, Sechon 4.21.040
-9-
~ S .
1 ~U,
_ 4 7~x oj-l~y e
~s '009
UH
f5~ 14~3 j ~ . ~ , 2
o~
Q15 14 , % ° ¢ 3 4. 7e" ~ o
P,
CA~,,V
2 8
, • .e~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~
v
~ ' ~ ~ ~ ' • 9 ~ • ~o • 4i t~ ` 1 2 0 0 ~ ~,o o ~
~
w
7-1
21 : y!2 * t~+ VO
o c~ 9 ~ ~ .
Q
- ~ _ , 4 3
4 ~ w1S) d 4~2)='
4 ~ :s• _ ,5 V ~ oc ,'.P' .
ti S O 7% 7 0 T O' 7 Q ot~/-0 I.- O / 1~
4vE-
~
dvI
I
- - - ~ `3 7~ - - - - a) r I ~ IaJ W
~ I U. 0:
. , ~ . ~ v? Q
,38 ~ °
~ _t~~ , ~ -;5~.- , a-6iA ~ • ~ o~BiA ~ i.diq'
L L
V
1 `r ~ ~ E ? 7C ~3~ ~i L o s ! /o o ~ ~ s
MANSf/ELD '2t r 1
2o ~ 100 iUo 4c ---2 ~~l t „ 13? i
4
► ~ ~ s~ ~ . C~ ~ '
,
lo~lt 21 23 '
I6~
415- ~ 47 4Z
, ~ 2~t! i32 /32 ~
~ - - - - - --r o , - - - - - - - - -
co
l 8 ~
, • - ~ b
~ ~
1 49
` ` - r ~
/ ~ - 1
172
-
~~.J
8 I r V t--T .30 v 311 v.3y
3;? 33
/6 B~3S" ~ 70 ui _ . ~
Lf
ooql-YA, ~ - ~
. ,
---,334
~7 30 317 ~ ' - - - - ~ - - - ~ .~~=y ~ - - - - - - - ¢ 3 6 - ~
~
03,36 ..a
,~3~ ~ .3.37•3
,
~ ~ ! • ~ ~ 39
3 *7
~ 1 .
- - - - - ~ 11,3 44
,
i I ~ ~ ~;9• ~ _ _ J r _ ~ _ . 3J~.!' 2 _ - -
~ ' ~ 7 ' • 1..~ .~1 /~T
6 c .s:; y - - - -
- 1~
~ ~ - - -
so o A-4 J. ~ •
~ , , ~ • , "
32i 3.3~ ~ i
/ o v
- ~
1 ~
•
~
{
' , ~,i ' ~
1 ~ yi. ` . f , . •
1 . ' ~ •/Y4 + ` , , .
~lt
~~y y1ti~1~ ~ t~,~j'j •
' ~ I l
. .:.4 . . . , ' . ~ ~
, 1~'• u' ~ 1• . • • ♦ ~ r 1
r.r T • ~ ` .~P"~ " Z
tar~ .
. . . . . , . ,f` . ' •+w'?K- •
~
.tir',A'
~q ~ ~ . ~ti ~ ~i
+ ' '4 i . ~ s ' "J~ ` il% ~'p,~ ' ~:i►~
i , ` ♦ • ~k.~`f~• f~.7 { . . . ,,f'
' . • Y-'„k, , 4 :''i • s ~ _ „iw~+.+i~'~~--i-- . 1 • , ~
~ yr'ry~; y• r~ ;~y;' ' \ . al~.# . r.ir.
~ • .4 ~,r•--- ~~~,i~ ~ `Y' „ . ' ' ~ ~ `S /
y .t ~ • ~ . . . • • ~ ~
• \ ~ ~ j; . ~ ~ ..~M ' _ . , R Y, ~t~1ee
o.j. ~ ~ iM~ s~ .r~t u~~ y i•! ~ ''^M r='n~C' :1~~ . ' ' w'^'~' ~ . w. - ~
. T' , ` . . ' ~~r' T 1t f j+Ryy ~ K►~,3'q-^'l! . , . -
► . ~ ,f+~ ,.'t,~µ ,a / '~_;4`I~' -'l~...
o - 6•r ~ ' . ~
*t'"-~7 ~3 ' ~ ,r . ` ' a ' « ~ ~ . , ' ♦
• ~~l~C.~ ~ if~'-'t= r y ~ r _ M . +.J.♦ i . . ' .
• _ ~ _ ' . - "
'.~'4,~ . t -_.y.... ir~~ <F( ~r a. .4~ h ~r , • ~
~'v . , , c. ~'t • t. , .~,~~Rs,. ' ~ ~y'~ _ .,r~.s~ ^w+T w
:
~
. e ~ ~ ~ ' a
p
i~ ' ~ ~ . . t .
~ «4 ~ ' \ • • ''1~ . ~ ~4~ ~ ~ •'1~ ~ \
} ' • ~ . ' ~ Z A f t ~ ? ~ :~•1„ • ,
. , . , ~ ` '4.ri w • Y ~ ' , ` 3r ~ ~
' t t e'.Z . t, ' + .
. ~ , f ~~~F,~, ~ .~t ~ , * ~ ~ . t , . s~~
. r 9
^r n` s ~ ~M ~ ' R ' ~
At
~ ~ • ~q ~ ~r ~ ~ *S~`~ +'M~ •
- . ,r,,~. _ .i ,r ~ .i . ' e . ~ ♦ i
•~w ' . • ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~
~',•~,s.wr ~
w.
.,96 ~~t
.
~
~
i . . - _ i~+,-'-.~, ' 4 _'r c'`i'• . . ~
. . . a - ~ ~ , v~ . r . . ~ • _ _ _ ' ~ ~ ~ ~r
_ _ . • + . . i* I?i.~
.
. ~ it., - _ ~
. ~
~'~~i•' r /
.JV ~ `C.-i . . ~ • y ~ J - - '
Ai~ T t4e• H` ~.~y~ t f. ~ -
} ~z ~t ~Y,:. '`t,' ~4 •
t, ' ~ a,,'~ ' ~~~4 •
_ ;V i ~ • ~ • . ~ _ . ~ _ ~
, .
- • ~ . : , . - ~ ~ - } , ' ~
~
' -
r
•
• ♦ h ♦
. . ;
. " ~ ~ 1 - :1:, : } . -t ~ 'V~~ .
- . . , ~~F • - . .
i, t + C_ ~ . _ ' fy ~ . .
- N,~ A~~~•
, .
- . _ , _ •r
, . b
• Y ~ o., - ,
~_•~ir.:v!".-~~`
d w
r.
r.
,a -
~4p
' ~ ~ ' . + ~ `
~<< ..,•~.ra~- * • • ~
. ~ . _ ~ r . - r~. ~ ~r~"..h+s~, "rF'- • ~ ~ , ,
"gkr' - - ' . - _ _
. . . : . • - . ~ • - -
+ t1F~ .
. ~s
~ ~ . . r '~117 h • ~ ' -a'° ~ ~ . ~ "~~'j '7'. n ~v a -
aa
. . - • " - '
44
f ♦ . A 1 - .
.
l
; 4 a
~ A
' •
~
_ ' ' . ._s' ~ ,i 4 ' . s . \ e . • ~ a'~~ , _w-.. v ~ ,t~'- ~ ~ C ' ~p, -W .
. . ~ ; r ` ► ~4 ,J ~ . } ~ ~,i. , , rt. '
_ ~ .~,N. y.
• M
, ~ •
~
~
v
, ~ ~..•~li~., ~r:
~
.
,
~
. ~ t :
. ,
0! ' . . ,
~ . ,
.
, . . . r y t .
~
.
' 4 ` ~ ~ N 1 ! * ~r•-_i
.t
.x.
•
~ w . . \ . 9► ",d.. . Il
. , . + - ' ,,.i~ ~ .J • ~ ~ 4,
. . ~ c ~ • cs~ S,~`~t
. wqw t
w
~ IWI
♦ ~is . 3u ~ ~1 . 'l ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 F~9 ~ _
.1 1 I \
ro .,`~7~t 1 =~~4~r' 't~R i• .
~
~
s
;
,
p~
t
,
t-.:,~ ~ • # ~ ,
. • .
, ~ - .
~ T~• ' ~~j/+~•~~r-'~
• ~
~
.
,
~
~ ei - ' . - - - ~ ~ • ' ' . . ~ ~
. . , . ~ ;,t .r
~ •
~ ~ ' ' - . ' , ~ . . " ' _ - ~ ? ~
~ ; ! I - _ ' _ r _ ,.,v-
' ~.r• '
r.:~~r.•f
l,~ : >
I~ .
x .
c.D1 4 A~ i 9r `w 1... !t _ ' J ~ 'F: ~ ~~'r.t~ ~1 ~v r t i ~
4
~s1L'y~~► ;:S,~J t~ 4 k~.r-i ~c,,,~ y ' e~' Jr~~ ~
. ! t t Y ~ ~~r ~ ' , ~ ^
.
•y r ,k. ..1:,y.' ~ i ~4 Y ~ ' .`i.q~ ~t`
~'~,~~~.'~Y, ~ ~ 1 a~ ~;,'1 • r ~
• ~ J . .
• t±~;~~~
! ~ ~t" ~ ' r ;
: w. ~ t ~'±t~
,1,,. ~ , ~ ~ ~ ` wr :ti, J~4 ~
a~~ , • s i ' ~ - ~
~ ~ ~
~ 1 ^!i , A,
• y ♦
wl-
, ~ r ~ f
= t ~r ~ r~ i ~ ~ . ► r_" "
t t ? ~y ,c1~ >w~ 1 r r•.~.. ' ~ < < • . ' ~
r r 1 , , ,.~r+ 1 _~►.+s " a ~ _ ~ - •
U 1~=7' ~ " ~y.~/e . .1'i."", r -P`wn/Y= ' . . _ ~ ,
' ~!~•v ~ew..! ~i"'f. . .
. ~
.
~ , v :=~r~' ^ ~ - I " r _ ~,.a . . _ - r . at
• ~{.}~j. - ~ - - ~ . . . . ` , µ . ~~.~M~ai..+,.~+~,. s.I. t
v , . s
: ' ~ s•
'
~ ~ 1"~.'~i ti'I . - ,.`ro ,_""_~'ti ~ A4Y~..w. ~ F 'W , + C •}I
.*.s-:.+-~" . ~ r.. ~ . ,~.,tM
~ " ^ a . _ , . , . • . s ar-. 'n-~..~~ • . • y_ . r ~i
` , ~ • ' _ ~ ~...-,.~~y,ci~~~• . ~ ~ ~ ► A~ F ~ . ~ ~r}
_ r . ~ , . ^ . ~ _"~4T Y^' _ , a . ~ . ' 1 . ' ' ' • ~ . . ~ . . i , ~ ~ ~ _ . . ~ 4 .
M `~..h~ ....r► . t-.F"O.'et~ ....w.~wk~ ~ ~ - - ' - . ~ - • , . . , ~ , ~ .+r . ~ r 'w'~~, -j " . }y.
` ~ ~ f ~ .iia ~ . - ' ' ..t , ~ . . , ° - ay ,~Ai~►, - . _ _ _ ; . . •.-•i .
. . _
-.a . " ' ,M.., . , . +iI' ,r'.~e ,~~I*r` • ..~~...1 . a. , ~i' . . , - - . . . . ".w,..," ~ ~.~~v .a... r~i. . ~ ~ ~,~~Ty~ ti.'~- ~ . ' SANr~ '
i .'e. , a, 'y~ ~~y~~!. ~ y ~
'
n
• ~
r
PINECROFT-IRVIN-MIRABEAU HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
CONJMUNITY OEVELOPMENT SURVEY RESULTS
P►larch 1973
There are 227 householcls in the Pinecroft-Irvin-Mirabeau survey area.
Interviews were not attempted at 33 of these househo]ds for lack of
enough interviewers. Interviews were attempted but not completed at
39 addresses for the following reasons: vacant dweliing--8; not at
home--14; refused to answer--17. Summarized below are the results
from the 155 completed interviews.
Survey resuits are shown as numericai totats (absolute numbers), and,
vrhere appropriate, in percentages of the total number of households
interviewed.
DEMOGRAPHIC IiVFORMaTtON
i. Number of adults 18 years of age or older: Males - 160 Females - 161
2. iVumber of adults employed full time: 181
3. Is it necessary for these employed adults to drive more than 10 miles
round-tri p to thei r pl ace of empl oyment:
Yes 92 - 59% No 57 - 37% Don't know 6- 4%
4. Number of children who are full-time students:
Kindergarten 19 Grades 10 - 12 42
Grades 1- 3 60 Attending local college 12
Grades 4- 6 55 None 38
Grades 7 - 9 54
5. ►yumber of preschool children residing in these households: 96
6. Types of residences: Single-family 153 - 99%
Single mobile home site 2- 1%
7. Own (buying) their homes: 149 - 96% Renting: 6- 4*4
8. Length of residence at present address:
Less than 1 year 20 - 13% 5 to 10 years 22 - 14% 1 to 2 years 58 - 38 10 years or longer 31 - 20%
3 to 5 " 24 - 15
.
~
~ 9. Most important reasons for locating in this area (most frequently-given
responses): Liked Valley or area 35
Rura1 or country atmosphere 21
Convenient iocation 15
C1ose to work 15
Liked particular house 14
Peace and quiet 13
Sparsely settled area 12
Liked school district 10
Less traffiic 8
Privacy (secluded location) 7
Out of ci ty 7
Close to school 7
10. Do you plan to continue to reside in this area for at least the next 2 years:
Yes 121 - 78% No 11 - 7% Don't know 23 - 15%
11. If NO to Question #10, most firequently-given reasons for relocating:
4Ji11 relocate if surrounding area goes industrial 4
Area overcrowded 2
Poor upkeep of neighborhood property 2
Too many "235" houses 2
Building a new house 2
- - - - - - - • - - " - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -
ABSENTEE LAND-OWIVcRS
(only two responded)
12. Approximate size of vacant property owned in survey area by absentee owners
responding: 5 res. lots 90' x 140' 22 acres
13. Uacant property is presently zoned:
Residential 2 (one owner has both)
Agricultural 1
14. Future plans for the vacant property:
Seli for residential.
Don' t know; future uncertai n due to whi ms of P1 anni ng Board.
r ~ ~
m 40 m m m m m • ~ m m • ~ m
.
GENERAL INFORMATION
CDUNTY SERUICES
15. Do you feel that snow removal and sandin.g of roadways and intersections
is adequate in your area:
Yes 73 - 47% No 53 - 34% No opinion 29 - 19%
16. Most frequently-given locations thought to be particularly dangerous:
Intersection of Grace Ave. and Pines Road 22
Entire area (equipment late) 7
Pines Road at blind curve 5 ~
Mirabeau Ranch Addition 5
Grace Avenue 5
17. How would you rate the road maintenance in your area: Excellent 15 - 10% Poor 16 - 10% '
Good 73 - 47% No opinion 6- 4% '
Fair 45 - 29%
I
18. Have you had an emergency at your residence within the last year that
required assistance from either of the following: ,
Spokane County Sheriff Yes 28 - 18% iVo 127 - 82%
Spokane County Fi re Dept. Yes 9- 6% Pdo 146 - 947. ~
19. If YES to Ques. #18, how would you rate the assistance you received:
Spokane County Sherifil Good 20 Fair 2 Poor 3 No op. 3
Spokane County Fi re Dept " 8 0 " Q
~
I
20. iVature of emergency i nvol vi ng Spokane County Fi re Department:
Fire in year 2 ~
Grass fire 2
Field behind caught fire 1
Inhaiator service 1
Fire at neighbors 1 ►
Pdot i ndi cated 2
21, ts your residence located within approximately 1000 feet or less of a ~
fi re' hydrant: ,
Yes 114 - 74% No 21 - 13% Don't know 20 - 13% ~
i
22. Have you experienced any problems with stray animals in your area during
the last year: Yes 104 - 67% No 51 - 33%
,
23. If YES to Ques. #22, have you hacl to ca11 the Spokane County Dog Control: '
a
Yes 33 No 71 ;
. ~
` 24. How would you rate the services of the Spokane County Dog Control:
Excellent 2 Good 4 Fair 4 Poor 17 No op. 6
25. Do members ofi your household use the Valley Branches of the Spokane County
'
Li rarY. Yes 94 - 61% No 56 - 36% Don't know 5- 3%
26. If YES to Ques. #25, how do you rate the supply of materials available to
you through the l.ibrary 8ranches:
Excelient 23 Good 57 Fair 11 Poor 2 No op. 1
27. What County services, if any, do you think need to be improved: (most
frequently mentioned)
None 24 Street lighting 9
Road maintenance 21 Sheriff protection 7
Dog control 18 Snow removal & sanding 5
TAXES
28. If you are paying property taxes within the area, do you feel the taxes are:
Very high 32 - 21% Somewhat 1ow 0
Somewhat high 65 - 42 Very low 0
About right 43 - 28 No opinion 15 - 9%
29. l+louid you be willing to pay higher taxes to upgrade County services: Yes 9- 6% No 91 - 59%
Perhaps 40 - 26% No opinion 15 - 9%
G4VERyMEIUT
30. Do you feel that Spokane County Government is meeting the needs of this
community: Yes 53 - 34% No 60 - 3996 No opinion 42 - 27%
31o Most frequently-given reasons why those who answered NO to Ques. #30 think
County Government is not meeting needs of the community:
Unresponsive to needs and wishes of majority 22
Poor land use and planning 4
Need more parks and swimming pools 4
Poor return on tax dollar 4
EDUCATION ~
32. Do you think the East Valley Schoo] District is meeting the educationa) ,
needs of your child (children):
Yes 85 No 12 No opinion 4
.
43. Da yau thzn~ there is a need for a day-care center for preschool children
within this area: Yes 75 - 48% No 38 - 25% No op, 42 - 27%
44. If such a center v~~ere available, how often would you use this serv3ce:
1 day a week 21 - 14% Not at a11 35 - 23%
2 or more days a week 33 - 21% Have nQ preschoolers 66 - 42%
45. How much need do you think there ts for a central area for health-care
faci 1 i ties, such as doctor, dentti st, lab, x-ray uni t, therapi st:
A great need 9- 6% No need 92 - 59%
Some need 36 - 23% No apinion i$ - 12%
46. Are you or any member of your famiiy i n need of i nformation on anyy of the
fallowing health services:
Home nursing care Yes 2- 1% NQ 153 - 99%
Prograrns for the handicapped Yes 3- 2% No 152 - 98%
Loan Closet (hospitai beds,
crutches, etc.) Yes 3- 2% No i514, - 98%
Health programs for the elderly Yes 3- 2% Ua 152 - 98%
47. Would you be interested in receiving more infvrmatian on emergency medical
ai d avai1 abl e to you from any of the foi 1 owi ng:
Spokane County Sheriff Yes 66 - 42% No 74 - 48% No opin. 15 - 10%
Spokane County Fire Dept. Yes 67 - 43% No 72 - 47% No opin, 16 - 10%
Spokane Caunty Poison Center Yes 69 - 45% No 70 - 45% No opin. 16 - la%
Washington State Patrol Yes 61 - 39;6 ii0 78 - 51% ido opTn. 16 - lOX
LA`JD USE AND PLA(VNI1'dG
48 Rlease rate the following possible uses for remaining vacant land parcels
i n thz s area: Strongly Strongiy No
favor Favor Qppase off4se opi n. _
Singl e--fami7y dwel l i ngs 78 - 50% 39 - 25;~ 23 -15'~ 5- 3~ 10- 7%Dupl exes 5- 3% 40 - 26% 68 - 44% 24 - 15% 18 - 12%
Apartment compl exes 2- 1% 11 - 7% 79 - 51 °6 46 - 30% 17- 71 %
Single mob i 1 e--home s i tes 4- 3% 13 - 8% 82 - 53% 42 - 27% 14 - 9% ,
Mabile-home parks 3- 2% 13 - 8% 59 -38% 61 - 40% 29 - 12%
Restricted industry 4- 3% 16 - 10% 36 - 23% 83 - 54% 16 -10%
Heavy industry 0 3- 2% 38 » 25% 98 - 63% 16 - 10%
Re ta i. l s tores 5- 3% 19 - 12% 51 - 33% 61 - 40% 19- 12%
,
Parks 96 - 62% 39 - 25% 12 - 804 0 8- 5%
.
33. What class size do you feel is best for your child:
15 - 20 pupils per classroom 21
20 - 25 54
25 - 30 16
i%iore than 30 0
iVo preference 3
Don't know 8
34. Do you think your child is receiving adequate individual attention in
the classroom? Yes 69 No 22 No opinion 10
35. Are you satisfied with the transportation provided by the East Valley
School Di s tri ct: Yes 69 No 19 No opi ni on 13
36. Most fre uently- q given reasons why those who answered iV0 to Ques. #35 were
not satisfied:
Overcrowding 6
lack of d7scipline 2
gus 1 ate 2
HEA! T!1 AND SOCIAL SERVICES
37. Should audi o and vi sual testi ng be done yearly and more thoroughly i n
the school s: Yearly testi ng Yes 78 No 4 No opi n. 19
More thorough tes ting Yes 48 No 13 No opin. 40
Do you think the School District follows through on the health problems
mentioned in the next three questions9 #38, #39, and #40:
38. Preferentiai seating for chiidren with audio or visual handicaps:
Yes 47 No 6 No opin. 48
39e Keeping compiete and up-to-date health records:
Yes 57 No 8 No opi n. 35
40. Medication instructions for children receiving medication durin5 school
.
ours. Yes 43 No 8 No opin. 50
41. Are you satisfied with the health care provided for your child during
school hours: Yes 76 No 6 No opin. 19
,
,
42. Do you think you are being notified promptly of any new health problems
encountered by your chi id at school, no matter how ininor: `
Yes 62 No 19 ido opin. 20 '
~
48.J. Other possible uses mentioned for vacant parcels of land in area:
Swimming pool 10 Roller skating rink 1
Elementary school site 2 8aseball field ]
Recreation facility far youth 1 Agricultural use 1
Office buildin s(with Park 1
light traffic7 1 Leave as is 1
49. If the remain3ng land parcels were subdivided for residential lots, what
siie iot is most acceptabie to you:
Same as present lot size (90x110 ft) 99 - 63%
Larger than present lot size 44 - 28%
Smailer than present lot size 1- 1%
Other: 1 acre 1- i%
No opinion 10 _ 7%
.
50. Are you satisfied with the manner in which this area is being developed?
Yes 52 - 34% No 89 - 57% No opin. 14 - 9%
51. Most frequently-given reasons for answering NO to Ques. #50:
Too many "235" houses 46
Don't like industrial zoning 36
Private residences not Icept up 5
52. In what manner, if any, do you feel that residential areas and industrial •
areas should be separated: (most firequently-given responses)
They are separate and should not be mixed 39
Should be separated by lots of distance 11
With their own separate roadways 7
By natural divisions, such as a river 6
I ndus tri al parks 6
53. How wouid you rate the overall appearance of the following areas:
Excellent Good Fair Poor No opin.
Mi rabeau Ranch Addi ti on 16 - 10% 83 - 54% 44 - 28% 8- 5% 4- 3%
Pi necroft 2nd Addi ti on 0 38 - 24% 35 - 23% 35 - 23% 47 - 30%
University area 14 - 9% 29 - 19% 46 - 30% 30 - 19% 36 ~ 23%
54. Do you feel there is a need for more litter control in the area:
Yes 103 - 67% No 33 - 21 % No opi n. 19 - 12%
55. If a litter control program were started in the area, which of the fol]owing
do you think should be given top priority:
Streets 29 - 19% Pri vate residences .38 - 25%
llacant l ots 47 - 30% Other 0 Large vacant land parcels 14 - 91 No opinion 27 - 17%
e
RECREATION
56. Do you think there is a need in this community for more recreationa7
faci 1 iti es : ~
Yes 131 - 84% No 17 - 11% No op. 7- 5% 57. If funds were available to locate a recreational area in this community,
~
which of the fol]owing facilities do you feel is most needed:
Tennis courts 3 Qal l fi el ds 6
Swimming pool 70 None 4
Playground equipment 60 No opinion 12
58. I` none of the faci i i ti es 1 i s ted i n Ques.#57 i nterest you, p1 ease
indicate what kind of faci lity you wou l d prefer: .
Park 3 Bowling aliey 1
Roller/ice skating rink 2 Picnic area 1 ~
Bike & snowmobile course I
,
59. Would an adult member of your househo]d volunteer to help supervise
children's activities in a recreational faciiity: ~
Yes 80 - 52% No 55 - 3596 No op. 20 - 13%
~
60. Whi ch of the fol l otqi ng age groups do you feel most needs addi tional ~
recreational facilities: ~
Preschoo1 (1 - 5 yrs) 25 18 years and older 5 ~
6 throUgh 12 years 68 No opinion 18 ,
13 " 18 " 66 ,
,
61. If bike trails and hiking paths were established, how often would you ar your fami 1y use them:
Frequently 59 - 389' Never 13 - 8%
Occasionally 58 - 38% No opinion 3- ZX '
Seldom 22 - 14%
62. If iand were available for a smali play area for children9 would a member ,
of your household be available to help develop the site:
Yes 70 - 459' No 37 - 24% D. K.' 48 - 31 % UTILITIES
63. What is your primary source of water: ;
I rvi n 4later Di s tri ct 147 - 95% ~
Pri vate wel l 8- 5%
>
~
~
.
64. Do you feel that you generally have adequate water pressure for your needs:
Yes 96 - 6296 No 58 - 37% D.K. 1- 1%
65. If 110 to Ques.#64, when do you most frequently have i nadequate water
pressure:
Time o.f year: Summer - 40 Winter - 4 A11 year - 11
Hours of day: Dayti me 23 4 to 10 p. m. 2
Evening 71 Noon i
Morning 6 Night 1
All hours 5 3 p.m. 1
afternoon 4
TRAFFIC
66. Are you in favor of the proposed widening of Pines Road to four lanes, ~
from Interstate 90 to Trent Road:
Yes 103 - 67% No 39 - 25% No opin. 13 - 8%
67. If NO to Ques. #66, why do you not fiavor the proposed widening of Pines Road:
(most frequently mentioned)
4Jou1 d i ncrease traffi c 22
Not needed 6
More dangerous for school children 5
Would create speeding prob]ems 4
68. Wou1d you be in favor of having the County or State Highway Department
include a sidewalk and curb on the west side of Pines Road in the plans far
upgrading, at no added cost to the taxpayer:
Yes 134-- 87% No 10 - 6% No opin. 11 - 7%
69. Would additional traffic controis, such as stop signs, traffic lights, and
yield right-of-way signs, be helpful in this area:
Yes 88 - 57% No 46 - 30% D. K. 21 - 13%
70. If YES to Ques. #69. what types of traffic controls would you suggest for
specific locations:
Stop signs: Grace & Bowdish Road 6 Fairview & Bowdish Rd 2
Grace Avenue 3 Fairview 2
Fai rvi ew & Perri ne Rd 3
Caution iight: Grace & Pines Road 4 Lef .-turn iane: " 7 Traffi c 1ight: " 5 '
Yield right-of•way signs: North/south to east/west in Mirabeau Ranch 9
' Grace Avenue and Perrine Road 4 Speed-i imi t si gnx throughout Mi rabeau Ranch 7
Street signs on Buckeye Avenue 4
Controls on Pines Road and freeway interchange 6
Speed-limit signs on Jackson Avenue 4
f
71. What do you think is the most important thing that needs to be clone to
improve our cvmmunity: (most frequently mentianed) '
Recreati onai faci liti es 37 Dog control 14
Chan.ge and upgrade appear- Stop i ndus tri al zoni ng 9 ance of area 22 Street lighting 8 ~
Improve the streets 11 Street signs 4 Traffi c controls 11 Better pl anni ng 4
72. What do you like most about living in Spokane County: (most frequently
mentioned)
'
Not so crowded 17 4pen spaces 17
Rural atmosphere 16 The people 9 Quiet 13 Shopping areas close 9 Schoals 13 Bigger lots 8 ,
~
73. What do yau dislike most about living in Spokane County: (most frequently men- ,
ti onefithing 33 Too popui ated 6
f
I(igh taxes 11 County not 1 i steni ng to
Zon7 ng probl ems 9 majarity 5
No dog control 9 Lack of bus service 4 f
74. Do you wish to make any further comments concernang either this community
vr Spokane County i n general :(most frequen t1y mentioned)
Keep industry out 4 Need better dog control 2
Favor restri cted i ndus t-ri al More peopl e should be i
zoning 4 community minded 2 ;
Favor progress, but not at ,
expense of residential areas 2 '
~
~
►
~
~
~
~
,
~
~
~
~
i
SPORANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
~E C~~y,►` Inter-Of f ice Communicat ion
y rr
Date: MeU/ 19, 1975
4~Ty p`S1
T0: PtANNING COMMISSION
FxoM: E. C. PRATHER ,
SUBJECT: EXISTING WATER SYSTEM AT PINCROFT TRAILER PARK
Mr. Bascetta has not provided Mr, Tom Justus, State DSHS, with
a hydrological report of the existing water system.
dr
RECEIVELi
MAY 2119 75
SNUKAiyt COUNTY
►")LANIVING COMMfSS14tV
SCHD-ADM-030
~
t f
AGENDA, JIINE 13, 1975 TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COINIISSION
Time: Friday, June 13, 1975, 9:30 A.M.
Place: dommissioners' Assembly Room, County Court House
ZONE CHANGE
1. ZE-31-73, Agricultural to Residential Mobile Home Zone
(Original proposal continued at the September 21, 1973 hearing to an indefinite time
to allow the sponsor to improve the existing facllity and to redesign the proposed
mobile home addition)
a. Location: Section 9, Township 25 N., Ran.ge 44, E.W.M.
Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecroft First Addition,
including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon
Avenue to be vacated.
b. Appllcant: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spokane, Washington 99206
c. Site Size: Approxz.mately 3.5 acres
d. Exs.sting Zoning: Agricultural, established April 24, 1942
e. Proposed Zoning: Residential Mobile Home Zone
f. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
g. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
~ - - v ~
. .
0 . .n . ~ . . . _ _ . .
'a'
MARIETTA AVE ,
s- s ' O!v AV E m~ • ~
'u
in
94
.
, QQ ~ ~
W NORTH
z ~t , tn -
%
W , SCALF.
- = EL 1969
~ooo'
i ~~O N K N Mx A ~
• ~ R~, s4y ~
~
SHAN NON
, L 19650 ' SHAHNOrv
i
N DIAN A ' -
~ 4 . . .
, ~
NOR.~1 _ Q ~ c o ~ ~ ~
P~t N Z
~ r W 1110 o-
' W 0 ~
EL. e.01 ~ m -a `ErY~4 ~
..ri mmompeow".,.+*weImm
6
ZE-31-?3
In the matter of a hearing to consa.der chan.ging the Zoning Map from Agricultural to
Residentlal Mobile Home Zone on praperty descrlbed as Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecroft
Flrst Addition, including portions of Knox Avenue and Sharunon Avenue to be vacated
ln Section 9, Township 25 N., Range 44y E•W•M•, Spokane County, Washiagton
(East side of Wilbur Rvad, north of the S.I.R.R.R/W.)
9Z. 4%4 M
STATS OF !w ASHINGTOV~ ~
~ ~
~~UNW O+ SPOKAM ~
. . ` . . . . . g 1oe►letSi &rt duly sw=, dePcoes Wd $aVa
t all~ tt~8 a~e~+oaced hea~e~at ~~rase a~ ~r is, a c~fti~r~ of The u aa#t~l ~tate ~
a n dsnt at 8pokane GouMa Waskdft+ot0nv and over a,ge ad' ~erity~ ~aJrs y
Thst a ~ ~ . . , ..e 1 v he pm~ns~nall~+ ,+~s~ad tt~e (3)
~ L~~RING a~ t~
tru~ ~C~~ c em of t~ h~ate~ attachedl NOTICE t~F PtTBLIC f+cllawing Fiaces in Spokane CvwtyQ tta-wita
C
10 ' . . . - . . . . . ;~~•t ~ i
l
2. 30 . . , . . . ,
. _ . , .
Submczrtbod Wd SwOn to m+s
, . - . . ~ 19. e
. . . . _ ~ . . ,
No?Aity PrJBUC 8N AN~ FOR SP'OIGANE CC}MM, WASWNGT'oN
Re81dlatg at sporane Q Washingt+onm
OTHER BUSINESS. ITEM 1(Cont' d)
g. On-premise signs identifying an agricultural processinq plan, feed
mfll, packing house, agricultural warehouse, dafry products
processing facility, or a commercial riding stable are permitted
as follows:
i. One sign, unlighted, placed flat agafnst the outside wall of
the mairi building, havfnq an area of not greater than thirty-
two (32) feet.
ii. One detached sign having an area of not more than thirty-two
(32) square feet on each face placed back to back. Such sign
shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height nor ten (10) feet
in width and shall be situated at least ten (10) feet from any
public right of way or private drfve. The sign shall be
unlighte d .
2. AMENDMENT TO SPOKANE CDUNTY ZOrTING ORDINANCE. TITLE IV -
SIGNS IYV RESIDENTIAL OFFICE ZONE p
Planning Commission Recommendation: Continue to the june hearing.
LETTER TO PLANIVING COMMISSION - PINECROFT II MOBILE PARK
Planning Commfssion Action: In a letter to the Commission dated Aprfl 9,
1975 from William E. Thompson, III, Sargerit, Ramer & As sociates , Inc., requested
rescheduling a hearing for ZE-31-73, Agricultural to Residential Mobile Home:
Bascetta. The mobile home park proposalwescontinued at the September 21, 1973
~ hearing to allow the applicant"to conti,nue improving the exfsting trailer court
to Spokane County standards and to offer altemative for design of the propo sed
rESidentfal mobile home addition". The staff ind.icated that most of the problems
had been resolved to a point sufficient to..wusider rescheduling of the request.
The Commission agreed to consider the application at the june hearing without
payment of additional fees or benefit of petition.
4. LETTER TO PLANIVIIVG COMNdISSION - SPUR INDUSTRIES' INC.
Planning Commission Action: In a letter to the Commission dated May 5,
19 75 , Spur Industries, Inc., E. 932 0 First Avenue, Spokane, Washington request-
ed that the Commissfon consider a request for Restricted Zndustrial for a parcel
located at East 17302 Euclid. The subject pmperty had been denied for Manu-
facturing Zoning at thp March 14, 1975 Planning Co mmi s sion hearing (ZE-10 - 75 -
Agricultural to IVlanufacturing: Cotter) .
The Commission agreed to consider the request at the june hearing without the
benefit of a petition. R
-s2-
N f0715 NEWPOFtT HWY
P 0 BOX 7779
SPOKANE, WABHIWG7QId 99206
Pi-l4NE 487 t658
ARBA Cdd]E S09
SARGEI'rl'i", RAMER & ASSDCfATES, IlVC.
CONSULTiNG CIVlL EhCGiNEERS Ec LA►NO SWRVEYORS
WABNINl3YON 0 IDAHO 0 14ON7ANA
i118VADA 0 CALIPOEtNtA
dREGdM
April 9, 1975
Planning Cvmmissian
Spokane County
N. 811 Jefferson Street
Spokane, Washington 99201
Re: PINECROFT TI MaBILE PARK
Sponsor: Mr. Pete Bascetta
E. 11920 Mansfield Road
Spokane, Washington 99206
Gentlemen:
On behalf af our elient, Mr. Pete Bascetta, we request
that a hearing for PINECROFT II MOBILE PARK be scheduled
for the ARay 1975 agenda.
The required hea ring fee wa s pa id in 1973 pr ior to the
postponement of the ora.ginal hearing.
Very truly yvurs,
SARGENT, RAMER & ASSOCIATES
~ - .~~G
Al*i E. ompso , I I I
WET: d.s
C E 11-1 E D
PR APR g 1975
A
~~OKANE +COUNrV SPOKA:lE COUNT'~
PLANNlNG COMMiSSt+DN PLANN~~G COMISSt4N
PHIL1P L. SARGENT -LAso stiRVSYos ♦ J PAUL RAMER - CIViL ENGtHEER ELMER E WARREN - TELL'PHOWE EWGINEE4t
^ L.AND 6UFiMgYOR
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY COURT HOUSE
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON
APPLICATION: ZA-4-7-
PROPERTY OWNERS LOOKED UP BY:
AGENDAS MAILED BY: DATE:
v
NAME ADDRESS LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
Q
lv ~
T
t ZV.-/
O o 474Z
T
o
T ,
O -7./
T .
Q
T
o
.
T O So -wZA . ~ ,s~
fg/:~54
~
T
p
T
p 31, 3 r
i
O
T • .
9 9a ~
p ~ KJ ~ a'Z 7 - f 3 s~',,e
v
T p
T o 9~l
~o
gy l ;L
.
T
el
~
, ,
~ ~ ~_3 ,
~ ~ ~
_ . , ~
, ,i~'2 - ~ - , ~ -
a~s-~~ r~y'~~
3 ~ 3 d' •
~~~'i~ ~ ~ ~ ~
_ ~ ~a~i 9
~
, ~
~
- - ~ .
}
, ~
~
= os?~.kr: S; - ~ r-a u~tb t _ u _ ~ ~.r-- > y- ~
~ _L _ -
~ , , ~r. aa P L l-ti.` ~1>L.
_ '
! J ~
j
A '
June 17 , 1974
Mt. N. L. MoGill
Spokane County Engineer's Office
North 811 Jefferson Stceet
Spokane, Washington 99201
Dear Mr. McGill:
Re: Right of Way Contract for Parcel No. 5- C.R.P. 1389
With respect to Condition #10, please be adviaed that the e3i8ting mobile
homes within the subiect parcel trailer court adjoininq Mansfield Avenue, are
in compliance with permits issued by Spokane County relative to setbacks ftom
Mansfield Avenue.
S incerely ,
CHARLES L. HUGGINS
Director of Planning
CLH:cmw
MINUTLS
September 21, 1973
Z4NE CHANGE
ZE-31-73 - AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME:
BASCETTA (Continued from the july 20, 1973 hearing)
Planning Commission Recommendation: Continue to a subseauent hearina
fio allaw the applicant to continue improving the existfng trailer court to Spokane
County standards and to offer alternative for design of the proposed residential
mobile home addition. The request would be placed on the agenda at such
time as the applicant has indicated that the existing trailer court complies with
Spokane County standards and a specific design proposal is submitted for
the advertised propert for Planning Commission consideration.
(Vote was unanimous, T
A. REASOIV;
The applicant has requested that the hearing be postponed to a later
date to resolve some of the conflicts with the existing trailer court and
to submit alternative pro,posals for the present Residential Mobile Home
reque st .
C. GENERAL DATA:
1. Location: Section 3, Township 25 N. , Range 44,
E.W. Nt . Tracfis 2 1"4*, 25 and 26 of Pine croft
first addifiion includinq portions of Knox
Avenue and Shannon Avenue to be vacated.
2. Applicant; Pete Bascetta
E. 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spokane, vdashington
3. Site Sf ze: Approximately 3.5 acre s
4, Exlsting Zoning: AgricuZi.ural
5. Proposed Zoning: Residential Mobile Home Zone
6. PtApmed Use of property; Mobile Home Court
7. Application of Zoning
, Provision: Chapter 4.2I, Section 4.21.040
-1--
I
opokane Valley Fire ..Pepartment
~ L (Spokane County F.P.D. No. 1)
~ 0
N722 SULLIVAN ROAD
VERADALE, WASHINGTON 99037
0
F IRE D Telephone (509) 924-3750
DOUG RIDEgt, Fire Chsej
September 13, 1973
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mr. Huggins:
The following zone changes and preliminary subdivisions have been
reviewed for adequate fire protection:
ZE-31-73 - Mains and hydrants will be needed in this area. Fire
hydrants shall be installed so all trailers are within
500' of a hydrant.
ZE-33-73 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
ZE-40-73 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
ZE-81-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants will
be needed.
ZE-147-73 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
PE-939-73
PUDE-2-73 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
Sincerely,
. ~ .ri
. ; ~
J'im Kearney
~Fire Marshal ~
~
JK: cy
PRE VE1V T FIRES SAVES LI VES
.
AGENDA, SEPTEMBER 21, 1973 TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANIVING COMMISSION
Time: Friday, September 21, 1973, 9:00 A, M.
Place: Conference Room A, Court House Annex
ZON'E CHANGE
1. ZE-31-73 f Aqricultural to Residential Mobile Home Zone
(Postponed from July 20, 1973 to allow the applicant to continue improving the existing
trailer court to Spokane County standards).
a. Location: Section 9, Township 25 N., Range 44, E.W,M.
Tracts 24, 2 5, and 26 of Pinecroft First Addition,
including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon AvenuE
to be vacated.
b. Applicant: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spokane, Washington
c. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 acres
do Existing Zoning: Agricultural
e. Proposed Zonfng: Residential Mobile Home Zone f. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
g. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
~A,►?IETTA AVE A 1" : O`1 ~AVE 1~~
a L
1f~1 r~ j
1n te, Q
N ~ ~ ~
cn .
j
~F_L 1965
C--
`
-~1/~N M A ~,1 S r 1 ~.0 ,
R 5 H Kr4C3C
sHAwtiON W - EL 19~3'p SH~,r+raoN
g ~ -1
~ ~ - - - --_--j~--
z ~
1 t7~~►t" . - - ~ ° "
{ND1A1M.i -f
1
P, t t~f ~ J
' ' ~
o
~ p
~ CL .~~Q 4
, , i,,~' r'__a ~ ~~.'~."!Q ~ , r~
. a.. a. . r ra..
• `
1 ~►oRTN
Sc~~~ : ~'=ioft♦
^-ner-Mgr. PETE BASCETTA
,
r
_
E ~w Pi*
net Mobile Par
"The Bes t o f A 11 " 11920 E. Manafield - Spokane, Wash. 99206
September 10. 1973
Planning Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99201
Attentioni Mr. Huggins
Ree ZE-31?3
8ascetta
Change from Agriculture-Suburban
to Residential-Mobile Home Zoning
Gentlemen e
Would you please be kind enough to remove the above zone
request from the agenda of Friday# September 219 19739
and postpone it to a later date.
Thank you very much.
Very truly yours.
~Pete Bascetta
PBssld
RECEIVED
SEP 11 1973
; POKANE COUNTY
PLANNIiVG COMMISSION
MINUTES
JLTLY 20, 1973
ZONE CHANGE
ZE-31--73 - AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL Nt4BILE HOME:
BASCETTA (conttnued from the June Hearing)
Planning Commission Recommendation; Continue to the September, 1973
hearfnq to allow the applicant to contfnue improvina the existinQ trailer court
to Spokane County standards. (unanimous vote)
A. REASONS: _
Although the applicant has resolved or agreed to resolve the conflicts
of the exfsting trailer court wfth the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance,
approved plans and ffre code regulations, the applicant has requested
that the hearfng be continued to the September hearing to resolve
some of the conflicts wfth the Spokane County Health District Regulations.
8. GEIVERAL DATA:
1. Location: Section 9. Township 25 N., Ranqe 44,
E. W.M. Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecrorj
First Addition, including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon
Avenue to be vacated.
2. Applicant; Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spokane, Washfngton
3. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 Acres
4. Exi sting Zoning: Agricultural
5. Proposed Zoning: Re sidentf al Mobile Home Zone
6. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
7. Application of Zoning
Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
~
_1 ~
PW -1
SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRIC- '
W. 1115 Mallon
Spokane, Washington 99201
DATE: July 19, 1973
TO : Rlamiaa
FROM: Spokane County Health District--E. C. Prather, R.S.
SUBJECT: Zone Chanqe ZE-31-73- (Bascetta)
z
la ~ 1. Sewage disposal generally no problem; final approval dependent
m zcn upon acceptable detailed plans.
w
> v2 2. Approve onl subject to provision of adequate supply (quantity
v~ and quality~ of water which should include provision for fire
~ W~ rotection. The we11 and ublic water s stem currentl servin
w P P Y Y 9
z C9
the adjacent portion of Pinecroft Mobile Nome Park is not now'
~ ~ O z su. ~table for th. ~s proposed add.
~tion. Need copy of agreement to
~ z su p pl y water b y Irvin Water District or letter from State
~ 1% De partment of Health a p provin g private well and water distri-
0- bution site and plans.
lg SCHD-ENY-038
w
.
v~
AGENDA, JULY 20, 1973 TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Time: Friday, July 20, 1973, 9:00 A. M.
Place: Conference Room A, Court House Annex
(Use Mallon Avenue entrance)
ZONE CHANGE
1. ZE-31-73 , Aaricultural to Residential Mobile Home Zone
(Continued from june 15, 1973)
a. Location: S ection 9, Township 25 N., Range 44 , E. W. M.
Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecroft First Addition,
including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon
Avenue to be vacated.
b. Applicant: Pete Ba scetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spokane, Washington
c. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 Acres
d. Existing Zoning: Agricultural
e. Proposed Zoning: Residential Mobile Home Zone
f. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
g. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4. 21, Section 4. 21. 040
~ J S 1'fE
z czi~~2<
Re .e/w ~ S~9dl1L~0+
.
~41p1~&Y8 I'--'
N
Iw+
` ~ .
r ~T~ 90
f~
koRrj#
g~AtE : s~ ~ ZDO~ ~
-j-
0
•
Spokane Valley Fire Department
~ L (Spokane County F.P.D. No. 1)
~ •
N722 SULLIVAN ROAD
VERA.DALE, WASHINGTON 99037
•
I R E E P T Telephone (509) 924-3750
DOUG RIDER, Fare ChteJ
April 10, 1973
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mr. Huggins:
The following zone changes and preliminary subdivisions have been
reviewed for adequate fire protection:
ZE-24-73 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
ZE-31-73 - Mains and hydrants will be needed in this area. Fire hydrants
shall be installed so all trailers are within 500' of a hydrant.
ZE-38-73 - Mains and hdyrants need to be installed in this area.
Sincerely,
-
LJ-im Kearney
Fire Marshal
JK : cy
PREVENT FIRES SA VES LI VES
.
Spokane Valley Fire Department
~ L (Spokone County F.P.D. No. 1)
~ 0
N722 SULLIVAN ROAD
VERADALE, WASHINGTON 99037
0
FI RE DEPI' TelePhone (509) 924-3750
DOUG RIDER, Fire CfiieJ
June 6, 1973
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planninq Commission
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mr. Huggins:
The following zone changes and preli.minary subdivisions have been
reviewed for adequate fire protection:
ZE-31-73 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
ZE-43-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants
will be needed.
ZE-57-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants
will be needed.
ZE-77-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants
will be needed.
ZE-80-73 - There are existing mains in this area butrhydrants
will be needed. Sincerely,
~ ` l~--+~ ~..~4.
Jim Kearney
Fire Marshal
JK:Cy
PRE VENT FIRES SA VES LI VES
~pokane Valley Fire Department
~ L (Spokane County F.P.D. No. 1)
0
N722 SULY.IVAN ROAD
Q ~A ,L VERADALE, WASHINGTON 99037
~ A 0
1 ~E DE~ Telephone (509) 924-3750
DOUG RIDER, Fire Chiej
July 11, 1973
.
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mr. Huggins:
The following zone changes and preliminary subdivisions have been
reviewed for adequate fire protection:
3173 - Mains and hydrants will be needed in this area. Fire
ZE-
hydrants shall be installed so all trailers are within
500' of a hydrant.
ZE-33-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants will
be needed.
ZE-40-73 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
ZE-43-73 - There are existinq mains in this area but hydrants
will be needed.
ZE-56-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants
will be needed.
ZE-73-73 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
,
ZE-100-73 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
ZE-102-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants wi11
be needed.
.
ZE-114-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants will
be needed.
PRE YENT FIRES SA vES LI YES
MCKANNA, HERMAN AND HERMAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
NORTH 122 UNIVERSITY
ROBERT J Mc KANNA SPOKANE, WASHINGTO.V 99206
HOWARD H HERMAN
LLOYD A HERMAN TELEPHONE WA 4-8144
June 13, 1973
Planning Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99201
Attention : AZr. . Huggins
Re : ZE-3173
Bascetta
Change from Agriculture-Suburban
to Residential-Mobile Home Zoninq
Gentlemen:
Would you please be kind enough to remove the above zone
request from the agenda of Friday, June 15, 1973, and post-
pone it to a later date.
ry /tr y urs
~
~
OB R . M
Attorney f r ponser,
Pete Ba cetta
RTM:j1
RECa--ju
iE D
J UN 13 1973
SPOKANE COUNTY
Pl-ANNING (!r-)[yIMISSION
✓
MINUTES
june 15, 19 7 3
ZONE CHANGE
ZE-31-73 - AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME; BASCETTA
(Continued from the May Hearing)
Planning Commission Recommendation: Continue to the Julv, 1973 hearinct
to allow the aAplicant to continue improvina the exi sting trailer court to Spokane
Countv standards.(The vote was unarumous.)
A. REASONS:
Although the applicant has re solved, or agreed to re solve the conflicts of
the e xi sta,ng trailer court with the Spokane County Zonf ng Ordinance, approved
plans and fire code regulations, the applicant has requested that the hearing
be continued to the july hearfng to resolve some of the conflict with Spokane
County Health District regulations a
B. GENERAL DATA:
1. Location: Section 9, Township 25 N., Range 44,
E. W. M. Tracts 24, 25 and 26 Pinecroft
Addition, including portions of Knox Avenue
and Shannon Avenue to be vacated.
2. Applicant: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spok ane , uVa s hington
3. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 Acres
4. Exi sting Zoning: Agricultural
5. Proposed Zoning: Re siaen'~sal Mobile Home Zone
6. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Honle Court
7. Appiication of Zoning
Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
-1-
AGENDA, JUNE 15, 1973 TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Time: Friday, june 15, 1973, 9:00 A.M.
Place: Conference Room A, Court House Annex
(Use Mallon Avenue entrance)
ZONE CHANGE
1. ZE-31-73 r Aaricultural to Residential Mobile Home Zone
(Contfnued from May 11, 1973)
a. Location: S ection 9, Township 25 N., Range 44 , E. W. M.
Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecroft First Addition,
including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon
Avenue to be vacated.
b. Applicant: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
Spokane, Washington
c. Sfte Size: Approximately 3.5 Acres
d. Existing Zoning: Agricultural
e. Proposed Zonfng: Residential Mobile Home Zone
f. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
g. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
R.e .eiw sdf901.1L~Of
~
M
W
J
~ 1 T 11YE 90
/YD R T t{
gea~~ :s• • Zoo.'
-1-
I
MINUTES
~ May 11, 19 73
,
ZONE CHAiVGE
ZE-31-73 - AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME: BASCETTA
(continued f `rom tbe Aprfl hearing. )
Planning Commission Recommendation: Continue to the June , 1973
hearina to allow the amDlicant and the staff to coritinue evaluation relat3.ve
to fmprovfna the existinq trailer court to Spokane County standards.
A. Reasons:
On April 26, ,19 73, the Planning Commission staff inspected
the Pinecroft Mobfle Park at East 11920 Mansfield and prepared
a list of pos'sible conflicts with the Spokane County Zoninq
Ordinance,,, approved plans, and fire code requ2ations.
On May 1, 1973, the staff inet with the applicant and his
legal counsel to evaluate and provide solutions to the conflicts.
The staff and the applicant's attorney have reque sted a post-
ponement to the June Hearing to resolve and formalize pro-
cedures to bring the Pinecroft Trafler Court fnto comipliance
with the Zoning Ordinance and fire code s.
B. General Data:
1. Location Section 9, Township 25 N. , Ranqe 44,
E. W. M. Tracts 24,, 25, and 26,
Pinecroft First Addition, inciuding portions of Knox Avenue
and Shannon Avenue to be vacated o
2. Applicarrt: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield,Avenue
' Spokane, via s hington
3. Site Si ze : Approximately 3,5 Acre s
4. Exi,sting Zoning: Agricultural
5. Proposed Zoning; Residentfal Mobil.e Home Zone
60 =Proposed Use o#
Property: Mobile Home Court
7. Application of Zoning
Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.12.040
-1-
Spokane Valley Fire .~Iepartmenl
L (Spokane County F P.D. No 1)
-9
~ N722 SULLIVAN ROAD
YERADALE, WASHINGTOIY 99037
-
F i R E D E P T Telephone 509) 924-
( 3T50
DOUG RIDER, F:re ChteJ
May 3, 1973
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, HTashington
Dear M.r. Huggins:
The following zone changes and preliminary subdivisions have been
reviewed for adequate fire protection:
PUDE-1-72 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this areao
ZE-31-73 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
ZE-43-73 - lhere are existing mains in this area but hydrants will be
needed.
ZE-57-73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants will be
needed.
ZE-61--73 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants will be
needed.
ZS-69-73 - There are existirag mains in this area but hydrants will be
needed.
PE-904-73
ZE-64--73 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
PE--827-72 - There are existing mains in this area bLt hydrants will be
needed.
PE-837-72 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
Sincerely,
Jim Kearney
Fire Marshal
JK:cy
-PRE VENT FIRES S1-~ Y~5 L 1' - E 3
MEMOR.AIVDUM
TO: Charles L. Huggins, Director of Planning, Spokane County
Pete Bascetta, E. 11920 Mansfield, Spokane
Robert J. McKanna, Attorney, E. 10819 Sprague Avenue, Spokane
jim Kearney, Spokane Valley Fire Marshall
FROM: John D. Konen, Zoning Administrator
SUBjECT: Correction of Possible Conflicts of the Spokane County Zonfng
Ordinance - Pinecroft Mobile Park.
On may l, 1973, Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director of Planning,
Mr. Pete Bascetta, owner of the Pinecroft Mobile Park, Mr. Robert J. McKanna,
Attorney for Mr. Bascetta, and john D. Konen, Zoning Administrator, met at the
Planning Commission office to discuss corrections to possible conflicts of the
Spokane County Zoning Ordinance, approved development plans, and fire code
regulations per inspection conducted on April 26, 1973, of the Pinecroft Mobile
Park. The subject matter of the meeting as well as additional informa#ion in reference
to the Memorandum of May 1, 1973, concerning the trailer court inspection is
listed below.
* Denotes the items listed in Memordum of May 1, 1973
1) The applicant indicated that the roadways wfthin the court would be
paved by May 25, 1973. See #1) Such paving would bring the
court into compliance wfth Section 4. 24 .110 b- 9 of the Spokane
County Zoning Ordinance.
2) The Director of Planning requested the applfcant to submit, by the
June hearing, a petition for vacation of Shannon Avenue along the
south side of the court. The street has been physically incorporated
into the de s ign of the court.(*See #2 )
3) Trailer pads No's 43 and 44, which presently maintain a 13 foot
separation side to side, should be moved at least 15 feet apart at
such time as either trailer is replaced. See #3 )
4) 7.Yailer pads No's 128 and 129 shall be spaced ZO feet ap-art.
Mr. Bascetta indicated that one of the trailers was being moved out
this month. The replacement would have to maintain the 2 0 foot
seperation. See #4 )
5) A revised plan shall be submitted for review by the Zoning Adjustor
shawing trailer pads No's 133 and 136. The applicant explained
that the pads were moved into the area because rock outcroppings
prevented installation of the trailers in accordance with CUE-99-69.
See #5 )
, -1- (contd. )
6) The applicant shall submit, for evaluation by the staff and for
review by the Zoning Adjustor, revised plans for Blocks 3, 4, 7, and
8. See No's 6, 7, 9, 11, and 12) Each of these blocks contain
more trailers than fndicated on the plan for CUE-99-69. The staff
will review the requested plans to determine if ordinance requirements
are met. If so, the requests will be submitted for review by the
Zoning Adjustor.
7) In accordance with a discussion with the Spokane Valley Fire
Marshall, traflers which maintain an end to end relationship of less
than 8 feet shall be moved to a 10 foot separation at the applicant's
expense prfor to the June Planning Commission hearing. Trailer pads
which maintain an end to end relationship of 8 to 10 feet shall be
brought into compliance as replacements are moved in. To insure
that replacement trailers comply, a present accounting (by notation
of the applicable stall space numbers and trailer identifications)
shall be made a part of the file. See No's 8 and 13 )
8) Trailer stall 81 A shall be removed by the June Planning Commission
hearing because of its relative position to other stalls per discussion.
See #10)
9) The srriall camper trailers on the east and south sides of the office
building shall be removed by the June Planning Commission hearing
because such trailers do not conform to fire code regulations and
were not authorfzed by CUE-99-69. The small accessory building
between the camper trailers may have to be moved. (*See #14)
10) The trailers in Blocks 9 and 10 along the west property line shall be
moved at the applicant's expense by the june Flanning Commission
heaxing to the 10 foot setback line. Trailers adjoining the Bascetta
property under option to the west will not be required to adhere to
the 10 foot setback if the adjoining property is acquired. See #15)
11) The applicant stated that the trasler which was stored "dead" at the
court entrance has now been removed. (*See #16 )
12) Zoning Adjustor action will be required on the 3 trailers within the
north portion of area "A". Plans for these areas should be submitted
with other matters for review as per itemil- below. The Zoning
Adjustor may find that one or more of the trailers per items 17, 18,
and 19, of the Memorandum of May 1, 1973, are not appropriate.
13) The applicant shall make firm confiractual arrangements to provide
fire hydrants and an adequate water system sufficient for fire
protection to serve the court. Such arrangements including
appropriate public agency approvals shall be completed prior to
f inal z oning re s olution on ZE- 31- 7 3.
- 2- (contd. )
14) In order to facilitate evaluation af items 5, 6, 9, 9, and 12 , the
applicant shall submit far staff review a revised development plan
incorporating the "as built" design of the court with such alterations
or changes as may be required by this memorandum. Trailers
requfred to be removed due to items 8 and 9 above shall not be relocated
except within approved stalls or as may be indicated on the final
revised plan. The final plan shall incorporate appropriate dimensions,
designated stall numbers, existfng trailer sizes and locations, paved
areas, etc. The applicant shall also indicate which stalls would
accommodate double wide trailers and which stalls could accommodate
only s ing le wide trailers. After evaluations by the staff, , approprf ate
items will be forwarded tothe Zoning Adjustor for further action.
jOHN D. KONEN
JDK: vrh
-3-
MEMORANDUM
TO: Charles L. Huggins, Director of Planning May 1, 1973
FROM: John D. Konen, Zoning Administrator
SUBJECT: Site Inspection - Pinecroft Mobile Park.
On Thursday, April 26, 1973, Mr. Konen and Mr. Blegen from our Department
conducted an fnspection of the Pinecroft Mobile Park at East 11920 Mansfield. The
following list incorporates our evaluation of possible conflicts of the Spokane
County Zoning 4rdinance, approved plans, and fire code regulations.
1) The newer portions of the trailer court have not been paved in accordance
with Section 4.24.110-b-9 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance and
a letter to the Planning Director dated November 18, 1969.
2) Provisions should be made for the vacation of the South 30 feet of the
trailer court area (Shannon Avenue). The street ha s been incorporated
into the d e s ign of the court.
3) Trailer pads Nos. 43 and 44 in Block 1 maintain a 13' side yard setback
instead of the ZO' spacing required by Section 4.24.110-b-4.
4) Trailer pads Nos. 128 and 129 in Block 2 mafntain a 15' side yard
setback instead of the 20' spacing required by Section 4.24.110-b-4.
5) Trailer pads Nos. 133 and 136 located in Area "A" were not authorized
by CUE-99-69. The applicant has explained that the pads were moved
into the area because of a rock outcropping in the SE portion of Block 2
which prevented installation of trailers in accordance with the previously
approved plan.
6) Six trailers have been installed in the N 1/2 of Block 3 instead of the
five authorized by CUE-99-69.
7) Six trailers have been installed fn the S 1/2 of Block 3 instead of the five
aufihorized by CUE-99-69.
8) Trailer pad No. 115 in Block 3 maintains an 8 1/2' rear yard setback from
the ad joining trailer instead of the 10 foot end to end requirement of
Section 4.24.110-b-4.
9) Six trailers have been installed in the S 1/2 of Block 4 instead of the five
. authorized by CUE-99-69.
10) Twelve trailers have been installed in the W 1/2 of Block 5 instead of the
eleven authorized by CUE-99-69. Because of its relative position to
other trailers, the staff recommends removal of Pad #102.
- 11) Nine trailers have been installed in the W 1/2 of Block 7 instead of the
eight authorized by CUE-99-69.
12) Twelve trailers have been installed in the E 1/2 of Block 8 instead of the
eleven authorized by CUE-99-69.
13) Many trailers in Blocks 5, 6. 7, and 8 do not maintain a 10' end to end
separation required by Section 4.24.110-b-4 of the Spokane County
Zoning Ordinance.
- 1 - (contd. )
r
Charle s L. Huggfns - 2- May 1, 1973
14) A small camper trailer has been installed along the east side of the
Office building in Block 7 and another small trailer along the south side
of the same building. Such trailers have not been authorized by CUE-99-69.
15) Several trailers in Blocks 9 and 10 abut the west property line, whereas
Section 4.24.110-b-(5) requires a 10' setback from any property line.
16) One trailer is stored dead near the entrance to the court (Block 10).
17) One trailer has been installed to the west of the residence i.n Area "A"
without authorization - no septic tank permits.
18) One trailer has been installed to the east of the residence fn Area "A"
without authorization - no septic tank permits.
19) One trailer has been installed in the eastern portion of Area "A" with an
individual permit - Addres s, Ea st 12206 Mansfield.
20) No fire hydrants have been installed within the court.
The accompanying map shows the referred areas of the Pinecroft Mobile Park.
JOH N D. KO NE N
Enclosure
jDK: cmw
~
~ - . I
~
.
~
I
i
. , I
~
_ _ - - -
i - I .
-
i .
I I
. ~
,
,
-
i
- ,
~
,
~ .
.
~
~ . „
_ ~ . .
, .
_ . _ - - - - - - - _ - ; _ ~
,
. ; ,
_ . :
i ,
_ , I
f . ..k-j
. ~ . . . . . . _,T .
I ~ . . . j . , . . . . . . . , . . . . ' .
, T
,
,
I
1J_ '
.
~
i
-
,
i
~
/ fa ~
~
-t - ~ _ ~ I
r ~ ~
~
I T.
_ I
~
~ ' -
f
- , ~
~
i
~fi~ f~•~ ~
~
_ _ _ _ . _ . _ ~ •
v ~
. - ,
I _ .
~
I
.
. ,
4 ,
I i
I-
,
,
.
, _ i . 1 _ i _ • -
; ~ . .
, , 1 .
~ i . I ~ ! _ . . i . ,
.
' I
T
,
~ _ - - I
.
~
_ _ .
~
. ~
_ ! I
. . . . i_._._
. I ,
w..
_
- ~ ~ _ -
i
_ . . _ . ; . _ . , '
f
~
,
. . , . . . ; j ~ i ~ r---j---
,
~
, ~ • . .
~ I
~ ~ • . ~
~ . , i K , . . , . . . . . . . . _ . . ' . ~ _ _ .
. . . .i . ~ . . , . . .
. . . _
i . . 't"" . o. . ~ i.
,
'
, . .
~
i , - -
,
I , . , . -r . , . . - .
~
_ . . , r! r ~ - - - , , - -
, , ~ . . .
- , - .
;
,
t _t_~.
f . . , . , . , . . . . , . , . ~ ~
l . . . _ . , . , . . , . . , ~ i.
~ ,
w
MINUTES
April 20, 1973
ZONE C HANGE
Z-E - 31-73 - AGRICULTURA.L TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME: BASCETTA
Planning Commissfon Recommendatfon; Continue to the Mav, 1973 hearing
to allow the applicaat to take measures to improve the existincr trailer court to
Spokane Countv standards.
A. REASONS:
1. The Commission is of the opinion that measures shoutd be taken
to improve the existing trailer court to Spokane County standards
before expansion is allowed. A staff investigation reveals that
portions of fihe existing court have not been paved, that required
setbacks have not been followed, that traiier s have been
established on the premises which are not in accordance with
approved plan, and that appropriate provisions for fire protection
are lackfng. The continuatfon vvfll allow the applicant to take
measures to hring the existing court facility in compliance with
the Spol:ane County Zoning Ordfnance and the requirements at
the SpokaiZe Valley Fire Marshall. The staff will provide to the
applicant a list of specific problems.
B. GENERAL DATA:
1. Location: Section 9, Township 25 N. , Range 44,
E, iN. M. Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pine-
croft Ffrst Addition, including portions of Knox Avenue and
Shannon Avenue to be vacatad.
2. Applicant: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Uiansfield Avenue
Spokane , Vilashington
3. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 acres
4. Exi sting Zoning: Agricultural
5. Proposed Zonfng: Residential Mobile Home Zone
6. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
7. Application of Zoning
Provfsion: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
-3-
~
,
L
Pinecroft Irvin rhirabeau Homeovrner's Association
East 11603 Grace Avenue
,~pokarYe, l";dshington 99206 ,
Spokane County Planning Commission
North $11 Jefferson
Spokane, i"lashington 99241
M~)1 0, 1973
Mrs. Rawlings and Niembers of the Planning Coramission;
The PIMHA would like to express our opposition to two items on tlie '
aaenda for today.
'rhe first item Z,6 ZY/ 7,J concerns a mobile home park. 'rle oppose
this item for the following reasons;
l. The results of the recent Communzty Development Survey taken within this area shows that 7€3/ of the reaidents
oppose mobile home parks and $0/ oppose single mobile home
sites.
2. There Zs presently a prooosed arterlal along this portion
of Wilbur Road to carry industrial traffic from the
Roundup Grocery site to Interstate 90. The original
proposed route of thie road ran along rlansfield Avenue
and bordered a similar mobile home park. This routo was
changed partially because of the safety factor in regard
to the children living in that mobile home park. Past
minutes of both Spokane County Planning Commission and
Board of County Commissioners meetings covering the
Roundup proposal, ZE 50-72, will show that the owner
of the Pinecroft Niobile Home Park expressed concern over
the route alono Mansfield and in fact suggested that the '
roadway be re-routed alonb its present route. This was
stated at the August3, 1972 hearina before the County
Commissioners.
3. Fire orotection within the existing mobile home park Uras
a major concern to you at the hearind on this matter
April 20, 1973. The survey areA has had one house burn
to the f oundation along Jackson Avenue because a pum,oer
truck was needed and hydrants are not alti-iays close enough
to fire sites.
, A
3. cont'd In December 1971, a fire did in fact occur in a
mobile home at the existing Pinecroft I,iobile home park.
'Ne would vrholeheartedly support your action requiring
that the services in the exis ting park be brought up
i
to etandard before any new projects are permitted.
L
The second item 2C /3-73concerning a pro)osed multl-family zoning for
acreage in the survey area is opposed on the follotving points;
The rsults of the recent Community Development survey
taken within the area shows that $1% of the residente
oppose Apartment Complexea. '
2, There presently exists a large apartment complex directly
to the East of this proposed site and north of I•iansfield
and west of Robie is another parcel presently zoned for
multi-family and as yet undeveloped. These two parcels
already zoned should constitute sufficient multi-family
zoning for the survey area when fully developed.
A covy of our questionairre vrhich was prepared entirely by residents
o~ our area and a copy of the results of the survey taken and tabulated
by residents tivithin the area is enclosed for you examination.
Your consideration of these matters vrould be appreciated.
S ncerely, '
Norman W. Gall
President, PIMHA
~
Spokane Valley Fire Department
~ L (Spokane County F.P.D. No. 1)
•
N722 SULLIVAN ROAD
VERADALE, WASHINGTON 99037
~ ~
~ ET Telephone (509) 924-3750
DALB R HAYE, Fire Chtef
June 12, 1975
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, Washington
RE: Pinecroft No. 2
Mobile Park, Phase I
Dear Mr. Huggins:
The fire hydrant locations as submitted, are satisfactory.
I have a question as to the capability of the existing water system
to supply adequate water to the fire hydrants.
The minimum quanity of water needed for fire protection is to permit
the operation of two 1h inch hose streams on any fire. This means
to deliver at least 75 GPM to each of the two nozzles at a flowing
pressure of at least 30 PSI at the highest elevation in the park.
If, after the installation of the new water system, it is found that
it does not meet the above requirements, another source of water
shall be provided before the park may be occupied.
Sinc ely,
~
J' Kearney
ire Marshal
JK:cy
PRE VENT FIRES SA VES LI VES
Spokane Valley F.-,a Department
~ L (Spokane County F.P.D. No. 1)
~ .9 •
N722 SULLIVAN ROAD
VERADALE, WASHINGTON 99037
•
1~E EET Telephone (509) 924-3750
DALE R HAYE, Fire Cbwf
June 3, 1975
Mr. Charles L. Huggins, Director
Spokane County Planning Commission
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mr. Huggins:
The following zone changes and preliminary subdivisions have been reviewed
for adequate fi re protection :
ZE-34-75 - This area 3s covered by adequate mains and hydran ts.
ZE-28-75 - This area is covered by adequate mains and hydrants.
ZE-10A-75 - There are existing mains in this area but hydrants will be needed.
ZE-31-73 - Mains and hydrants need to be installed in this area.
Sincerely,
, 11
Jim Kearney
Fire Marshal
J K: cy
y ~~~IAVRED
jUN 51975
sPOKAivE couN-Pr
PLANNING COMMISSION
PRE VENT FIRES SA YES LI YES
.
t
I
PINECROFT-IRVIN-MIRABEAU HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION ,
~
COBMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SURUEY ~
~
November 1972 '
~
Interviewer's name: Interview area:
Al l rep1 i es wi 11 be kept stri ctly confi denti al . The i nforma-
ti on obtai ned w i 11 be given to the communi ty as total s only.
CEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS
l. How many adults 18 years of age or older reside at this address?
Males Females
2. How many adults residing in your household are employed fuil time?
3. Is it necessary for these employed adults to drive more than 10 miles round-trip
to their place of employment?
Yes No Don't know
,
4. Please list the number of children in your household who are full-time students: ~
,
Kindergarten Grades 10 - 12 ~
Grades 1- 3 Attending local college ;
,
Grades 4 - 6 None
Grades 7 - 9 ~
;
5. How many preschool children reside in your household? ~
~
6. In which of the following types of residence do you reside?
Si ngl e-fami 1y Mobi 1 e home park
Dupl ex Apartment compl ex ~.~__....r.--
Single mobile home site Other (specify)
7. Do you own (buying) your home? or are you renting? '
8. How long have you resided at your present address?
Less than 1 year 5 to 10 years
1 to 2 years 10 years or longer
3 to 5 years
9. What was your most important reason for locating in this area?
10. Do you plan to continue to reside in this area for at least the next 2 years?
Yes No Don't know
11. If NO to Question #10, please indicate your main reason for relocating: IF YOU PRFSic-NTLY RESIDE IN THE SURVEY AREA, PLEASE SKIP TO QUESTION #15.
If you own vacant property within the survey area but do NOT live therein,
please answer Questions 12, 13 and 14. 12. What is the approximate size of the vacant property you own in the survey area?
acre(s)
13. How is the vacant property presently zoned? '
Reside.ntial Other (specify)
AgricuI tural Don't know
Restricted industrial
14. What, if any, are your future plans for the vacant property?
COUNTY SE RVICES
Y_-
15. Do you feel that snow removal and sanding of roadways and intersections is
adequate in your area? Yes No No opinion
16. If NO to Question #15, please list any locations you feel are particularly
hazardous:
• . t
17. How would you rate the road maintenance in your area?
' Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion
18. Have you had an emergency at your residence within the last year that required assistance from either of the following:
A. Spokane County Sheriff? Yes No
B. Spokane County Fire Dept.? Yes No
19. Yf YES to Ques. #18, how would you rate the assistance you received:
A. Spokane County Sheriff? Good Fair Poor No op.
6• Spokane County Fire Dept? Good Fair Poor No op.
20. If the emergency at your residence involved the Spokane County Fire Dept.,
what was the nature of the emergency?
21. I s your resi dence 1 ocated wi thi n approxi mately 1000 feet or 1 ess of a fi re
hydrant? Yes No Don't know
22. Have you experienced any problems with stray animals in your area during the
1 as t yea r? '
Yes No
23. If YES to Ques. #22, have you had to call the Spokane County Dog Control?
Yes No
24. How would you rate the services of the Spokane County Dog Control?
Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion
25. Do members of your household use the Ualley Branches of the Spokane County
Library? Yes No Don't know
26. If YES to Ques. #25, how do you rate the supply of materials available to
you through the Library Branches?
Excellent Good Fair Poor No opinion
27. What County services, if any, do you think need torbe"improved?
. TAXES
28. If you are paying property taxes within the area, do you feel the taxes are;
Very high? Somewha t low?
Somewhat high? Very low?
About right? No opinion
29. Would you be willing to pay higher taxes to upgrade County services?
Yes Perhaps No No opi ion
GOVERNMENT
30. Do you feel that Spokane County Goverrment is meeting the needs of this
community? Yes No No opinion
31. If NO to Ques. #30, what are your reasons?
EDUCATION
• IF YOU DO NOT NAVE CHI! DREN ATTEPIDING SCNOOL IId THE EAST VALLEY SCHOOL
DISTRICT, PLEaSE SKIP TO QI;ESTION #43.
32. Do you tk~ihk the Eas t Val 1 ey Schooi Di stri ct i s meeti ng the educati onal needs
of your child (children)? Yes No No opinion
33. What c1 ass si ze do you feel i s best for your chi 1 d?
15 - 20 pupils per classroom No preference
20 - 25 " " " Don't know
25 - 30 " " "
More than 30 " "
34. Do you think your chi]d is receiving adequate individual attention in the
classroom? Yes No No opinion
35. Are you satisfied with the transportation provided by the East Valley School
District? Yes No No opinion
36. If NO to Ques. #35, why are you not satisfied?
. . HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES
37. Should audio and visual testing be done year]y and more thoroughly in the
schools3 Yearly testing Yes No No opinion
More thorough testing Yes No No opinion
Do you think the School District follows through on the health problems
mentioned in Questions #38, #39, and #40?
38. Preferential seating for chi]dren with audio or visual handicaps?
Yes No No opi ni on
39. Keeping complete and up-to-date hea]th records?
Yes (Vo No api ni on
40. Medi cati on i ns tructi ons for chi 1 dren receiving medi cati on duri ng school hours?
Yes No No opi ni on 41. Are you satisfied with the health care provided for your child during schoo]
hours? Yes No No opinion
42. Do you think you are being notified promptly of any new health problems
encountered by your child at school, no matter how m1nor?
Yes No No opinion
43. Do you thi nl: there i s a need for a day-care center for preschool chi 1 dren
within this area? Yes No No opinion
44. If such a center were available, how often would you use this service?
1 day a week Not at all
2 or more days a week Nave no preschoolers
45. Naw much need do you think there is for a central area for health-care
facilities, such as doctor, dentist, lab, x-ray unit, therapist?
A greati need No need
Some need Na opinion
46. Are you or any member of your family in need of information on any of the
following health services:
A. Home nursing care? Yes No
B. Programs for the handicapped? Yes No
C. Loan Closet (hospital beds, crutches, etc.)? Yes No
D. he4ith-programs for the elder1y? Yes No
.
47. Would you be interested in receiving more information on emergency medical
• aid available to you from any of the fo]lowing:
A. Spokane County Sheriff? Yes No No opinion
B. Spokane County Fire Dept.? Yes No No opinion
C. Spokane County Poison Center? Yes No No opinion
D. Washington State Patrol? Yes No No opfnion
LAND USE APdD PLANNING
48. Please rate the following possible uses for remaining vacant iand parceis in
this area: Strong]y Strongly No
Favor F3vor ODi3ose appflse Opin.
A. Single-family dwellings
6. Duplexes
C. Apartment complexes '
D. Single mobile-home sites
E. Mobi?e-hame parks
F. Res tri c ted i ndus try
G. Heavy 7ndus-116-ry
H. Retai 1 stores
I. Pa rks ,
J. Other (specify)
49. If the remaining land parceis were subdivided for residential lots, what size
lot is most acceptable to you?
Same as present lot size (90 x 110 ft)
Larger than present lot size
Smaller than present lot size
Other (specify)
No opinion
50. Ar: you satisfied with the manner in which this area is being developed?
Yes No No opinion
51. If NO to Ques. #509 why are you not satisfied?
52. In what manner, if any, do you feel that residential areas and industrial sites
should be separated?
No opinion
. ~
r 53. Mow would you rate the overall appearance of the following areas:
Excellent Good Fair Poor No opin.
A. 14i rabeau Ranch Addi ti on
B. Pinecroft Second Addition
C. University area
54. Do you feel there is a need for more litter control in the area?
Yes No No opinion
55. If a 1 i tter control program were started i n the area, whi ch of the fol l owi ng
do you think should be given top priority? (Check only one)
A. Streets D. Private residences
B. Vacant lots E. Other (specify)
C. Large vacant land-parcels F. No opinion
RECREATION 56. Do you think there is a need in this community for more recreational facilities? Yes No No opinion
57. If funds were avaiiable to locate a recreational area in this community, which
of the following facilities do you feel is most needed? (Check only one)
A. Tennis courts D. Ball fields
B. Swimming pool E. None
C. Playground equipment F. No opinion
58. If none of the facilities listed in Ques. #57 interesta yous please indicate what kind of facility you would prefer: , 59. Would an adult member of your household volunteer to Melp supervise children's
activities in a recreational facility? Yes No No opinion ,
60. Which of the following age groups do you feel most needs additional recreational
faci 1 i ti es :
A. Pres chool 5 yrs ) D. 18 years and ol der
6. 6 through 12 years E. No opinion
C. 13 " 18 "
61. If bike trails and hiking paths were established how often would you or your
fami ly use them?
Frequently Occasiona]ly Seldom Never No opin.
,
~
- _ I
~
r
62. If land were available for a small play area for children, would a member of your household be available to help develop the site?
Yes No Don't know UTILITIES
63. What is your primary source of water?
Irvin Water District Other (specify)
Private weil Don't know
64. Do you feel that you generally have adequate water pressure for your needs?
Yes No
~
65. If NO to Question #64, when do you most frequently have inadeRuate water
pressure? (Indicaice time of year and/or hours of the day.)
A. Time of year:
B. Hours of the day: ~
TRAFFI C
66. Are you i n favor ol' the proposed wi deni ng of Pi nes Road to 4 1 anes, from
Interstate' 90 t0 1'rent Rcad? Yes No No opinion
67. If NO to Ques. #66, why do you not favor the proposed widening of Pines Road?
68. Would you be in favor of haviiig the County or State Nighway Department include
a sidewailc and curb on the west side of Pines Road in the plans for upgrading,
at no added cost to the taxpayer? Yes No No opinion
69. Woul d addi ti onal traffi c control s, s uch as stop si gns, traffi c 1 i ghts , and yi el d
ri ght-of-way si gns , be hel pful i n thi s area?
Yes No Don't know
70. If YES to Ques. #69, what types of traffic controls would you suggest for
specific 1otations?
A. Control: Location:
B. Control: Location:
C. Contro]: Location:
1 } 1
•
` • ~ y 71. What,do you thi nk i s the mos t i mpor-,tant th1 ng that needs to be done tto i mpr.ove ~
our community? '
}
i -
72. What do you li ke most about li vi ng i n Spolcane County?' ~
~
- ^ ^ ~ - - I
73. What do yout di sl i'ke most about '1 i vi ng i n Spokane County?
_ , ►
- _ - ~ _ - ' ~
- - i
,
74. Do you wi s'h} to make, any fulrther c,omments concerning efther this communi{ty or ,
Spokane Coun,ty i n g2neral? _ ~ -
,
~
h ,
1
i
- !
i
V
~
_ i
- - ' L
i
i
i r
~
t
SCHD-ENV-038 -
S . • .L
.
R~~~b VIEW 1)
SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTN DISTRICT
N. 819 Jefferson Street M,qR 2 2 1973
Spokane, Washington 99201
SPOKANE COUN I Y
DATE 1 SIO
T0: P1annin4 Comrnission ,
FROM: Dennis Kro11 SUBJECTr: ZE 31-73
The generalsoil and terrain cond3tions are suitable for sub surface
eff 1 uent di scharge systenso
The area is not within a recognized service boundary of an approved
public water purveyors An approved public water system must be
made available to the proposed rrrobile park. Special consideration
should be given tawar,d the location of this proposed zone since the
intersection of Knox and Wilbur wi11 be heavily trafficed by the
vehicular activity associated with the proposed Roundup Grocery
District Center at University and Jackson.
oK%j c j
~
\
-
/
/
J
AGENDA, APRIL 20, 1973 TELEPHQW ATO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANrTING COMMISSION
Time: Friday, April 20 , 1973, 9:00 A. M.
Place: Conference Room A, Court House Annex
(Use Mallon Avenue entrance)
ZONE CHANGE
3. ZE-31-73 , Aqricultural to Residential Mobile Home Zone
a. Location: Section 9,Township 25 N.,Range 44,E.W.M.
Tracts 24 , 2 5, and 2 6, Pinecroft First Addition,
including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon
Avenue to be vacated.
b. Applicant: Pete Bascetta
East 11920 Mansfield Avenue
5 pokane , Wa shington
c. Site Size: Approximately 3.5 Acres
d. Existing Zonfng: Agricultural
e. Proposed Zoning: Residential Mobile Home Zone
f. Proposed Use of Property: Mobile Home Court
g. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
~
~
~r •
N~
+ J
CJ
~ 1 I~ITFR~S~ ATE `Q + ~
\
T~
IVQ 2r 14
geA~~ : s° ~ ~oo.'
-3-
ZE-31-73
A hearing to consider changing the Zoning Map from Agricultural to Residential Mobile
Home Zone on property described as Tracts 24, 25, and 26, Pinecroft First Addition,
including portions of Knox Avenue and Shannon Avenue to be vacated, in Section 9,
Township 25 N., Range 44, E. W. M., Spokane County, Wa shington .
(Ea st s id e of Wilbur Road, north of the S. I. R. R. R/'W.)
AFFID►AVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SSa
COUN OF SPOKANE )
flf • , Being first duly sworn, deposee and says:
at a~ all times mentioned herein he was, and now is, a citizen of The United
tates, a resident of Spokane County, Washington, and over the age of twenty-one
years v
w
100
That o 9 p , 1~ he peraonally posted three (3) true
and cor p es of the hereto atte~che NOTICE OF P'QBLIC HEARING at the
followin places in Spokane County, to-wit:
~
Z/r, A VW
e
2-
3 f ~
Subscribed and sworn to me
, 19
NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHIIVCTGN
Res2ding at Spokan.e, Washington
~ 3
s• ~ ~G~ 3~
APPLICATION FOR SPOr."ANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSI4N
Z ONI 1VG HE ARI NG Court House, Spokane, UVashington
Date: Applicatfon No.: -zr-_ 3?- 7 3
. ,
1Vame of Applicant; ~ ~ C345Cr-_'TTt4
Street Address: Lo ao pndn=fg14City: .SRolc &iap State:
Telephone No; LuA
Existing Zoning Classification: e- a `r&Ap-e
Date Existing Zone Classif,ication Established:
Proposed Zone Classification:
Proposed Use of Property:
Legal Description of Property: ~ c r-5 c7.~f~ ~ 5~•-~ a~
M e1 ~
et-d-e c 4OZZ-/A s r .
.
Site Size:
Section: ~ Township: cl s Range: 5~'~l
Street Address of Property:
A
Who Holds Title to the Property:2Z
TA_ lef_
If you do ot hold title to the property affected by this application, what is your interest
in it ? ,A_,
~
Furnish a letter from a Title Insurance Company, showing the property owners of record,
their address, within 400 feet of the exterior boundartes of subject property.
ALL OF THE FOLLOvVING OUESTIONS MUST BE AIVSWERED:
1. VVhat are the changed conditions whfch are alleged to warrant other or additfon-
al zoning ?
a~
f
2. What facts justify the proposed zone reclassification based on the advance-
ment of the public health, safety, and general welfare ?
r
~~jp► ' ~ ~,,r"►,,~ ` «
3. VVhat effect will the proposed zone reclassification have on the value and
character of ad j acent property ?
4. Can a reasonable return from or reasonable use of the property in ques4ion be
secured under the existing zone classificatfon?
~
A plot plan or sketch must be attached containing the following information;
(a) Scale of the drawinq.
(b) North point.
(c) i11 dimensions of property, ex3.sting build3ngs, and proposed buildings.
(d) Locatfon of all exi,sting and proposed buildings, or additions, with
dimensions to the nearest property line.
(e) Off-street parking area.
(f ) Defined point s of acce s s and egre s s.
(g) Date of the drawing.
THE NECESSARY FEE MUST ACCOMPfiNY THIS APPLICItTION.
The recommendation of the Planning Commission in thfs matter will be presented to
the Board of County Commissioners for final action. liny person desiring to contest
the recommendation of the Planning Commission must request, in writfng, a hearing
before the Board of County Commissioners no later than ten (10) days followfng the
date of the public hearing held by the Planning Commission.
igned)
A
~
I,IST OF OWNERS AND PERSONS PAYING TAXES 0N PROP'ERTY
• _ - Owners and Persone within 400 feeto
Spokane County Code Nwnber . Je ~73
Application is for a 0 r7 F- e, JlQ
~
~y -
Certification of Title Company: I hereby certify that the following liBt of nsmes and
jaddresses consisting of this and the followi.ng pages has been prepared from the
%igned atest available records and to the be~st of my knowledge correcte
by - . &4& For Pioneer National Title Ins. Co.
(Title Company)
Date : Jan.uary 31, 1973
LAST GRANTEE IN CAAIN ADDITION
OF TITLE (0) AND ADDRESS LO!rS BLK
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T)
.
p ~ Pin.ecroft Addition '
. T o954+- 18
Al.ton L. Munter • Blks 35 to 38
,
Zeona g. Miller E. 11911 Mansfield
0
r
T - 421
p Warren C. Hausken Part of Blks 43 0 53 :
,
~ Spokane Va1.ley S& L! Z 2424 the W 135•5 ft d
tr ft of Blk 43; At~t-z
0 Rl 1r treet
~
T , o finearof t First .Additi ?n
T . 09~41+-0~1 ~ -0~12
P& R Co.4 Inc. W. 827 lst The W 116 ft of lk 10;
except
T 116 ft thereof
r
O
~ I
T -0513
, , . ~
1/0 Cla7ton C. CumminGs OP j 1-7 ~ )Blk 11
S~y
T I Sec. Intermountain 216 61'6 50
,
O ~
T~ '
~ ' (Corltinued on next page )
' + . . ,
~ i
~ I
ti
' page 2 \
~
~
~
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ADDITION `OF TITLE (0) ANI) ADDRE►SS LOTS BLK PERSONS PAYING TAXI;S (T)
, -0506
' Inc The E~ of Blks
8, and 12
Frank G. Ovando N. 2~+04 Hamilton
0
T ` -0507
~ The M 36 of Blks
~ Earl V. Olmstead It)
`
T Qhester L. Murray E. 11801 Man.sfield 4, 8, an.d 12
, . 0
, •
s
John Zou3s Moon E. 11702 Mansfield That portion of B32.
16, 17, and-18 1 g N
T of a linQ dr,n 1% ft
~ N of the SE corner Blk 18,
ol - Lthence WDar4llel o the
N line of I,ots 16- 7-18
T to a uoint oA the iline
0 of Blk 16
0518
T ~ L
.
„ Bgulah Coman 3 tjAh,(tj That portion of Bl s
. '7T6, 17 and=esc i ea as
Charles E. Barnes N. 2115.-Wilbur xd. f ollows : begirm.ing at the
' -M corner of"SIk ib, thence
oi N 150 ft, thence W parallel
,
'GO tJZe 1V 1'lZle UY ri
T 16-17-18 to the W ine of
' SIk .tb t
p c orner thenc e SEly t o the
~ • T
0
. . ~
• r0519
0 ' L E. 11702 Mansfield , Blk 20 ,
m -
0
T
0
,
T
-
♦
\
:
Page 3 LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ADDITION
OF TITLE (0) AND ADDRESS LOTS BLK
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T) _0520
0 RalDh G. Henriksen , E~F308 Mansfield Blks 21-P?
0
T ~0521
. T. Flanigan E. 11826 Mansfield Blk 23
, T
0
T 0522
- Metronolitan Mtg. & , ~ AJAA-l , Blks 24-2,5-2h ,
Sec. Co.
~T Zeonard Dexter N4 2110 Wilbur Rd. ,
0
T L0523
o W. Earl Beigh E. 11603 Indiana Blk 27 egce~t anv ~~rt
in the NE A of the SW y~
T Sec 9-25-44• also
highwa4y; All Block 28;
0 Blk 29 P~~c the
~ thereof
T
0
T , ~.24
0 Eugene A. Carstens N. 2005 Wilbur Rd. The E 1i5 ft Qf B1,& 29:
gll of Blk 30
0
T _{2628
)(10 B-_-,_~p-_
Block 36 except h ghway
NAITIA . , N _ l PPl Pi n p-sq Rc3 a
0
, T
plialter E. Scott E. 11520 Man.sfield The E 12 ft of Blick 14
' and all of Blk 15
T
~ ~ ~ I
r
~ Page 4
~
~
~
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ADDITION ,
OF TITLE (0) AND ADDRESS LOTS BLK ~
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T)
r
~
p Opportunity
T , , . 0954+-0 Ol
p J. Paul Schrllebly N. 1615 Union Rd Block 348 egcept hwy
~
T
~ . ~
0
T , L OIY .
0 Sta ,P nf w s i ncston ~Block 347 l;vin.g N_
T of hi ghway
b
T , See 9-25-4-4
.
4 Treat Nor .hPrn RailwaZ , Co. Railroad ri t-of a;~
across N of S of
T „ Sec ~
i
0
L I
T
0
~ < < <
T
0
T
0
T
0
T
< < < ~
0
T
0
< < ~
T
~ < <
0
m 9 I
1
~ ~
.
~
i
A
' Date JanuarY 30, 1973
ZE-31-?3 .
Spokaae Cbunty PlamUng Cowmiesion
ceunty Cowrt H~sa
Sp0I%catLe. Visahinqtan 99 201
Cernismea:
iVe. the undersigAed pmapert~ ownecso raqtest ths Spokaae, Comty Plenniag Commissign
(to cmeider e• z=ftq ptan) or (to oonsider ohauQiog tb►a map) irom
Agricultura1 to Res ential Mobile Home
m ttWtoUow4aq detaccibed p~u►party;
Tracts 24, 25, an.d 26 includ.ing Knox Avenue and Shannon Avenue (to be vacated) Plnecroft AdcU.tion,
in Section 9, Township 25, Range 44, E.W.M., a11 in Spokane County, Washington.
r
x
■ . ~l 1 7~4~~ ' . -~C
„ ADDR£5,~,. . ~L~A~.DEBC~P'i'ION„QF PROPR1'Y-
~ , .
~
154fCS • ~ ~ ~o ,za ~ ~
.
2 le Fa - -00-am
57
~Lr'S.
b~ x
4k
, . : ~ , ti.~. .
.
• G
7.--
-
~"D~t~~ ~ ~'LXS lce'~/•~¢~~
Y
{
✓ ~ L,'~~4~isc.+ l8~l~` /l/, /.~'O~
90
. ~.CS ~~l~ , •
I0~ . , . . .
vl
, ~ . . , ,
z. ~
- 3 3 Ce.. ~
2 IU ~~I 3 ~ ~
~ ~ o..~..r ~ , _ G.. ~ c e_ 1'~ dt e•v .
,
• ,s . -~a. ir.+■ .wr. , ,
^ ~ 1
, l'/
W L/
. . . • •
~ •
r~tr+r~a
D
~
I
1
3 6,, ~
'rrs eW~t? ~ ~ J~w ? ~Arn I.► .~•~A . ~ri YrA ~rwMrPr4Y~ Wp .JYl~ O.. ~rfrrt► w~P ~O . 7rMi~'SliLLiS~M~ ~J~
J t
! 1~
~ ~~a_ _ - i~~- _ r~~~~ ,.i~~~ ~ . i ' ' ~ • '
~
~
I
_ ~
r~„ ~~~-~r=___ ` - G . . _ .~.i~oo• . . c. .rl1'~te. a~~i _ . -IT.~i~~u r. '
■ P ' ~ ' _
1
I+ I ~ ~
J
~ i ~ t . . . . • , • - .r~:~.~ , ~.a . ar ~__s: , ~ _ '
•r. _f
'AttEY~TQ~~ CE~
_ ~
,
f PACt~C 1st1~FED. SAY & LQAI~ SSM.
r ~ 1 ~i 1 }4 ~ i~ ~ BV , ~ ' . . . . ~ . , . . .
• • . ~ , . ~ I l ~ . , :i.
~1 «
~ ` % ~r~ .l" . '~f'~`` I~ ...,_,.sr_.~.1.~,: ;i .,i• „ n- , ...a - , _ . ~
I •
~I L , . ' , .C ! -0 " . , . . . ~ , ~
~ • ~ . _ ) _I r 'I n ~ f I f -
~
1 . , Y„~~-• ~,1 ~ fJ~ r , ~ "f~ ~ ~ a ` ~ ~ ~
T ~
. . , _ , _ _ . _ . ~
, . . ,
•
_ rj ~ . y r ,rt,~, ~ , , Y - ~ - • . -1 r~ ••i- . . „ . , . ~ , • • - ~ . . ~ ' _ . ~ ~
v ~ ' ' ~ ' - ' 1
I ;
I
Il _ •
1 1 ~ I
~ : ~ J~ ~ ~r~ i~ ~ti~.~
J .
i „
If - - _ _f1•f~ • , . ~
t
• _ - - ~ - , I
i~
, . ~ • ~ , - _.,.~,._..G . . t
•s _ i. ~_v..a-.;~ -
- ~ . • ; i^~/. = 7O. , ,..r- _ _ . '
-
• ' ~
-
V_ . jm~ - ~•a-°.i~_.. I
~l
~ - . , . . ~ - ~
~ - . . -
- _ - ~ .
~
i ;
~ ; ~ :•n • im
3.
dm~ ~ • 'R- , . ~ •
I
1,A .
~ , .
.
You are hereby noti~ied, that or~ _
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s~
_ , at the hour o~
of said day
Spoka~ne County Co~rt House~ Spokpne,
Washingtan, The SPQKA~IE C~UNTY PLAI~NI~1~ C0~~1►M15-
S~C?IV wifl co~duct a public he~ring to
r~ ~s~ ~ ~u~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r ~a~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~s~~ ~e ~c ~ ~~g~o ~►~~aa ~v~, ~a~r.
~ ~V11 ~ ~ ~ A~M~iir ~ ~M1 ~ ~ ~ 1IQ ~~i
Genera~ destri~tion of area:
'~rsol~ ~r, rrs P~a~ti~ ~~t Il~t~,a~, ~la~ p~a~w a~" t~a~r Ar~ rr~rd
~ ~"ihll'~i~ '~D ~ ~r ~ ~l ~~~11 ~1 +I~ ~f~ ~ ~ars~~f
~J~M ~i
I8~ ~,dr o~' ~ii1~r' ~ ~►~t ~1 ~•~~~«R.~. r~~ v~r~
F+~R F~JRTHER DETAILS contatt the Spokan~ Caunt~
Planning Commission, Public Vllvrks Buifdir~g, N. Sll Jeffer~
son Street, Sp~kane, W~shington.
l~' ~ s~. ~v~
Dir~cfor af Planning
S~okane Counfy F'lanning Commissio~ FORM 896 PLNG. COMMi. 8.6~
i
i ~ .
•
Yvu are hereby notified, that c~n
, at the hour vf ~~Q~
~of said day in ~onferen~e Raom A Mallon AvenU~ En- .
tra~te, Spokane Cvunty Court Hous~ Annex, S okane p .
Vllas~ington, The SP~KAI~E C~UNTY' PLAIVN'NG C~Q,N~M~S-
SIC~N will condutt a publi~c hearin t~
9
~ ~ ~r►~ ~ ~ ~u~ ~ ~
~i~r ~~r~ ~r~ ~r~uc~►~ ~ ~t ~ ~ ~v~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~rc.
. . ~ ~r
Generar descr~pt~on of ar~a:
~ cr ~c ~►v~~ ~ ~ ~r~r ~a ~ ~ ~s~ ~
1~ ~4~ ~.w~ll., ~
~ ~ f1~9~ GI~ ~ i.~,~~.~1~/1i~
~~R FURTHER DETAILS cantact the S okane ~Count p
P~annin~ Commission, Public VN~r~CS Buildin I~. 1 . g 81 J ~ffe r
svn Street, Spv~Ca ne, Wash i n ton.
~
Direetor of ~lanning
Spokane Cvunty Planning Cammission FORM 840 PLNC. COMM. 8•O~
~
~ ~ .
~
nvtified that vn You are hereby ,
, ~at the h~ur of
# said~ da in Conferenc~ Room A, Mallon Avenu+e ~n- o y
S Qkan~ Count Caurt Hous+e Annex, Spokd~►e, trance, p y
Washin ton The ~PQK~II~E C~JUNTY PLA~ININ~ C~MM~~- 9 ~
I~N wil~ c~nduct a~ublit hear~ng t~► S p
~ ~ ~~t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~w ~
. . ~ ~R ~,~f e~►, ~i
Genera[ d~~triptron of area:
~ ~►~~i'~; ~ ~ ~t'~ ~D ~ '~~i'~, ~ 9~ ~
~ ~~I.~., ~
~ ~ i~" ~ ~►I~~i.~l.
~+~R FURTHER [lETA~L~ contact the ~pokane Cou~ty
P~annin C~rr~mission, Pub~ic ~A►or~CS Buildin~ M. 811 Jeff~r- 9
son ~fireet, ~pvkane, Washington.
Diretior af planning
Spakans Coun#y Planning Commission
F'ORM 846 pLMG, 6QMM. 3•60