The URL can be used to link to this page

PE-1072-77 CL'TWKL_IAl Ato, AGn. -i- '3AAg.. FAM ~6,S FAll 4~5 ~ . PLAr~~~~~~ ~OMMISs~~~~ ~ CG~~~~~~~NERS ACTION ~ ~A A/ ~ ~ r"A/ CamML_~M . k ~ ~ - _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; - _ - _ - ._._....,~y ....,,.r . . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ 4 ~ - ~ - ~ 9 e i ! I ~ t x 1 i ~ ~ r ~ ~ - ~ . . ._S . . - i ~ \ . ~ STi1TE 0F t•1ASHIidGTON ) ss. County of Spo'-.-,anz ) . I, D. JEA1`I BUCHANAiV, on oath dzpose and say that the attached is a transcript prepared by me of the tape recording of the hearing held by the Spokane County Planning Commission, January 14, 1977. Such • transcript is true and correct insofar as I uras able to interpret the . . voices as recorded. D. Jean Buchanan., Clerk Typist II Spokane County Planning Department i~ . Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 1977- , j : ! i , • : . _ Notary Public in and for the State of 4Jashington, residing at pokane, Washington. ' My commission expires . 04 ~ . v ~ . • _ 4V , INDEX TO HEAP,ING MD BY THE SPOKARE COUNTY PLAI~IVIN1 C02011SSI0~d, JAI`1IIA.RY 14, 1977. PE-1072-77, COi1KLI11 ADDITION ZE-8-77, AGRICIILTtTR.4L TO SIPICLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND/OR Tt:lO-FANIILY P.ES- ' IDENTl4L : F'RANCiS CODFSI,IN. 1. Verbatim tra.nscript for hearinc- held on January 14, 1977. 2. Order certifying records. - 3. Findings and.order regarding plat proposal and zone classification upgrading. 4. Threshold Determination. . -5. Commissioners' Decision. . ' 6. Letter from Walter Horning to Planning Commission dated January 7, 1977. Letter from Francis Conklin to County Commissioners dated January 27, 1977. - Minutes for preliminary subdivision and zone classificativn upgrading, January 14, 9. Letter from Robert Turner to Planning Director dated January 11, 1977. . 10. Letter from Walter Horning to Dwight Hume dated January 4, 1977. 11. Staff Review of Environmental Checklist. 12. Zetter from John Nunnery to County Health District. - 13. Lead Agency Designation of Spokane County. _ 14. Environmental Checklist. _ 15. Letter from Vallef Fire Department to Dwight Hume dated Januaty 3, 1977. 16. Letter from James Trull to Pla.n.ning Commission dated December 9, 1976_ T 17. Agenda, January 14, 1977. 18. Affidavit of posting. , 19. Letter from Gene Prather to Planning Commission dated December 14, 1976. _ 20. Preliminary Plat Application From. ' 21. Legal Description - Proposed preliminary plat of Corklin Addition. - • _ 22. Legal Descriptions and addresses of neighbors. • - - 23. Notice of Public Hearing. „ _ _ ..,.~a4--- • ~ . ' ' - ~ - ' _ _ .,w PE=1072-77 - C0'i\',nIN ADDITTOV January 14, 1977 Bethards - PE-1072-77, Conklin Addition is sponsored by Father Francis Conk- lin. It's also located in the Spokane Valley, this time being in the east-central area. Secifically, it is e?st oi rlora Road, between Cataldo an.d Boone Avenue. The proposal is located here, F1ora is here, Cataldo here, Boone here. On the Land IIse map Flora is here, Cataldo here, Boone here. Flora Road here on the Plat map, Cataldo, Boone is shown up here and the Burlington Northern Railroad up here. The sponsor is proposing to subdivide 4.3 acres into twelve lots for duplex use, thereby, creating a gross density of about six units per acre. -The ° site is relatively flat aud is presently vacant-. Staff recomatends approval, sub- ject to the conditions as presented. Staff further recommends a zone upgrade to the R-2 Two Family Residential Zone a.nd that a Declasation of Non-significance be - i ssued. - SchadeE&_ - I might request what the neighboring zoning is. What is the zoning and the land use right in this - - - _ . , - Bethards - The zoning in the area is primarily of the Agricultural Zone. We _ - haven't had that much development. I might point out that the site as presented which is east of Flora, north of Cataldo, and staff opinion is extremely disad- vantaged towards single family dwellings so we are recomoending approval to a duplex zoning. We have to the south the primary state highway and to the north we • have the Burlington North Railroad. It is also on the edge of a neighborhood, Flora Road being the edge of the neighborhood as is the primary state highway. - - You don't really think that th e property is more suitable for freeway commercial or light industrial or something of that nature instead of dup- . . lexes? • - 1 - - - - - - . , - , _ " ~ " - - _ D ✓ • ~ ` - ' r 3ethard5 - It may be. The proposal is located some distance from Flora Road_ ~ r reeway cormnercial may be appropriate in the area here. I don't know. Quigle,y - Once the twelve duplexes have been established aren't we precluding then, maybe, a freeway commercial right next to it or light industrial on the other side? - Betha.rds - Ia the area here I wouldn't think so,." no. Higher intensity residential developmeni, either multi-family or duplexes, is an appropriate bufier to any resident- ia1 prover'Lly that you're goino to have on the other side of it. " Schadegg - Any further questions? - - - Ho4r many of each of these lots, Bob, how man.y single family and how • many ( ) or does he want all duplexes? Bethards - All duglexes, I should make that clear. - Thank you. . Schade,gs - Tnere is no problem as far as the Engineers' Office or the Health I}is- trict is concerned? - None whatsoever. . • - Schadeg.m. - Is the proponeat or his representative here?' - . Conklin - My name is Frank Conklin. I'm the proponent. We have no problem with the conditions which have been imposed in this application. Quite frankly, a number of parties have approached us about this property and talking about it going commer- cial or going light industrial and i felt that - it's vacant - I thoug,ht it would be to the best interest of the neighbors and of the neighborhood to take this approach - to multi-iamily to protect them from what,I believe,this area to the west has al- ready been zoned for light industrial and it just seems like the next development is inevitable and it just seemed that, given the situation as the staff indicates, thi s - is not suitable for single family residents because it is right cont iguous to the • freeway. That tze best highest uses would be duplexes in this particular area. - 2 - I i i _ - _ - ~ - ~ . . 'e, ~ s ~ , r " /t Schadeo-c- - Any questio,,s? Is 'Llhere a.nyone else ti•rho woul.d like to appear in fav- or of the proposal? Is there anyone w'no is in opposition to it? Hec,rizt - My name is Frank Hewiti, I live at E. 17505 Cataldo. Father Conklin's concern for the nei;hborhood touches me - to no end. I reside approxdmately - there's five acres adjoinino property here, and I reside at the next five-acre piece_ • ' Now, I don'z know the gentleman's n.ame that spoke first, but as far as this being a neighborhood adjoini.ng here, there are one or two homes on Flora - facing Flora - just past the intersecti on of Cataldo. From there to Sullivan Road there are no homes or buildings of any kind, shape or description. There's no neighborhood ex- " isting. So, what his reference to neighborhood is I don't know. This whole area ' with the exception from Flora Road to Barker ( ) to Long Road, which is where Caltaldo Avenue dead-ends, with the exception of one or two places, are all five-_ acre tracts of ground, each with a single family residence. We all keep horses and livestock and I might say the same is true of Boone Avenue vihich runs just the other side of Farrair Road. To support me, I am real glad I will be brief - I am rep- resenting a sizeable group of people. I am going to have them stand_ Al1 of these - people reside on either Boone or Cataldo Avenue. I want to assure you that there are several others iIho are not here Oho were unable to attend and to my knowledge we represent 100516 of the neighbors that Father Conklin is looking out for, and we are unalterably opposed to duplexes on this property. 1rJe are not all, and I speak for myself in this, opposed to development of property and we're not opposed to progress totally, however, if I'm mistaken someone can correct me, I believe it's been in the County budget for several years now that Flora Avenue be wideaed, that a bridge be built at the river, and an access put onto the freeway at this point, whica oeans that the eight-acre piece of property which is owned by Alvin J. tidolfe vrhich sits here, has been zoned li ;ht industrial ; does belong to him _ The rest of that property that is behind it is oc,med by the Inland Empire Paper Company, it's ~ not individually o,rmed by anybody so it's not going to be a neighborhood. And that _ 3 ~ • x r. _ t- s - particular eight-acre piece of property and some of this property that is vaca-qt on this side, I assume !,►ill be used for this access that has already been approved by the County as soon as they have the funds to build it. Now, there are a total number of people on Boone and Cataldo excluding four or five trailer homes that number twenty-two. That's hoc•, narsy people live on those two streets from Flora Road to Long Road and you're proposing putting more fariilies than live in that 4rhole area from Flora to Long on both streets on a 4.3 acre piece of ground_ That's 24 families in 12 duplexes. Now, we all, as I stated, anybody ti-tho lives there, there isn't one of us who otiixn more than an acre who do not keep animals of some sort. Horses, cattle, pigs, hogs - you name it - chickens - they got them. Now, by . virtue an R-2 zoning, those people who move in there will be precluded frocu having any animals other than a domestic pet. That's what it says. In other words they can have a dog or cat, but they are not going to be allowed to keep a.nimals by virtue, of course, of the size of their property a.nd the fact that they probably live in a duplex. Alright, they have 24 people who are gning to be opposed to what ~ the rest of us already have. Now, it says here in this Planning staff approval that . , . the Agricultural value is minimal and the proposed use would upgrade the neighborhood for whom, I don't know. We don't feel it will upgrade it for us. In land values _ property. But we're living there not with the idea of selling our land. We're living there - when we moved there we brought our animals with us. I might add . that there are three rental units on Cataldo Avenue of which one, Nir. Conklin's, . is highly familiar and I think he will be the first one to tell you that the only - person who has remained on that piece of property since he himself moved away from it is the one group viho moved there who had animals. They came there because they could bring them with them. And they have not left since. Prior to that nobody - remained for more than a few months. And I might add that the other two rental_- a units on that street are the same. Duplexes are rental units, people come and thep . go. They are, however, eligible to register to vote, they can vote in school levees _ 4 - - . _ . • _ Y . " ' ' ~ fire levees, whatever they want and pick up and leave. The rest of us have to remain behind to pay the bill. I Qignt add that there's no access to this property other than on Cataldo Avenuz which in t'rie recomrnendation they have a1- ready stated the street is r_ot adequate. It has to be sixty feet wide and all that. TheyQVe got a freeway fer_ce ri ;ht here that will preclude them going any farther that way, so that means that they have got to come in a.nd take the 20 foot easement south of the front of the rest of our properties that are already established on this street. It means there's no access for children, there's no place, now you talked about us keeping our kids off of the streets, somebody up here on the Board, so it's up to us to keep our kids off the streets, well, brother, I've got five acres for my kids - they're out of the streets. Those people aren't even going to have a postage stamp for their 24 families full of kids. So where ' - are we going to put them. Are we going to build a park for them? We've got no park. You put 24 families and statistics will show you that the average American family is a two-car family. That's 48 automobiles with one street. We don't have room for them. Now, as I stated, we!re not opposed to something reasonable. Twenty- four families on 4.3 acres of ground right in the middle of what has always been, and we hope to keep, srnall, farm-type living, five acres. lrle're not ranchers, we're not. big time cattlemen, but we have a situation here where everybody there is exactly the same. We all keep animals. «e have a sewage problem. It says here: Existing road9 water, fire protection, povier and the required sewage management system to this ~ proposed plat are additional supporting reasons for approval. I can't think of a less supporting reason than the very fact that it's not even proven that possibly our aquifer is in trouble out there and we're going to start putting that many . more people in, in one jump, one batch. Let's wait until we find out what we've really got in Spokane Valley. I•le're tal.king about septic tanks and - drain fields. ° , And that's a pretty high concentration in a pretty small spot. This is railroad . property behind, and I might add that there is an easement designated right here - 5 - ~ . . , . - ~ `that is privately oc•med, that is not railroad property. It belongs to PZr. Brandon Burge, and if he ti•rere here he vroul.d be raore than happy to tell you how much chance _ they have of getting ihat easement away from hia. And that precludes, even if they take the railroad out, any traffic out on Boone Avenue. And I think that the rail- road is goin; to be here awhile. Bu'LO that's private property, the railroad doesn't - allow trespassing, the kids got no place to go. Everybody out there rides horses - I guess I'n starting to repea'-u myself - so, I don't think that this i s the way to go in this neighborhood. There were a couple of other remarks made just prior to my coQino up here that this was the only thing for this neighborhood, I think that it's tne last thing for this neighborhood. There aren't many places left like this where everybody lives the same way. Our homes are older, but they're nice homes. Somebody says that it will upgrade the neighborhood, we don't feel that tiray. As I ' show you we have a lot of concerned people with me here today, I did.n't bring you a_ petition, I don't thi.nk that they all want to repeat what I have to say, but, we feel very strongly about duplexes or rental units. Schadegg - Is it fair to say that we can accept the statements that were made here as representing your feelings in general? - Mr. Chairman? The people that you are representing here, are they all from the immediate neighborhood? _ , . Hearitt - Yes, sir. I can assure you that they are. Mr. Grant lives right here, rirs. Plechett who stood up on the other end, lives right here - they all live im- . . mediately adjoining either on Boone or Cataldo. Mr. Stofford iz going to be just a little late. He was here this morning, he lives right next door. And he is un- alterably opposed. Schadegg - Is there anyone else? Barnesb,y - I would like to say - My name is Joanne Barnesby and I live at E. 17203 Boone. Our gradeschool, where my son attends - part of it has been condemned. -6- ~ . ~ ' - ~ . - . _ - ~ Although we have a levee .o build a new school, that' s nc. _ for like a_nother two years. We don't feel that, there's a lot of other bigger developments going up in other places and we just don't feel that the school could handle that. A lot of th2m are being busspd to other school s. Schade5g, - Is there any additional testimony: Anyone want to be heard in oppo- ~ , sition? If not than we will procede - Could I ask the staff a question? What is the. density there or around that. I mean I, w'r_en I was out there it seemed like there were quite a few mobile homes and houses. How dense is it? - The proposal is located here. (lncoherent) number of parcels segregated here. ' - Sir, t2ie mobile homes you're speaking of - there are five, and all but - one are on a three year conditional thing because there dependency - one of them belongs to my father who has one and it's the only one on Cataldo Avenue, there are four others that are on Boone Avenue, all but one, and I'm not sure about it, . but I think it may be a permanent one, but the others - an.d there are no other mto- bile homes in that immediate area. Those are the only five mobile homes. ' Schadegg - Well, except £or that small sub-division over here - there are actually tracts, acreage tracts. - - That's correct. - Schadegg - Any further questions? If not we will proceed to the next item. . ~ . - - - ' - - . - - - ~ . . . - . , rsoTZOV - Schade~~ - Corklin Addition - PE-1072-77. You heard the presentation and discussion., do you have any questions or do I hear a motion? QuigleY - tlell, IwOUld like to asv the staff one question. You recommended approval oi this site far duplexes. Do I understand then that you xiould recommend thQ next plat for duplexes or the third one down from the corner was, has been ap- plied for rather than the one that did. Now, we're establishing a policy here, a duplex policy next to the freeway and eliminating restricted industrial or freeVray commercial zoning by putting these duplexes right in this particular spot. Sweitzer - Let me a.nswer or comment in regards to what you stated about freeway commercial restriction industrial. That property,is located just to the east of Flora Road. Z`he Comprehensive Plan designates the properties to the west of Flora Road as being appropriate for restricted industrial but designates them to the east of Flora Road as being appropriate for .esidential uses. Now as far as freeway com- , mercial goes if i;here was an interchange at Flora Road possibly that property in ~ , - that area could be appropriate for freeway commercial uses, but without an inter- change it's not even worth the Quigley - That's in the plaa is it not, to change the access of the - ~ , Sweitzer - The state highway sure doesn't want to think so. But as far as the policy of duplexes possibly the plat administration should address - Quigley - Somebody should. " - Mr. Chairman, I wauld like to ask the staff as ta - you know, we just got through passing an amendment to the ordinance concerning duplexes in agricultural zones and I have some questions in my mind as to duplexes used as a buffer which . it normally used on an arterial -vihere you'l1 put a duplex as a buffer between the , single family residences and the arterial. Here it looks like to me the plat is . going back into the agricultural land quite a ways. I'm wondering about your justi- fication for this, I'm sure you must have an answer for it. I can see on the free-- way.part, you're going to buffer, but this is moving back into the agricultural or c ~ - 8 - . , . pozeniiai szn;le am2_sy t_ Le . ~ Hume - tlell, not in th ense that there's other development that can talce place frora it. You' ve got a nor therl~ boundary of the railroad right' s-of-Laay, so it's not going to be likz your penetratina into an area that"s going to be single fam- ily in and a...rour.d that norther? y end of it. You didn't answer my question specifically as I recall, about what you would recomrnend if the five-acres next to this property came in wi.th a duplex ap- plication and then the fi-ve acres n4xt to that? I know that's looking a long ways ahead, right? , Hume - I guess that I'd feel comfortable that that was compatible with what was there then. - You would feel - y f Hurne - (lncoherent) as a result of this plat 'then you'd have more of the same, wouldn't you. - I have a little problem with what is really a rather drastic change in terms of an area that' s got nothing but tracts, and here we're heariag a proposal for a duplex development - just to put one other cornment into the pot. - It looks like when you go out there that there's quite a high dens- ity because there's a lot of mobile homes in there, but reallp when you look at it apparently those are there only on short duration. • Schadegg - Well, we've had a lot of discussion, do I hear a motion? _quigja Mr. Chairman, I feel that we have to make a motibn to deny, PE-1072-77. Schadegg - There is a motion for denial. Do you have a reason. QuiEley - Yes, I do. I an very familiar with the area. it seems to me that' we're putting a completely foreign development in there, an established area that has been established for many, many years and has no inclination, that I can seP, to go industrial on that particular side of Flora. Cfn the west side of Fl.ora I can see 'tohat there are indications that a lot of that will be industrial in the fut~ ~ . - 9 - . , - _ - - . ' ~ . ' - • ~ , ~ _ ' a _ l But on L"ha'Ll p3.rticular side, from tne-re to Barker Road I don't sQe any indica- tions that peonle i•rill desire any further industrial commercial development ex- cep-L. for the box factory ar'_nich happens to be located doti•m at the corner of Barker and - Schadego - The relationship of that stateraent to the problem, of course, is there is no need for the bufier then between the industrial area and the agricultural area. - Quigley - I don't think - I think that there's a natural buffer in Flora Road. SchadegP - lrJe have a motion - is there any other discussion? McCour,y - Second. Schadegg - It has been seconded. Is there'any further discussion: All in favor say aye. _ , - - Aya. SchadegE - Opposed?. . .So ordered. • Y - , . ~ . ~ . , - THIS 19 ' RECEf Y ED _ ~~1 , . . . _ ~ ' _ ~ - . frZAY- 2 4 ►Jt r ~ - - , •~l-:;•~ C~ , . . - _ . _ i ~ ' = - ~~scM_',~ ~ ~ - _ ~ . _ - . 2 - . _ ~ : - - ~IN THE SZIPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OTr WASHINGTON •4 IN AND FOR THE CaUN1'Y 0F SPOKAIIE . - - - - _ - 5 £ FRArICIS CO'TKLIN, . ) - - : . - . - - - - t;--Petitioner, ) - , •~f;~ ~ = - _ _ _ . ~ ~ . _ . - vs . . ) No _ _ , - - . g g ~~z~ oF xEVZ~c~ ~ o~~ - - - BOARD OF COUNTY CtJ1IISSI0~IERS oF ~ CERTIFYING R.ECORDS . ~0 SPOKA,NE COLTNTY, WASHINGTON, and JERRY C. KOPET, Chairman, R.AY W. ~ - 11 CHRISTI.ANSEN, and HARRY M. LA.RNED, in their indivi.dual capacities 12 as Coamissioners, - ' • / . _ ~ . _ f ~ y ~ Respondents. ) _ ~ ; : : - : _ : • 13 14 • ~ . . - - . . : . - _ - . T0 : BfJARI? OF COLTNTY COMMISSiONERS SPOKANE C4UNTY, WASHING 15 3ERRY C. KOPET; R.AY W. CHRISTIANSEN; and HARRY M. LARs ° ' ~ - • _ . _ - - . : . ~ - ~ - ~ 16 •17 WH'EREAS, the above-named Petitionez has fiZed anc Applir-ation for_ Writ of Review in the above-entitled matter, a~eShp• ~~v, 18 named Respondents, represented by Jexry rleal and 3 are Civi.l Deputies; and . 19 REAS this matt ng on for h,eari~ng before tlze uns.~er- WHE _ Kn si ed Judge in op en cour he O~cder to Shvw Ca~.s e an the 2d ~ day of and WHERE.A►S, it has been represented to this CouYt ~by the A-pplic-_~-' ~ 21 9 tion for Writ of Review and the Affidavit in Support thereo ~~f ~.vz.duall~ and Francis Conk3.in, on f ile here~.n, that you, ind , -23 rsemb ers of the Spokane County Commis s ioners , ha`ve and are prm- - ~.at-~ ceeding i1legally i~. the matters of preliminary plat denial. re ing to eon~c7.in Addition under Planning Commi..ssion files No. . . ~ PE-1072-77 and ZE--8-77; and 25 14HEREAS, the Court havi-ng reviewed the records and files - herein and having heard the argument of counsel 'and being ful.l.y 26 advis ed in the premis es : 27 RECORDS TO BE CERTIFIED 28 ► - You are commanded to fully cer ify and return to t~uli a~~ue~ I.977, a ~ 29 entitled Court on the s u~day of om lete transcript of 'the entiri~ records and procee~hegs of and c p lat matter, inciuding ~p the Conklin Addition preliminary p , testimony at hearing before the Planning Commission and Baard af . 32 , Rs.cbaLvrd P. . -Sperling - E.. 12019 Sprague Spokarte, WA 99206 - " 1 Writ of Review • • - , ~ " '~::~r-- = = ;!f - _ _ _ -w,. ' . _ - •S- _ i3''`-- _ . . - ~ . ~ _ • { - - _ ~ t , . . _ - ~:s" f - ~ _ . ' ' _ ~ _ . -j , - ~ i ~CZ~''` ~ w t , '_~j` _.~j_ ~ t • ' - • 1 Y . . ~ _ ti ~ i: ~ « J ~ ~ Ml~..'~ ~ r . ~ .~r T~ 7, ORN.f..i~ ~,I~~.s+'' ~~.►~ih! ~ ~ ~ _SZ•~._- _ w~ r.r. •sFV..+^ ~ . r ~ ~ jw _ ~ ~r ~4 . : ~ ~T+ ' ' r~' " ' ~.,.~+r~.._ . . • ~ . ' ~ - • `t • ^ , J : . ~ ♦ . • " ~ - •j ^ • 1 ~ . • ' . • ' - . ~ 1 ` ' ' • ~ ' - th~-s en hat the same be reVieWe~ by ~ ~ Coun~Y cO1~ls s ioners , tQ the d t done. ~ - - such action b e taken and ertif ied Court an~ rQCeeding shall not be c ~ 2 The xecord of any other p . ~ aS part of this record. of 3 ~ nd ce~cti-fication such. xecQr e costs of the p~rePaZati d on aid by Petitioner. . . 4 Th an p _ _ - • - : . Q b e dete~i -ned at trial -t_,6 day of May, 1977- - ~ ys t I 5 I~ 4PEN CO~T this DONE . : ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ , ' ~ = . • r •,O~^~~ • ' ~ " • - , + ~ ` ~ • ` 2' . . • ~ ' ~ . _ ; . ~ ' • ' '-t' . : . ~ ' • • ~ " . • ' ` • . . - • " • • • t " r ~ - ~ - • • . . -10 Prese-ntea b9= . . cnARD F , S?ERLING - -1-1 RI _ . ~ ~ - - - . - . - - . 2. rza~ rier p't - , _ • . : . : - - . . . . . ~ tQ~ey for . . • . . . - ~ = . - ~ : ~ _ : - ~ East 12019 SPrague 99206 g , Washington 14 p oir, an e (509) 92$-1100 - - ` . . : • . . - ~ ~ - . . ~ - . . . , . . _ 1977. . ' SEN s~ ~~,~,DAY 0~ 16 CEI'VED ICE 0" Y ~ a ~ RE nd ED Fp NTR . . _ . - • . . ~ AI D ~ ~ ~ - - • - . : - - - ~ - , . - : ~ . ~ . ts ~ ~ - - ~ - - : - - ~ - . s-- At e9 f ° ~ ~ ~ ~ , - " . . ` ~ rr ~ ~1 ~ . ' ~ ' • 1 • ~ ~ • ~ i ~ ~f.. ~ 19 • ` • ~ ~ ' " ' ' • ~.r: ~ ' I + - ~ . , . . ti•. . t ~w • . 20 . 22 24 . ~ . - _ . 25 ~ . . • . ~ ~ . 26 . { . 2? 28 29 ~ - - - - - 30 . 31 ' . Richard F - SPerlii E. 12019 Sp rague . 3-9. Spokanev WA 99206 t5o9) 9?$-iloo ~ . " • . _ / ' • , ~ y : ; q ~ D : • . ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~f ty. ~ ~ 2 ilX 1 t 4£ RevieW _ . ; j ~ ' - - ~ _ _ a ' ~ . . ~ . • . . ' : ~~~~~~5~~~~~►~~ ~'~fM ^ "o'fM ~ " ~'~_''.~~j. .-3 J. ~ - I_ • l•~' ' . • ' !..d ~ . r~_ . •~a~-~ . _ . _ . _f :..rr" No o 77 414 ~ - EOARD OF COUtiTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNITY, WASHINGTON - Fl:vDINGS AND ORDER REGARDING PIAT PROPOSAL AND ZONE CLASSIFICATION UPGRADiNG - PE-I072-77, CONKI.IN ADDITION: ZE- 8-77, AGFUCULTURAL 10 SIiVGLL FAUiIL`I RESIDLN'i7AL AND/OR TWO-TAPJlILY RESIDENTIAL: FRANCIS CONKLIN WHEREAS, the Spokane County Planning Commission dkd, after publfc hearing on January 14, 1977, forward to the Board of County Commissioners a recommendation that the preliminary plat to be known as Conklin Addition (File Number PE-I072-77) and zone classification upgrading (File Number ZE- 8-77) be denied, and WHEREAS, Mro Francis Conklfn, dfd by letter dated January 27, 1977, request a hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to present evidence and testimony against the recommendation of the Planning Commissfon to deny the above - described preliminary plat and zone change upgrading, and VITHEREAS, the Board of County Commfssioners dfd hold a public hearing on 1/larch 10, 1977, to consider the recommendatirn of the Planning Commissfon and testimony and request of the applicant, objectors, and other interested parties, and ' - WHEREAS, at said hearing opporttinity was afforded those favoring and those opposing the above described prelfminary plat proposal and zone change upgrading, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane Counfiy having fully considered the testi- = mony given, the records and minutes of the Plannfng Commission, the environmental assessment, and 311 other evidence presented and having personally acquainted :themselves wi-Lh the site and vicinity in question, does hereby find that the • conclusioas recommended by the Planning Commission were generally valfd and . sufficient, specifically: . i) Tnat the proposal as submitted would be inappropriate for the area, a nd - - , t' ' _ - • .v . ! ar . • K / 2) Tne publiu interest 4vould not be served by tfif s sundi.vision because it is located within an area having adverse environmental influences from: a1 Tne railroad tracks adjacent to the North, b) Interstate 90 adjacent to the South, and _ c) Industrial zoning exlsting within 600 feet at Flora and _ Interstate 90. NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners does conclude that . the preliminary plat o'L Conklin Additfon and zone classificatlon upgrading should be and hereby Is denied. . D1lTED THIS DAY OF , I977. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS - OF SP4KANE COUNTY, WASHIIVGTON 1ERRY C. KOPET, CHM. - : RAY W. CHRiSTfNSEI# . - : ATTEST: ' . VERt~tON W. OHLAND ` ' • - . . - = Clerk Board . • - ' a ♦ - - ` _ - _ - ; - BY: D epu ~ • . . _ ' • L ' . C • ~ . .r 2 w_ . - . • • y s~s' r v sr l ~r C ' . " S - _ „ - -•....1H1 ~ "➢IT' _ _ _ • O. • ap" ' -'~~...d - THRESHOLD DETERMINATION ; f DECLARATION OF (proposed/final) . aI llL I J JN . ~.p.,.E ' ~ .•v a- ► `o rV ~1 G N ' (sigr_ificance/nonsignificance) 1. Descnption of Proposal: R.V~19 (Z DO F LE-1,)~.S O1J ~-:3 AGeZS 0p LAKID; Rcoo sQ, rT. tit IM. L6i si zE 2. Proponenc: (012FOkj4r Sr:--ZU I C E~ ~k)G, : - ~ 3. Contact Person: ~Ll~1C1 5 COQ L!/Q 3. County Action(s) Requested: --fY17. 6ijp zmp--~ .rYPdi~'.,~.- - APPP,011AL- CVL- I072-77 ~ 2E -f3 T7) - i , 4. Location of Proposal: , ~$00 E AS7 6r ~P-'LoQA P.-D Ad\1 D Or,\ M r? i{-I- 5 I O-F,- em~ CAi 4,L Da - 5. Lead Agency: sro• CQ , WA This proposal has been determined to k)OT have a significant adverse impact on - the environment, An EIS is W7T_ required under RCW 43.21C.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review by the County of a completed environmental checklfst and other information on file with the lead agency. . . . 6. Responsible Official: R6.Y 1~►', C. YOt'E-t" - Position/`Title: Department: pLA1~ la 1 AGP • Dste: (orooosed) Signature: (prooosedL ✓ Date: (final) Signature: ~ (final) ~ z--8-?7 SEPA PIC RDfer. #:P) pe -Io7L-77~e~es-rDepartment Reference PE-k17Z-?7 (ote -ese~ . . ~ : DB'pTf-~ment'MerettZ'": iYinai'y • (See Reverse Side) ~ . ' = - r . . - , • _ - • _ - "Oi BEFORE THE 80ARD OF COUNTY COMMiSSiONERS OS SPOf:ANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON - I N THE MATTER CONCERN I NG PREL IMI NARY ) SUBDIVISION AND ZONE CLASSIFICATIOrJ ) UPGP,ADING, PE-1072-77, CONKLIPJ ADDITION, ~ COMMISStONEP.S' DECISION ZE-8-77, AGRICULTURAL TO SIMGLE FA111LY ) RESlDENTIAL AND/OR TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ) . Francis Conklin, Sponsor This being the time set by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane - County, 4lashington, to render its decision concerning the request of Francis Conklin, East 12019 Sprague, Spokane, Washington, for the above preliminary _ subdivision and zone classification upgrading; and The Board having received the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny this request for prel iminary subdivision a.nd zone classification up- grading, as contained in the Commission's minutes dated January 14, 1977; and ' The Board having conducted its ovm pub.lic hearing on March 10, 1977, at the - request of the sponsor, Francis Conklin, and after visiting the site and - reviewing the testimony; and The Board being fully advised in the premises did determine, based upon the _ testimony submitted at the public hearing and other evidence available to - - , the Board, to uphold the recommendation to deny subject prelimina ry subdivision and zone classification. - ' . The Boa rd found the reasons for den i al expressed by the P1 ann i ng Corr~nn i ss i on, as contained in its January 14 minutes,.to be sufficient and controlling. - The Board instructed the Planning Staff to prepare Findings and Order, fo r . execution by the Board at a subsequent meeting, setting forth more definitively the Board's action in this matter. BY ORDER OF THE BOARD this 31 day of March, 1977. • VERNON W. OHLAND - " _ Clerk of e Board - - b Ros nne Montague, Deputy C1 rk r . _ . - . - • . . . - ~ _ . w . _ ~ . _ _ . _ _ _ ..~.y . . :rr..~~.,~. _ - . _ - ~ - ~ l~,? ~ ~V/-~Y ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r• ~ W. A. Bulley - Director OEPARTMENT QF HIGHWt;YS Office of District Engineer `~*^_►A " N. 2714 Mayfair Street Box 5299 NortFi Centraf Station Spokane, Washington 99205 January 7, 1977 Spokane County Planning Commission - N. 811 Jef f erson . Spokane, Washington 99201 - Preliminary Subdivision & Zone Classification Change _ PE-1072-77, Conklin Additioa • ZE-8-77, Agricultural to Residential Gentlemen: We have reviewed the agenda for January 14, 1977 wherein it is proposed to rezone a portion of Sec. 18 T25N R45ETnM to residential. We wish to . call attention to the fact that such a location is very near the freeway. - Building residences in the same area will expose the occupants to highway noise. . We feel that both your office and the proposed developer should be•apprized of this situation. . ° • ry ruly yours, • . : `H RN G, P.E. . District Engineer . WRH : mb cc: JEManton Record Control - RECFIVFC. J.-: 1: ~,/(YN~L JV V ~ AUi M~ 1' 7V (XWSSI`P - ✓ s • - - , • r • ` I ~YA ♦ / vfi~//v/ `-^i~~ ~Y • , - BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMI SS ! OtVERS OS SPO}:ANE COUNTY, WASH f NGTON - IN THE MATTER CONCERNING PRELIMIPIAP.Y ) SUBDiV1SI0N AND 20t1E CLASSIFICATIOtJ ) - UPGP.ADING, PE-1072-77, C0tIKLIN AQDITION, ~ COMMIS510NERS' DEC{StON , ZE-8-77, AGR I CULTURAL TO S INGLE FA111 LY ) RESIDENTIAL AtJD/OR TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ) . Francis Conklin, Sponsor ) . This being the time set by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane - County, Washington, to render its decision concerning the request of Francis Conklin, East 12019 Sprague, Spokane, Washington, for the above preliminary subdivision and zone classification upgrading; and The Board having received the recommendation of the Planning Commission to . deny this request for preliminary subdivisionand zone classification up- grading; as contained in the Commission's minutes dated January 14, 1977; - and The Board having conducted its own public hearing on March 10, 1977, at the . request of the sponsor, Francis Conklin, and after visiting the site and - reviewing the testimony; and . . The Board being fully advised in the premises did determine, based upon the . ~ testimony submitted at the pubiic hearing and other evidence available to the Boa rd, to uphold the recommendation to deny subject preliminary subdivision and zone classification. The Boa rd found the reasons for den i a 1 expressed by the P1 ann i ng Cormni ss i on, as contained in its January 14 minutes,.to be sufficient and controlling. The Board instructed the Planning Staff to prepare Findings and Order, for ' . execution by the Board at a subsequent meeting, setting forth more definitively the Board's action in this matter. BY ORDER OF THE BOARD this 31 day of March, 1977, - VERNON W. OHLAND • - ' C 1 e rk o f e Boa rd o - b Ros nne Montague, Deputy Cl rk o• r . ~ . ' FRA1 CI`r.J' CoNKLIN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW ~ ECF-IV Ep - 12019 East Spra;ue Avenue - Saokane, bVashington 99206 ? 7 1977 Te!e?hone (509) 928•1100 ~ .r•. .r---;~' ~ a' _ i, i' ~ j . 1.:: • • - : . `C.: . : January 27, 1977 . " _ T0: Clerk Board of County Commi.ssioners Spokane, Washington . . NOTICE IS HEREBY given that FR.ANCIS CONKLIN, the Sponsor, hereby apneals to the Board of County Commissioners the - Planning Commission Reconrnendation recommending denial of Replat and Zone Classification Upgrading PE - 77 Conklin Addition, ZE 8- 77 Agricultural to Two Family Residential R-2. . FRA'.`dCIS COr1KLIN ^ • J ` - . `~~'rC ~?7 RIECFIVFC) - • ~.~j7 - JAN28~=::~ . , . PLAN~ING CC~W1SSiO~ . ~ • - ~ . . ~ • ~ ' , r ' ~ IVII NUTES jANUARY 140, 1977 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND ZONE CLASSIFICATICN UPCRADING PE-1072-77 - CONKLIN ADDITION: CONKLIN ' ZE- 9-77 - AGRICULTUR41. TO SINGLE FA1ViILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) ANDlOR . 7'IA-O FA?VIILY RESIDENTLAL (R-2) Planning Commission Recommend3tion: Denv, for the followincz reasons: (Vote was unanimous.) A. RF.P,SONS: 1. That the proposal as submitted would be inappropriate for the area. - 2. Thnt there is no need for a buffer of duplexes. - B. GENEFcA, DATA: . . • - 1. Location: Section 151 Township ZS N., Range 45, E. VJ.M. Tract 22 of Bacon`s Addition to Greenacres, except railroad right of way 2. Sponsor: Francis Conklin E. 12 019 Sprag ue Avenue Spokane, WA 99Z06 . 3. Land Surveyor: L-3wrEnce V. Dunsmore N. 1208 Herald Road Spokane, WA 99206 4. Site Size: 4.30 acres - ' S. Number of Lots: 12 6. Land use proposed by sponsor: Duplexes . . 7. Existing Zoning: Agricultural, established july 30, 1957 8. Advertised Zone Upgrading: Singie Family Residential and/or Two-Family Residential 9. Water Source: Consolfdated Irrigation District 1Vo. 19 10. School District: Central Villey School Dfstrfct 11. Environment3l Impact: A topic of discussion at this he3ring may be ~ whether or not this proposal will have a . _ significant adverse environment3l impact. . 25 - ~ . . • • i'~_ i . ` ' ~f. t~ • ' - . ' sPo:thr:E caMM FNGir;EER - ROAD TJEPAR=t-iiT . SUBDZVISIOy SECTiON , - _ - Tp; The Director oi Planning . DATE: January 11, 1977 FROM: :Lobert S. Turner, County, £ngineer SU33ECT: Standard Plat Con3itions _ . • : . - k'e reco=ea3 approval of the plat of CONKLIN ADDITION PE 072 sub j ec t to the foilowf.ng conditioas : that condition.al approval of the plat is given subject to dzdication of Right of - Way to the public and apprava3 of the road system ict the plat by the Couatp Eagiaeer; Lhat plaa.9, profiles, aad cross sections shoc,ri,ng preposed street centerliB.e and cczrb _ grades be suhraitted to the County Enoineer for approval prior to constructiou and the filing of a final plat; _that drainage plans and desigcz calculations showing the grades and aliga:aent of draia- age facilities be submitted to the Couaty Engineer fox appraval prior to constructioa and the filing of a finai plat; - . , . . _ construction within the proposed public streets aad easements shall be performed -under the direct supervision of a licensed land surveyor, who shalZ be responsible ' - for perpetuatiBg 211 evideace of the location of suzvey mornuaents which map be disturbed durino construction and who shall furnish the Couaty Eagineer wi.th "As . Built" plaas and a certificate ia wr~tino thaC all improvements were installed to - the lines and grades sho,,m vn the approved constructioa plaus and t'hat all disturbed monumo-nts have beea replaced; • . . - _ . . : . - _ _ - _ . . , . . _ - . _ _ . _ _ _ no construction work is to be perforaed within the Public Right of Way nntil a perrai.t has been issued by the County EnginQer. All work is sabject to inspsetiort aad approva3 by the County Engineer; aIl coastruction withia the Public Right of Way is to be completed prior to filino the final plat or a bond in the 2mount estimated by the Couatp Engineer to cover the cost of coastruction of improvements, construction certificatioa, "As Builtr' plaas, and monumenting the s treet centerlines shall be f iled with the County Engineer. - _ . - . . OF i . . . _ _ _ O . . F. • • _ _ ' . ~ , • ~ .l w ' ` - - • - JrVNUVL VUuIV 1) ' _ - - - - _ : PLANNING C~~mlsSloN ~ . . NASHINGTU\' STAT[ri ~ ; 4 - ~ Danie! J. Evans - Governor - d G ,HWAY COMA'SS ON _ ~;y1/. A. 8uiir, )ley - ~irector EPART,~~tiENT OF H IGHiVAYS ~ j~ _ r'j' ~•ri Dffice of District Engin2er ,J. 2714 MayFair Street 3ox 5299 North Central Station ;pokane, Washington 99205 - January 4, 1976 . tlr. Dwight J. I3ume, Acting Director Spokane County Planning Commission - North 811 Jefferson Street . Spokane, Washington 99201 Spokane County Planning Commission ' Agenda - January, 1977 Dear Sir: This office is in receipt of the agenda af your January 14, 1977 Planning - Commission meeting and would comment on the following items: . /PE-1072-77 ' ZE 8-77 ' The Department of Highways would not oppose the proposed zone classification upgrade in as much as no access will be allowed onto Interstate 90. _ PN-784B-71 - This office would request that all access onto Sign Route 2 be via the existing county roadway system. The traffic volumes and vertical alignment along SR 2 are not such that multi-approach development would be feasible to insure the - safety of operation on this state route. L truly yours, " ALTER R. HQRI 4GO District Engineer • WR,H : mb - - - cc: Record Control ' . 14ECEIVFE) . . j►- lo ~~~M COWA%;M . ' ' " ' ' - ~ T--.- _ - _ .._l~R'~p( ~T ..~y 1~ y ~ _ ^9 _ - . . . ~ ~-r e~- . t ✓ . ~ ~ 3„~• ~~,,.r~, .c~l ~__5.;.~' ' - -~ri5t. y~ j ~ ~ - ' ' •re . . ---f F- 0~2- -77 DE PT. ~ ..E REF . aE- !9 -77 t rrLLv .~~'~~,t,~ " , " c " t • ti % _ ~ ~:~Q_3~~~x~.~'~`'~~ • r: T-~. ~ ~ ~ , ~ 1,. ~ r ~n . • . . . . . „r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . SPoP(aH- COUhTY GOUR7 MOUSe STAFF REVIE`'V OF ENVIROIvMENTAI. CHECKLIST - , . - I,~ In accordance with the Spokane County Envisonmental Ordinance and WAC 197--10 , an Environmental Checklist has been submitted by the applicant or his agent. - This checklist and any additional pertinent data has _subsequently been reviewed by the ~ The following data briefly describes the proposal: A. Action Requested: SL7,0i`1C A41D PPI~L)M WA2r QLAji- APP..ollAL rnn►✓_c.►nl 4~.oViTIon) (PE -l07Z -ti7) (zE - 8-7-7) , _ . . B. Description of Proposal: 5UP n 10 Or-' 4-.30 ACCF-S iN 'rr~ 12 L-OTS ~ , _Q„G L./ ~ ~ C~ ~ E1 ~~1 1 ti 3~~ '~I O ` C.f..~,l,~() 'FF-QAj7/~ n / , ,~G~ C~c ~2 u t~Q~•s {~i=- I 7 1,~,,,~t ~1 ~S . C. Location of Proposal: _L02nx ~ dQa_fj• 'rr AsT or- ~ELoP.,-A~ Ct) ~ II . Review of Checklis t: _ V Z _ - _ `J/ . _ _ ~ ~ _ - _ _ - : ~ . - - t•i ' 'I , ` • ~r ' A. Slight adverse fmpacts are noted under the following questions: ` 7T. , 2~ Z,f 3.~ 4.16 ~ 7, 8,~~ /.3 51(_. i . r . . y ' (Over) - ~ ~ ~ollo~l,t ing _ noted u~der t~'e + . impacCs a ad,4erse - SIgnlf . patentla 90 _ . - ♦ _ que S tlons ; Jr„ . • . ~ . _ - - - - ' " r . - ..r•~ • . • - ~ • ~ : - ""'►r'~' . , _ - , ~ . • . . N _ . _ - ,,,,,r„~, • ' . Q~ . , ~F ~ F_p 0 ~ : ± : . _ . - _ • ~.tif' ~-ed &b ` ~ o~l 4f lmpa~ts lde ~ 1rt A c?vrt ! . I?iscassion of y l ! F~~ r ~ il~f~ wL3 - (~0 u - . - : - • . . , _ G . l~ ~AL(Br C~ . _ : . . _ = : . A60~ G~~~5 f ' - : - - ~ . .7-4 Ary~Ab ~t'L' - 24- Md #E4 51 c1~~ " ~ ~y - `r - ` ~ • ' - - • , , . ' _ • • • ' . _ . ' ' _ - . ~ _ c - _ - - . , - • - - . ` ^ ' - ~ I.l ~ ~~r - , 5 7VAr ..-p~ tls. mmenda Sta~ , ; - r , ~ _ _ . - ~nd ~teco ab~.~e' th~ ' ,~L'C~'~° PA c Gon'~l~sions B ard G ..~t A . . . . j-~. /CA ~3S . Based. 01 M~ - ~ - . , 1 , : ~ • . . , ~ r ~ F„ •i ' ' ~ ~ _ . , ' ' ~~r?` + , F..~. - ~.~j~a f "'G • t ' . ` , ' trz • SPOKANE COUNTY PLANMNG D£PARTMENT r yPUBLIL' WOAlC$ BUILDING N. 611 JEFFENSOK STREET aD► v~ ~ PMONE 458-22?4 S . '1-`;•p~ ` "a'YR'ir SPOKANIE. WASHINGTON 99201 . , . , . - SPOt^rC C3UnTr C0U97 r+QV3t MEMORANDUM _ T O: 5?0 c0. .4.`~\L.-'[ 4 VkSt. " A'TrW t5t~V ! e,D . HL-,T4. . F R O M: S pokane County Planning Department . N. 811 Jefferson, Spokane, WA 99201. - Attention: JGWN 1JunlN taLY DATE: R E F E R E N C E: Attached Propo sed Declaration of Non-Significance and Environmental Checklist for i' PF--1072=1-7 CONY..LiAIS A,00171C)rV Information on file concernfng this proposed action indicates your agency to be - one of jurisdiction, WAC 197-10-040 (4). - Accordingly, if you wish to exercise yvur right to review and comment as pro- vided in WAC 197-10--340 (S), please be advised that theproposal was Iisted fn the SEPA Public Information Center on IZ.)2"/ /76, , - , ~ l~ ~ , . • , ~,er . vyer''..!' c. . a" • ~ 4 • \ , - ~ _ - L 1 ~M / ~ . • ~~3: ~ _ i SPOKANE COUNTY PiANNING DEPARTMENT PUBIIC WORKS BUIIDING N. 871 JEFFERSON STREET Lj.~, j j a - _ • _ ~Qr~ ~ ~~i3.~~ t~~,~'~• .1• ; PHONE 456-2273 SPOKANE, 4YASHINGTON 99201 g-J.ja•: CCU .rv cG, v; MJUSS . . LEAD AGENCY DESIGNATION - - OF SPOKANE COUNTY Pursuant to WAC 197-10-203 (3), the Spokane County Planning Department, a division of Spokane Coun=y, has determined that the County, as an - ~ ACTING AGENCY, is the LEAD AGEIVCY for the following desctfbed project: ~ Pr--- - fo 72 =T7 ~ ~-E - 8--77 - - 0 ON K LLLI A 0 D 1 The following is explanation for this determfnation: WAC t91-1o --ZZa ~ - ~ Determination for Spokane County By: . . ' - - ~ Name: Jo4,v r%~u NQFZ-f Title: i'i.k~ Aq,~>)-1jNkS'TV-A-TCiZ` ' Date: I Z j~~71~ - . ~ ~ spool , _ ~ • j r • . ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ • •K ~ S ~ • ~n,;~E~P► V ~ , 7r.~ ~3y 4~ -T1 •T~.+1~,~ li)4~•~-~~ ~..-f ' ' . . - SOO+w»t CJt.N'l COUiT w7v5[ - _ EiWIRONMEI~TTAL CHECKLIST - Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals, The Acr also requfres that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared for alI major actions significantly (and "adversely", as per WAC 197-10) affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is [o help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. , - - , ; . , - _ • , ~ ; _ - . Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the informatfon - presently available to you. Please answer questions as "yes" or "maybe" if, in your _ opinion, even only slight impacts will result. The reviewers of the checklist will be - aware of and concern themselves with the decrree of impact, asking you for more informa- - tion, if necessary. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision-makers, include your explanation in the space provided, or use addi[ional paQes, if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are relevant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now wLll " - help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required envfronmental . revieiv without unnecessary delay. " . The following questions apply tv your [otal proposal, not iust to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers . should include the impacts which will be caused by your prolposal when it fs completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all - of the agencies whfch will be involved to compleie their environmental review now, _ without duplic3ting paperwork in the future. No application shall be processed until the checklist has been completed and returned - to the apprapriate County department. State law requires explanations for every "yes" and "maybe" answer on the checklist._ The person completing the form may be requ.ised - to provide explanatfons for "no" answers, and in some cases, more detailzd information . to aid in a threshold determination, ' • r.'_ . NOTE; This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencfes in the State . of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not - apply to your proposal. If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and - continue on to the next question. • • _ ~ - , - • ~ DAU ! uAPP17-11)~V 1 ~ PZ,-- -1 D7';Z -77 - . . - . + A • . w'•' w ~ r_ . ENVIRONNIENTAL CHECICLIST FORM I. BACKG??OUiND ' I. ~~iame of Ptoponent: ; ngp~g~F 5~ VR ! CES ! I NC . ' ' • ~ ,~J 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: F ranc i s Conkl i n . • East 12019 Sprague Ave. _ ' Spokane, WA 99206 3. D.ste Checklist Submitted: QPrQ.rn Q r 15 .1976 4. Agency Requiring Checklfst: Spokane County 5. N3me of Proposal, if Applicable: , - o~~lr.l ~ n!.5 A ~l ~ i t i nn 6. Nature and Brfef Dascription of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate under- standing of its scope and nature): kTe p,r: p riap ]vP duplexes wi th a stub road to prov i de access. 7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impac[s, including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environmental settinq - - of the proposa2): Pasture,,and bordered on tbg sQuth bv a freewav., on the north - by a ra i t road and a_ r aaP r,racr s on fihe Qthe,r sideS Tile cu'rrnttrtrl!na hpmec ara nlrlar anrl thgrQ arP a„f,w_dt~r~lPxc~S an~l - . 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: , - - Janua ry 1 -LU$ - 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required fcr the Proposal (federal, state and local - includfng rezones): - Qezzop - a ti i l.rii ng p..m it c- SookanQ Countv - H Qa1th permits . - - a 16 - - - ~ r _ • ~ ,,,~r5nr1~"`"I" ''3~ . . _ l - "si'S• . f- ~ . (IF SPaCE FOR ECPLr-1NAT7' 'T IS INtaDEQUATE, PLEASE ATIACH AT' TTIOIVAL PAGES.) _ 10. Do you h3ve any plans for fu~ure additions, expansion, or further activity related to or conmected with this proposal? If yes, explain: kin 11. , Do you know of any plans by others which inay affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: NO . > _ . ~_T • r 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the proposaI; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: - N/A - II. ET'VIRONMENTAL IMPACTS . ' (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) . Yes Maybe No . 1. Earth. W;11 the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic . - structures? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' -X.. (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ~ _ • (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? X _ (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique - geologic or physical features? . . . . . . . . . X , (e) Any increa se in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the si te ? . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . .1 X _ (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or ervsion which may , modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? 1~ Explanation: ~ . - - • - , . , ~ ` , - - . . . . . Exc~vat ion for home construct ion and road ocnstruction wi 11 alter the A l so cau l d chanQe the dra i nage patterns. ' 17 /,L ~ . , . . . - ~ ~ ~ _ • - _ r+ • (IF SPACE FOR EXPLANA'.L_-jN IS INAD£QUATE, PLEASE ATTACH AllDITIOIVAL PAGES.) ' - Ysa Ma.Y.b,... No 2, Air, Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quali[y?... _X~ (b) The creation of objectionable odors? . . . . . . . . . X , (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, . X or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Explanation: Additioral yeri,iCular traffic w+ll e u1 in an incre-asP in ai r emissions;a1sQ SmQkP from c,himne.T... 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Change in currents, or the course or direction of . - water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? ~L, . (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or -X - 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 x• • body ? . . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . • , - (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration . " of surface water quality, including but not limited , to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? • X, _ (f) Alteration of Lhe direction or rate of flow of ground X - waters ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations ? . . . . . . . . x _ (h) Deterloration in ground water quality, either through " direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phospates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, - . - - - ` _ - or other substances fnto the ground waters? . . . . . X ' ~ _ ' (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available- for public water supplies? . . . . . . . . . . . : . X . Explanatfon: ' I • • -4r.24page s. . Hnmp- nnSomR, inrt nf watPr wi 1 1 al tPr th _ eiiant itv CPrtjG ta.CLk..S'GA+~~ alteC' thf, cli►,a1 itTV This hn5 nnt hP.p^ rP-, o lvPei- 18 . . - ~ . ~ . . R; ~ . • ' (IF SPACE FOR EXPLANATIC iS IIVADEQUA.TE, PLEASE ATTACH AD_ ~TONAL PAGES,) Yes Mavbe No 4. Flora, Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of - " ' any species of flora (inciuding trees, shrubs, grass, . crops, microflora and aqua tic plants) ? . . . . . . . _ Y (b) Red action of the nu-nbQrs of any uniqu,*--, rare or - endangered species of flora? . . , , , . . , . . . . x • (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, ' or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of exis[ing species? . . , , . , , . . . . , . , x (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop ' _X Explanation: LANDSCAP I NG FOR NLIMES W 1 LL ALTER THE FLORA PATTERN. Yes Mavbe No 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of . any species of fauna (birds, land animals including _ reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, . - ' insects or microfauna) ? . . . o . . . . . . , , (b) Re3uction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or - - endangere3 species of fauna? . . . . . . . ~ , , ~ • X (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or x . result in a ba:rier to-the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitar? X, - Explanation: . ~ , - - Yes Mavbe No 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels?. X - ° Explanation: NtimhPr nf nPnnlP autmmo,bi 1PC Ptc- ~ wi 11 in _rPacP in thP. arp-a. _ . 19 ~ . 1 L f~ ~ • ' ✓ . - • _ ~ 4' ' c~ _ l (IF SPACE FOR EXPLAdvATION IS INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIQNAL PAGES.) . . Yes Maybe No 7. Liqhi and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? ~ Explana tion: I_i ;.htan 91a r.e f rom t h,A nesa tnme.c. - - Yes Maybe No 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in tfie alteration of the present or planned land use of an area ? . . . . . , . , . . X ' , ~r , . Exulanation: ' nc,t „~Arl ahd .,i i~l hp . ~tser1 fnr t,.^~;r,sing- • , - Yes Mavbe No 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: - (a) Increase fn the rate of use- of any natural resources? ~ . • (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? x Explanation: Enorq,v fnr hnmP n unat inn ~ , • Yes Maybe No 10. Risk of U:)set, Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions x Explanation: On 1 y s 1 i qht chanqe of exp ios i on f rom o i] for homes IF u.sed . or any other explosive substance in a home. . 20 " ~ _ . (IF SPACE FOR F.CPLANATIOiv IS INr"►DEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES.) Yes Maybe No 11 I. Pooulation. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human - popula tion of an area ? . . . . . . . .0000 . . . . X Exolanation: Twentyfour new fami 1 iew in the area. , 12. HousinQ. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or - create a demand for additional housing? . . . . . . . . . x L'v12• Explanation: ,r c.'0-4 c 440 vr n V"L-C112:r . • • , - Yes Maybe No 13. Transpor[ation/Clrculation. Will the proposal result in: , (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? . . . . . .X.._ (b) Effects on existing parkinq facilitfes, or demand for - new parking ? . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . X (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or X movement of people and/or goods ? (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? . . . . . . ~ (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, X - bicyclists or pedestrians? . . . . o . . . . . . . . ~ ExQlanation: Add;,tiorL 1 vpch i.r. iPs im tPh arPa - - Yes Maybe No 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, - or result in a need for new or altered govemmental services , in any of the following areas? - (a) Fire protection? . . . . e . . . . . . . . . . . ~ - . (b) Police protection? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 ~ ~ l • • ~ ~ • i_ s 1 • C , + ' 1.✓ 1T J , . _ . _ a uf ~ . , (IF SPACE FOR EXPLANAT IS INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH A TIONAL PAGES.) _ Yes Maybe No (c) Schools ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x _ (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? . . . . . . . . X (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (f) O ther governmental services ? . . . ' . . . , . . x ~ Exolanation: W i 11 i nc rea se poou 1 a t i on i n the a rea , Yes Maybe No - z. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: • - (a) Use of substantfal amounts of fuel or energy? . . . . . ~ ` - _ _ (b) Damand upon existing sources'of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? X Explana[ion: ~~~914 SRpr-gy ~-4 1'1 ba Rigadvd to-h:3: anrl 1lnht rhP npw hnilcpc ' . , ~ • . Yes Maybe No . 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new _ - systems, or alterations to the following utilities: _ (a) Power or natural gas ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (b) Communication systems? . . . . . . . . . . . . X ' X - (c) W3[er? . . . . . o . . . o . . . . . . . . . - - (d) Sewer or septic tanks ? . . . . . . . . . ; - . . . X _ X (e) Storm water drainage? . . o . . . . . . . . . . . _ . (fl Solfd waste and disposal? . . . . . . . . . . . . X _ • Explanation; • • FF 22 , . . ~ . • . • - ; ~ - "(IF %EPACE iOR LXPLrINATI( 1S INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH AD .IONAL PAGES.) Yes Maybe No 17. Human Healtn, Will the proposal result in the creation of . any realth :zazard or potential health hazani (excluding ' riental health) ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ Exo! ana tion: Yes Maybe No 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of _ any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the pro- posal result in the creation of ari aesthetically offensive site ' open to pubiic view? . . . . , . . . . . . ; Exolanation: - - Yes Maybe No - 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the . quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X Ex'olana tion : • , : . , _r• - s y , - Yes Maybe No 20. Arch eaPiqi,6al/Historical. Will the proposal result in an ~ alterati n of a significant ~rcheological or historical site, - structure, object or'buillding? . . . . . a . . . . . . . . Exolanation:, . 23 , . - . f L , . ~ _ • - 4~ • III. SIGNATURE ' - I, tne undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information fs true and complete. It is understood that the Iead agency may withdraw any declaration of nonsignificance thzt it might is5ue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or wi?lful lack of full disclosure on my part. . Proponent:.' drr"f2{n,ctA 4-7 • " FL[, (Please Print or Type) , Proponent: Franc i s Conk) i n . - ' Address:, East 12019 Sora4ue Ave. ' Phone: s2_$-1 100 , okane r WA 99206 ° . Person comoleting form: S , . • Phone: Q xsz- -1 1 0 O ' • - Date: ? (,o Dept, or Office of Counry Rev#ewing Checklist: + Skaff Member(s) Reviewfng Checklist: , - . . ~ ~ . ~ ~~in A. . 24 . ' /y 1 ~ ~ ~ . . T' - . •~~~-:A...-.h TIRt DEF,:~~HTPXtYf` ~l.s. LE(l 5POI~ANE% ~ ~ EAST 10319 SPr2AGUE AVE. • SPOKA1c, WASHINGTON 49206 ~ tELEP?10NE (509) 928-1700 _ J y JGr►uary 3, 1977 b ~ , • _ ~ ~ tiir. D;iight Hume, Acting Director ~ Soo;<zre Cozsnty Plarning Corninission ; Spo;<ane, 'ilasnington . Qzar 1-1r. Hume: ~ The follovling zone changes and prel iminary subdivi sions have been revi ewed - - ~ X lor ad2quate fire protection: ~ . - ; _ . . ~ PE-1058-77 - ~ ~ - ZF- 4-77 - There are exi sti ng- rrains yi n tnis area but hydrants wi l l be needed. / ~ ~ ~ - - - LC- G-77 - Mains and liydrants need to be installecf in this area. , , ~ 7t-1071-77 ~.r f %I' F'i f 1~ . ~ ZE- 7-77 - Mains and hydrants ~need to be. instal'Ii2d'%in this area. . . / f • t-.~ ~ PE-1072-77 ~ . , - ~ • ZE- ~-77 - This area;/is~~covzred by adequate' mains 'and hydrants. ! ~ _ J "f.r , . . ~ - ~ Pc-1073-77 ZE- 9-77 - Mai ns~ ar.d hydrar, ts need -#*.o be i nstal 1 ed in ,.th.i area. - ~ , • ' ` ti ( i ' - - L . rE- ,990-70 ~ ZE- 3-76 -Mains and hydrants need to be instailedlin-,this rea. 7f- 147--70 - 1411 ins and hycfr,,nl•► nvor; ~n 1it+ •in:(a 71r•d iri ttiis, are-I:.. . . ~ "LC- 153-760 - This area is cover•ed by adequate maiiis and hydrants.\ ~ Zc- 2-70 - This area is covered by adequate mains andhydrants. _ , ~ ~Sincerely, ~ . . - - - - . : j • _ ~ ' 9,r,.fF;i~~~ A1 Cook C~a - D - 1 L-c. 01' Inspectors , _ . a t r - • ~ ~ . ~ • . j ~rvnr,,v~ ✓t1V•♦ ~ !".1i1 cy l~~~~~~~R~+ 1~1.~ j•~ T 1 ~ PREVE1 `Y T FIR8.1 S SlY. Y E LI~.'L'i S ! ~ , _ _ . _ - - - - - - _ • - - • - ~ _ _ _ - ~ , . ~ . . ~ - ' ' ' ~ _ ~ _ December 9, 1976 Spokane County P1 anni ng Corrmi ss i on - N. 811 Jefferson Street • - , - Spokane, Washington 99201 . : . Gentlemen: . - - r The proposed plat, Conklin Subdivision, located in Tract 22, 6acon's - ~ ~ . ~ Addi ti on ( por. Nig, Secti on 18, T1,1P 25N., R45 E. W. M. ) i s wi thi n the boundari es ~ . of Consolidated Irrigation District Noe 19. The property is presently served _by a 6inch di ameter water main. There is adequate system capacity for domestic and irrt gation service. and fire flow protection. - ~ - - . - - - - ` , ^.-~u~ ✓ c: S Sincerely, • - - - : . : tz J ' W- ~~~r.t~~ ^ . • _ ~ G . " ~Y`Li ~ - James W. Trul 1 ~ ~ - Secretary-Manager cc: Frank Conkl i n . _ . - - • • - - , - - . . - RECE ~ vf; C DEC 2 L~~ - - . .~iU-ti~~i. .L~ti. ~ - _ . ~~~~~NG COf~IS.7IM " - ' " ' - - CONSOLlQATED iRRIGAtION DISTRICT - - : NORTH 120 GREENACRES ROAD • GREENACRES,INASHINGTON 99016 • 924•3655 • • ' ♦ l . ~ 4 • + • . ~ AcE~rDz , JkNTu_nLRy 14, 1977 ( T(: 12rfOINE No _ : 456-2274 : SPO;tiA1:E COTi-IVIY PLANND1G C!' TSSION ' Time: (idDTE TIi:E CHANCE) Friday, January 14, 1977, $:30 A.M_ Place : Conference Room A, County Court House Annex (Use ilallon Avenue entrance) PRELD11014t Y SUBDTVISIOII AND ZONL CL.A.SSIFICATIO-M UPGRADING - 10. Pr,-1072-77, CorL~tlin Addit? on - ZE- 8-77, A^ricultural 'uo Single Farnil,y Residential and/or Tc,lo-Fartily Residential a. Location: Section 18, Tovmship 25 N., Range 45, E.W.M_ Tract 22 of Bacon's Addition to Greenacres, except railroad right of way. . . b. Sponsor: Francis Conklin _ East 12019 Sprague Avenue : - Spoka.ne, l;lashington 99200 ~ . . , c . Land Surveyor : La-vrrence V. Dunsmore _ _ - ' - North 1208 Herald Road - " Spokane, Washington 99206 d. Site Size: 4.30 acres e. Nuraber of Lots: 12 - . . . ` - f. Land use proposed by sponsor: Duplexes - " g. Existing Zoning: Agricultural, estab'_ished July 30, 1957 h. Advertised Zone Uporading: Single Family Residential and/or Two Family Residenti i. Water Source: Consolidated Irrigation District No. 19 j. School District: Central Valley School District k. Environmental Impact: A topic of discussion atthis heariag may be whether or not this proposal will have a significant adverse environmental impact. . . - ~ . - ~T~~ • . . . ~ . . . - ' . ~ ~ . uNi ~ MAXWELL AV d Q ~ OC ~ . . 0; - Q ; . - - - ~ i O J z ~ R , • 8 00 ~ ~ ~ - _ - jE Av E. / BOOt~E - - ^ 800 N E - i ~ t pp Q . AVE. ~ CA' _ SCALE : . N'IP'ER-STATE NIGHWAY N*'O- 90 Spokone= to ttooot. . BROADWAY A'VE. OADV,~Y _,4VE. 4 ' j 8 . qt~el ~ : . . . ~ ~ ~ -r - A L K i V ~ T, ~ ~3' . ~y , . . . _ . . . . - . /_7 . - • ~ . _ . - ~ ~ - PE-1072-77 and ZE-8-7~/ In the matter of a hearing to consider the application of Francis Conklin, East 12019 Sprague Avenue, Spokane, jJashington, to file a plat 'uo be knoivn as Conklin Addition. Also to consider changing the Zoning Ma.p from Agricultural to Single Family Residential nad/or TU;o-Family Residential on the property described below, such zone change to become effective only upon the filing of the final plat, or plats, of sucYi property. The property being platted is described as Tract 22 of Bacon's Addition to Greenacres, except railroad right of way, in Section 18, Tot,mship 25 P1. ! Range 45, E_trt.M., Spokane County, Washington. . (Between Interstate 90 and Burlino'uon Northern Railroad right of way, approximately 630 feet east of F'lora Road) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) - ) SS. COUNTY OF SPOKANE . . Being first duly sviorn, deposea and says: That at all times mentioned herein he was, and nocr is, a citizen of The United ' States, a resident of Spokane County, Washington, and over the age of twenty-one ' years. That on 1 ~ , 97 he personally posted three C3) true and correct copies of the hereto attached NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING at the _ following places in Spoka.ne County, to-«i.JU.: ' - - 1 . "5^'~ ~1 1; :.L' • ` j ~ G _ l ' fs ~ ~ ,l< ~ 4 ~L.,'S ` f . . ' ✓ . ~ ~ ~ r~ L . ✓ ; _ • - - _ • _ j-~~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ! ~~cs~~- ~/..c 2. . , - . • < ; r : - 3. ~ Y~ ~ • . s wf , f . r .~f~~~ r~i/►~ 'J, ~v 'I; - J f Subscribed and sworn to me ~ 19 . NOTARY PUBLIC IN ki-ID F0R SPO:{xNE COiJ11I`Y, WASHINGT )N Residing at Spoka.ne, Washington 1 - - : . . , ~ DOKANE COJtITY HEALTH DI51RIGC ~ Inter-Offi ce Corrmuni cation Date: December 14, 1976 Tp : Spokane County P1 anni ng Corrmi ssi on--) ~ ' FROM: Eugene C. Prather, R.S. 9?(~r SUBJECT: Proposed preliminary plat--CONKLIN ADDITION , 1. Reference: map of proposal, scale one foot equals 100 inches by Dunsmore, dated November, 1976. 2. Consolidated Irrigation Company has indicated its ability and interest to provide domestic use water in the plat upon completion of a11 con- tractual agreements. We recommend that prior to filing the final p1at: a. A7 l contractual agreements for water servi ce are compl ete. b. The water system provi de for fi re protecti on fl ows. - 3. The soi 1 s and topography i n each 1 ot are sui tabl e for i nstal7 ati on of individual on-site sewage disposal systems. Under the rovisions of WAC ?48-96-:I17(l a manan ~ ement svstem will be reauired w mut be approved by this office priorto siqning the final plat. - dac - - cc: Dunsmore - REci . ~ ~ . - f~ ~I SCHD-AOM-118 ~ . • ~ . ~ ~ ' - E X H I B I 1 A PRELIP•IIt`1ARY F't,..4T APPLICATION F0RM AREA M:D DISiANCE 0 o0 0 0 0 00013 oo13 o13 0130 0 00 oo00 oaoao0ooaooaoooo13o0ao01313ooaoooo13oooo1 Total anount of land in this Subdivision: 4„37 Acres rroposed density of the Plat: Lots/Gross Acre iotal amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner or sponsor: 4-3-2- 13 Acres Proposed use of controlled adjoinino land: N/A ~ What is the driving distance in miles to the nearest fire station? 1.3 miles Shoppino facilities? I mi 1e rlunicipal Boundary: ; mi le Paved street or highway? Ad j acent LAND USE 130D013DODOOOOOOODOOOOODDODDt]OOOOOOGDOODOOOOOOODOODO000017DC10i7I700C]QOOOC]I Indicate the proposed land use of the plat: Single Family Dwellings ( Duplexes { X). Indicate lots for duplexes: 12 14ulti-family dwelling units ( Indicate which lots: N/A i•lobile Homes ( Other ( Describe other uses: N/A Describe any non-residential use proposed in the Plat: N/A What is the present use of the property proposed to be platted? Qa,~,rP I,ist type of uses: Cultivated land: acres. Pasture: F_~02 acres. Timber: acres. Vacant: acres. Other: Acres I s keeping of animals desired? No ( X). Yes ( Type: IM.PROMtE1VTS wOODDOOOcOOOOOOOODOOOODOOOOOOOODODOUO0Q0O0OC7DODD0O0t]ODCICIOODC70DDODD Do you plan to file the Plat in its entirety as proposed, or will it be a multi-phase dev- elOpm2rit? FntirPty , To what level of improvement will streets be constructed? Gravel ( X)- Minimwne Curb anc3 Gravel ( Curb and Paved ( - Describe any combinations of above: • What is the time period expected for complete development of the Plat: . Street =mprovements completed? 1 yea . Substantial number of lots occu~p d? I~r Is dedication of an.y land for public use contempleted? (Parks, schools, etc.) No. (x Yes ( Describe: Indicate the size of units proposed to be constructed: ~~rr~x imatP lv q2Q_ Sa ~ Square feet Number of bedrooms 1) • per unit _ Will buildings be built on the lots before they are sold: No ( X). Yes ( • Will any special deed restrictions be included in the sale of lots? _No ( X). Yes If "yes", explain: . UTILITIES m00 0 0000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000 ODDQOOOOOrJCMt?D0i Indicate the proposed method of sewage disposal : Septic tank ( X}. Lagoon ( ireatment plant ( Other, or combinations (Describe) Indicate the proposed source of water supply: Individual wells ( Public system ( X~. Private commu(nity system ( - Indicate method of extending service to the lots (Dwellings): Jnderground utility easements ( Overhead utility easements ( Utilities in streets ( X). No easements ( Indicate the distan.ce irom this proposal to the nearest exi.stino water main: Adjacent feet. Indicate size of nearest main: 6 Inches. List utility companies or districts e)qpected to provide servce to this.Plat: ~0 Electricity ~P Gas: N/A ti~later: Conso'~adated Trr'9•pnone: pNWB . ya - - ' - ,:l~*'=.' - ` ~ • _ . . . ° - y. _ ..P _ . ~ ' { - i h/ ~ EXHIBIi A Page2 PRELLMII'~1ARY PLAT A.PPi,ICATION FORK (Continued) ACKNOWLEDG1fIIvTS MOOOOOOaOOOODO00i]ODO0OODODO0DOQOL7ppOC300C7ClODOOt10130OCIOCID0000QOQDQi PROPOSED PL.AT NA2IE : Cn ^ L I A c-)c/ , 4 / o r-, I, the undersigned, have completed the iniormation requested, and the Preliminary Plat has a°en prepared by me under mf supervision in accordance with the requirements of the Spokane - County Planning Department and the 12.ws of the State of Washington. - D t : (Signed) ~ a e e c. /S J~ ~74 7 ~ J;rrG ~yo F, (Address) ~c Phone: 9 -74 8 o. ~ 5~VL•7 r. zip: 06 ~ F 22606 ► S~ - suR _ : . please print - col I, C'-1-1G , , the sponsor of this proposed subdivision, am the (owner ( builder ( agent (X option holder ( contract holder r of the property proposed to be platted and have completed the information requested of ine and do hereby testify that it is correct and accurate. - - - t.,'~, ~~••~.r,~f (Signed) Date: iZ I ee 7G .,i'~';`~4 '%J` • •~E'~ ,f (Address) Phone : g z O O Zi P `3 o ~ A~' +t V.Lti,[tY 1`l . . Date: r`~~'.•t ~ t~~4 ~ y'c~ 14i c C/ NOTARY SFAlr: Special Comments: ~ . . Jrunr►~v~ uv~+v ' , 30000000000000000000 THIg pAgT TO BE COMMETED BY FLANNIlNG DEPA.RTNIENT vaoo0000000000000c . PZANNII`1G DEPAR'ITMT INFORi4ATION ~ s~ Date Submitted: Checked by: School District: Preliminary Plat Fee: Existing Zoning: : Date established: 3~ -.57` 2one Cnange File No. : e-70 77 Advertised Zone IIpgrading: - + Number of Lots: . Location: Section ~ Township *IS Rang~ e ~ ~ Plat File No.: f0 7 Z "'77 Plat Name: C &DITLDA) ~74 , - -ti - , - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - _ _ _ . , . > ~ ' IAWRE\CE V. DIUNStiIORL' • PRORess•oNAL tANo suavwow . N 1208 HERALD RD SPOr[ANE WA 99206 At3Ea CaDE 509 WA 4-97<8 Dec. 13, 1970 EXHIBIT "B" ' LEGAL DESCRIPTION- PROPOSED PRELII'MARY PLAT OF CONI= ADD. Lot 22, Bacon's Addition to Greenacres, according to plat recorded in Volume "J" of Plats, Page 15, in Spokane County, Washington. EXCEPT that po3-tion conveyed to Spokane and Inland Empire Railroad Company by deed dated February 23, 1909, in Volume 239 of Deeds, Page 96. ~ ~ ~~"i.~ 1f ~>4~ I ,N~ ~ 1 0~~ I • o, La Q. re ~ . • " 12605 ~ - . Fcf' 44FGJS i ERE'O t RND ~ . SECS - . ~~w rN IPL~ , , _ . . r . . ~ ~ _r!aCRES WA 990IE ~ ZE5 E112 ~..b ~NDEhBURL WILLtRG~-Q - - 72I55 CATALCC aVE ;R=~~~~4ES WA 99016 2E5 E1l2 C''LLI_R MEIVIN !SQF RR E323 t~ ?q ~I G4RRY RD _r. . _ O T I S C RC H 4 RD S VJ A gqC Z 7 - - 2ES W1/2 N0F=N4N d L Z e23 . E 172c7 CATAlO0 avE ~ - - "~~EN'ACRcc WA q901E 2 ~ 5 W112 T - - _ ~ - - - - - - _ L L I ER N EL V I N - - - ? S oF RR E23 1_521 GAeRY Ro OTis cRcHARos WA 59027 Z`s ncENaLRG wr n f w WITNiNE1i2~B23Y___..______~.~_. - - 17215 Ca7nLG0_._nvE _ GRccr:acaEs WA Sqolt- <E 5 tV- cVcRETT JR /N .:ITHI~! ~,'3323-_______---_.~- __I~t~ 120 3GLIV4R ST ----T------- SP!:,KtNE WaSh 99216 tE5 P T N N t ILL I A N ?24 1CI4 FLORA RD . GR=ENACRES W4 5901E - ~REE T1aCRcS PICHE CRANT J . . ]F Rr2 EXC Y.k'Y 824 E;:XC FTN OtF: 9cG 4T INTCRS CF E 17121 CATALQP AYE LNY0 F fi3A N SPO E IWI.4 ND LMPIRE RR 7H SWLY t,LG hlY GREEhtCRES WA 9901E 'D E INLAr:G FMPiR_ RR TO PT OF IATERS wITH r1.Y R/W • . lVc TH. SL_Y_ 1~.LG _ElY LN _ CF CaTAlDO AVE 1COFT_ TH ELYm___ .40FT S 7Q PD2 7H N ALG ~ LN 140F7 TO PCB ,RF:iVACRES GPQCEN A N G AT INJ_RS ?F E~--LN £ P1LY R!w'--tN QF AE&',N SPp ~E ~Y4^~.-E: 171C4 CATQl00 QVE R TH SWLY L1G NLY RIW LN CF SD SpC & INL4No GRE`NaCRES WA S901E 09 INTERS bdITH ELY KlW LN CATALDO AVL TH SLY 4LG ~ DC AVE ~100FT TH clY TO PT ON F LN+~34CFT S TO PCB 4CFT TO P03 ES cXC FIG MUT~ SAV ~8K^ 02 3 1 2973E 5 . C--- - - - - _ S F X C C 4il.RCH G F H R I 5 T ~ - 8CX ?3 GRcEt.ACRE S WA 5901E :S EXC PaC 15T FED SEl SPO 3Z:8A H H S S ^.CObE .4000~~ 24.0C00- - . , • , . ~ ~ ,7 t t ~ ➢ .K~ ~-6 • . r ` I8552-2330 0~7237C _ r.~.A--B R~r4D'~:EuR~ CC, GQ==ticCRES E112 ~ S G F 3 - - • - - - - - - - - - - ~ i°552-233I 9 2 6 15 7~ .l:3SI = C, N; 3 r, p:.5 E I/2 C I / i. -3 c p 3 ~ 1~552-2332 5GC-4C~S 3~TTY J'~4 5ELCUrsS Gh==':4r2E5 '~!1/Z OF w Zi2 s e= E%3 l • . I85r-2-2333 76C2090043 ,r,OLLIc~J B.^.CnNS GF=r'4~►eR~. W I/2 ~ OF E 1I2 W 1/2 S 0~ R.R 7:3 . , 18552-2334 gl4b29 3 W A 3RANi.r% c ~ .G EN A i,RE S SC', FT_ _4R _P/'.Y V I T H I N =I/Z FZ 7 ~ ^ K . y 13552-2335 q__ 524_lb8___ ' ' - ~R~T .AVE F _~C~NS ~R=_ti tC ~-S ~ # , - 5C'F-T ~;?.?'%h RR ;/1-' WITHiti +,112 32 ~ 18552-2435 269667C L JAvIy- paCONS GREENACRES PTN N ~ ~ QF RR EXC NWY 824 ~ _ / ~ ~ 18552-2439 20646-,C G J PICh:/ B4CGhS 40C TC G4E=ra:CRcS --~~of - - P T rJ _ S O F . -N L h 0 F _ QR E Y C F t. Y 924 . c LN EtILY Rl1a LN OF ~1B~h SPu E ~ R/ W lN OF SO SPG E INLQe:i t'4P IK - . t y Cl F C GT-AL t? 0 _AVc TH. S L Y -i. G._ El TO PT JN _ lM 140FT S TO PQ2 TH ~ ~ 1355 Z-2~.40 5_81_13oC_ .~_BDCC_NS - aLD _TC_ Gk F__ NA ~R_F S ~ PTN BZ4 D4F; BEG QT INT=RC c7F E ~ INLAND cMv IRE RR TH SWLY GLC N1 EM PIR:._P.q_ TO__ PT__QF _INTEP,S W ITH ELY UN LiF CATALGO aVE 100.,FT TH . TN N ALG c- LN 14CFT TO P03 - - - ~ 18552-2740 61+2118C T4OMAS CmU ~CK 6ACONS Gr2E=tvACR=S c"XC -TV 9 z HWY 827 ' ~ - - ~ _ __y--- ~ _ - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ ~ 18552-2639 7303270140 CPP CN OF CHRIS~ e~iCOT~S GR."cFNU-RES EXC NWY s?6 , 1E552-284I e69769C GORDuP4 J TAYLGR BaCOhS GR=-"cNarQ;S EXC Hd Y 6 2 8 _ - _ ~ . _ . - - i , ~ . . o r_UT L;,RDS P ;P, C. E LS PRINT_ LIt-'ES NH ; 11 27 35 .CO~E ~ , . i ~ - _ . - - , • . . ~ . - - ~ - , J O6 v LJ ~ E.-R, e 5 1~ .Y_L _ = 3 _ SPOKANE COUt1TY :EQ1. LAC1D E (L P AR C EL _ DllC UMt NT---- - NUh3-R hUM3cP ASScSS=D OwP•i=n 1E'G4t OESCPIpTiON OF Pr2iPERTY 18552-1012 659477C CUNNII`IGNAM ETAL BACONS GR:-:ENACRcS B10 Y . PTN LYG E OF EL GF W1/2 CF TR 7 c) - - - - - - - ~a T _ "dW C 0 R 0 F_ _T S 2 4 4F_T_ TH_$_E 1 SECG2 E 16.5FT W CF cL CF TR 10 TF (L TH ;N TO N:-::CDR L10 TH W TI! PQa 15552-1013 E4G389C 0 MuLLERLEILE BACONS GREEMACRES P7 aF B C<8c.t; AT A PT20CF7 N OF SE COR L ~ COQ L I4 TH S TO SWCOR 7H c TO ~ - ---~y~-o7•--- E16.5FTEEXC ST - - - - 18552-1I43 657049C JOHy WMILLFR BACGNS GREcy4CRES PT QF ` - /ka;~c~ 11; tXC E160FT DF S15C~FT ~XC ST __18552-I149___ 75O8200I84 _ DONAL D__ A_.K I RBY____ 6ACaNS_ GREcyACRE S_ ~/73/ 7 W90F T OF t 1b0FT OF S 15aFT 811 EXC ~ ~ 18552-1150 ~7403190091 GF GP S GHARST 6dCGNS GREENaCR_ S ( /7 3 /~~Lf a 7.~'T `r SI50FT 811 EXC ST 18552-1216 9575683 wM E NAOwOP.iVI~ BACONS GRtEyACRES i_._._- . ~.,.5134..4FT OF E Z52.bFT DF 612 t XC S1 / . _ 18552-I217_. 269253_ _ _W c_ N~DWOR,,IO- BtACGNSGREt"ifiQC_RtS_ E 112 OF BLK 22 E XC S 134.4FT OF E li j 18552-1218 17752C3 - ~ -~d - ~ "~ADWORtvI C -._~~---Sf`.CONS GRFE~iACRcS - ( w112 OF BLtc i? ExC ST , - - - - - - - - _ - _ - - . _ . ( 18552-2025 7512030162 M r{E: UE TT / Bc1Cr"-NS GFcEEtvACRES BZO . . C I8552-2126 74C2C5CCC4 NEELY L 3rLL BACC-ilS GRFFiVQrRcS ElIC - - - G F T 0 F S 3 6~ F T - 8 19552-2127 5Z0773C 0 STAUFFER ~ S4CONS GRLENAC°ES_~XC_ E~ F T OF 53E5FT ~2I LF~S G/7~ o/ ~D 11552-2229 5667I7C i ~~A N Gnc~-~Uf-~ BACGti5 :.DI TQ ~ , - GR cLEN : CRtS 822 iVCh-GPERATIIVG G:~i ~ l 18552-2230 096552t C SCMl.IcNvL R ~ BACONS CRCEENACRESY W1/2 OF ~ {TR 22 IESS R/W , , - ~ . ~ 1+'+ 1 S L LuElJ ....•~ti.te„~ / ; F P R ~ P = F. T Y ~ ~ - _ - - - X P AY E R ~ ~ ~ - - - - - - _ _ . - - E h G l t .f a N I C E - - t; I/Z e= TR 7=XTD SLY flF F~L DESC ?"IRC EL BEG E 17222 MISSIQh! AVE S2-4PT TN ScLY Tr- QT Wl;ICH '1EAS 20{}FT N QF_i._ GR _E+`t11C_RES__WA 5901~ ==L Lr T~ LC i c-f S Tv Sl T~-i c 16. ~iF T TC SEC CR = T-4 W i C FG3 r , PT _OF gARNSLEY VERNCN E A ~T N Cr= S-E CCR L 1C TH NWLY TJ j~, PT?40FT "1- CF E 172C3 BOCNc AVE ~ SWCO~. ~ H ~ T~ S-C`K TF? N TG 8=G EXC ~RcENACRES Wa~ S90I6 - Q T OF INC MUT SAV' 3K Ob S15%".,FT "XC ST -06 OC2E075 ~r . . _Atr+DANL._CL_I_FFOR_Q -0 ~ - ~ S150FT 611 P-XC ST E 17317 BDONE AVE CRccNACRES WQ 1;901E - _ • G H A R S T l AR R 1l. G _ .1 ExC r-T r 17323 BoONE avE G PE E haCRES WA SaoIE ~ NACWCRNICK wItiinM E - r= TQ F 512 XC _ S T - - _ . = _ _ 17421 _ _B C GN E._ A V E _ • rREtrtACRES WASH 1;90 1c- - - WGRti`_ICK._1~ILLIAM~E ' 5134. T CF E162.EFT 4 I7=~2I BtJGNE AVE GRrErIQCRES WASN S9016 L: - ^ - - - - - - - ~ - _ - to R y i Cx E Lv EY C ST BOONE l►VE. GR'C'ENACRES Wll 99QIb ' 820 ONB G2EENQCRES ~ - HEUETT E-I 1C KIOt1RKQS DANNY N F 174I9 EATALOCs AVE ~ - GRcEr~4CRES WA 49016 . . C-. . =XC P4C 1ST FEO SEL SPQ aZl l,' ~P R/~+ - 13 121125 - , - E:afvCFRFsLRG WM e\,-GPEPI:.TFNG GO~ F/W LYIt,G ~,ITNI~. S; oLK F-' 17215 CATAlt30 AVE GREEFiACRES WQ 590I6 _ ~ . w1J2 MARTIN.~GAYLE A~-------- - CJV„iY ~,~~~:t - 17506 MONTGQ~~tERY AVE - • ~ 1 ~ rLt•i.~-~.~y•.~ J .<<< ~ s: ~ ~ nn,'1r'~{ Jr.G'-'lli=5 1\nTi-: {~.D GRc= r'tCRES '~!Q 59o1c Pr..~r T ' - , - ~ - - ~ . ~ c l/~ ^ t~~ I~: G4YlE 14 i: 7i: • ~ 17~C6_ MCNTGOMCRY F". GRcE'vACRES WA 19901E ~ N 0F OAVIS IILLIAN , ~ ` - . Y .:A . . ~ RUM ~ t~z"c I" 'r e r.s r, ~ - t .d, IV- • ' Tin • '7'ou are hereby notifaed, that on mrAy, 14, 1975 o• a`~ hour of 9:30 A.M. I said day in Conference Room A, Mallon Avenue ~ances Spokane County Court House An ~aex Spokc ~ Ilashangton, The SPOKANE COUNTY PLA►NNING COMi ,]ON wilt conduct ea public hearing t~ ~~~~~~~~~UCA-ZoD OF FWNCIs CGfiT=M. EAS? 12019 SPR~~~ AVENLT]E, MCKA:+IE, ~~AS1HLN=34, to filar A PiAT TO 8=KNCWN AS CONYWI ADrI~CN. ALSO TO CGNSIC12R CRAM$Fi^ ~E 4701~' IVAP Mi AG13CULTURAL 10 SMGLE FAMII.Y PMM£N'I'ML ~~r/CR TWa-11r~ VWLY M=£NTIAL QN T'HE PRGPE.RW DESCRIBEL B='~ a SUCH ZCNE +CIiANGE Tt~3 BECOZMIE EEFEC'A= ONLY i~ON i°'HE F3 C}F7"HIE MIAL PLAt* OR WTS, OF SUCli VXPE;M. PL-1072-77 eLnd 7E- 8--77 ;ene1'al desc ~'i~$~Ol~ O~ ~I~~~: s~U~ 18, TowashlA as N.. ~►~e 4s, E.~~, irac3 22 of 8acon's Additian Gmenacres, a=ept r8llro~ 4:7ht of way. o' (38trosen 3atarsLate 90 arti Buslla;=N-cr thsrn RQliroad ~ght of waY. ~pproxtmately : 630 ~~t east of F!asa Ftoad). FOR FURTHER DETAILS contact the Spokane Cot 40 n'g Commission, Public Works Building, N. 811 Jell lanni on Street, Spokane, Washingtom ~ Direcfior of Plan~ing ~3~Woe• Cauntr Plaening Coinmiss 6+ eae Pwe. coww. 3-e3 APPLICATION PROCESS: , APPI on ■ ■ ~ • a . s • • ■ r • . +'aymGnt and iL4::'4iGlpti 4i ! . ■ ■ • • V4 ~~ga+ Desfa+~iptiV#A • i i . i ! i ! . i • ~ P ~I T `ive (5) Pl3 t T`iaps . a . . . . . . . i , . 3.wo (2) PL~~~i~wl MC~.pw~? w • • ■ . ~t r +e • J ~yy ~py♦~ ~ ii~3sess},~p~~.L~n'9? i'►ap e i s # . # i * i • • Hea.LtSI Disl,l i-4rt 3'1G!/1o i • r ! • r r I - Water District ~ Lettcr ~ . . ~ . . . County Utility I~~partment Farxxvironmental. Checklist . . . . , . , ~ REVIEW PROCESS: ~eliver Preli~inary Plats To. E#Rgineei ti7 • s • • • • ab . r a . a • • i • V~~lit.Les . ■ • • . • s ■ . • • rt • • • . . . } - ~eaLlty,, IL' ~isirr1.ct • • r • • e • • • s . ♦ . ■ - I,ncorporated Cities, w:ith deadline letter State Highway, with dead.la.ne letter Check Lega1 Description . . . . , ~ . Zoning Deterrmination . . . . . . . . Or+dinanc+e ComplianCe . r . . . . . . 4.a1~ ~lan 1~~~ieW r • ■ ■ . ■ r r r r +r r RC7ad A1igme21t & StLIb StrE'et . . . . 11wnersS1ips • ■ . . • . • r +r r . w • ~~~pe s a r ■ ■ . s r * r . s • r r LQt S1.zes . i a ~ • . ■ • • . . s w E~d.~~ing Land V se P1an * • ■ r . • r IrZ Check Cornpreh.en~ive Plan . . . . . . Llrainage . r ► . w • r w . +r w M ■ • I - d:11'-I.g~neers, Memo ■ . r . . s • # . . +r Fii. e 11istri~`it 1'1emQ' w • : ■ s r r. r . - - Rlt c'l1.LL1114 endat1 Vk3s ii i • • ~ a i Y~ M • Enviranmenta.l Checkl~~~ Review . . . Threshold Determination . . , ~ . . . ~ , iigGiJlda +++.ipL7 ■ i i i i ♦ • ■ • ! ! • M PZ"oL3f Reat~ ~ge7~da Pagt i . . . . . a ~ Post Notice of P..iblic ~earing . , . . ~ S1.L:ik.AIA$j Pd3QUIREMUY1S s r ! ■ r 4~ # i • • 1Y ~ * • ■ ■ . a • r . . ~ * w ~ a s r t • ■ ■ r r r ~ • a ■ r r + . e ■ r • e r . ~ ■ ~e r ■ ~ . ■ ~r r 4 N0. 78 578 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON. FINDINGS AND ORDER REGARDING PRELIMINARY PLAT PROPOSAL AND ZONE CLASSIFICATION UPGRADING PE-1072-77 CONKLIN ADDITION ZE-8-77 AGRICULTURAL TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND/OR TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WHEREAS, the Spokane County Planning Commission did after public hearing on January 14, 1977 forward to the Board of County Commissioners a recommendation that the preliminary plat be known as Conklin Addition (File #PE-1072-77) and zone classification upgrading to the Single Family Residential or Two Family Residential zone classification (File #ZE 8-77) be denied,and WHEREAS, Frank Conklin did request a special hearing before the Board of County Commissioners to present evidence and testimony against the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny the above described preliminary plat and zone recl assi fi cati on, and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners did hold a public hearing on March 10, 1977 to consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the testimony and requests of the applicant, objectors, and other interested parties, and WHEREAS, at said hearing opportunity was afforded those favoring and those opposing the above described preliminary plat proposal and zone reclassification, the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, having fully considered the testimony given, the records and minutes of the Planning Commission, the environ- mental review, and all other evidence submitted, and having personally acquainted themselves with the site and vicinity in question does hereby find that the con- clusions of the Planning Commission were generally valid and sufficient. Now, therefore, the Board of County Commissioners does conclude that the preliminary plat be known as Conklin Addition and zone reclassification upgrading to the Two Family Residential zone classification should be, and hereby is, denied. MAY 41978 DATED THIS DAY OF , 1978 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASNINGTON HARRY M. IARNED, CHM. ATTEST: RAY W. PRISTENSEN UERNON .-OHLAND JERRY C. KOPET Clerk o the Boa . 4. . . . BY: ' Deputy