ZE-231-79
w
ZONE/PUD RECLASSIFICATION CHECKLIST
Contact: File # c J i'
A6 PART I
ENGINEER'S SECTION MAP
ASSESSOR'S SECTION MAP, (Legal Description, 400 foot boundary outside
ownership)
LK L ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION, (F or m A)
ZONING WORKSHEET
_ L ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
G l PLOT PLANS (5)
S
NS (5)
GRAPHICS PACKET
SLIDES (minimum size film 126) (date)
APPLICATION FILING FEE (s) RECEIPT NUMBER 3 4 / l Cf
TITLE REPORT OF PROPERTY OWNERS z(date)
PART II
COUNTY AGENCIES NOTIFIED
NOTICE OF HEARING FORM (AGENDA) TYPED, (date)
ORIGINAL GIVEN APPLICANT date
STAFF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
STAFF ANALYSIS
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING (A Sign - 4x4) (date)
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING SIGNED
MAIL AGENDA TO CONCERNED AGENCIES (date)
(date)
ANALYSIS MAILED TO APPLICANT
(date)
PART IIL
HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE'S ACTION: APPROVED
DENIED
CnNTINtIEh
MINUTES it }
SEPA's Notice: ut:►
BONDING (Landscape) ACCEPTED _
(date)
RETURNED _
(da te)
r~ -
-7:! 21~614 ex
NO RA
3A ► ~,,r t
•
i
k
h ;
;G
Fl, 1! 11 1'
~rj,j4 i
N
i le No . ZE-231-79
SPOKANE COUN f Y
HLARING EXAMINER CUMMIT 1 EE
FINDINGS AND ORDER
A. IN 1 RODHC 1 1 ON
1 his natter laving collie before the Examiner Committee on December 13
19/9, and the members of the Committee present being Eldon Thomas,
Chairman, Jane Myers and Paul Sceva, Jr.,
and there being the following persons present who wish to request approval of a
Zone Change, Robert J. Bethards, representing applicant for a Zone
Reclassification, Agricultural to Residential Office for the
purpose of Two Office Buildings/43 Apartments
B. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the existing land use in the area is Residential, commercial, I-#90, .
cultivated and undeveloped.
2. That the Cornprehensive Plan designates this area as appropriate for
residential development.
3. That the existing zoiiMy of the property described in the application is
Agricultural
4. That the provisions of' RCW 43.21C (The State Environmental Policy Act)
have been complied with.
5. That the proper legal requirements for advertisement of the Agenda Item
have been fulfilled.
6. That this proposal pax/is nol in conflict with the provisions of adopted
reguldtion .
I. 1 hat the land in this area is suitable/txc s" abika for the proposed use, or
uses within the proposed Zone Classification.
1
f .
File No. ZE-231-79
8. That the proposed use is compatible/MIMAUN 14 with existing uses in the
area.
9. That the uwr)ers of adjacent lands expressed neither/approval/disapproval/
Aj@i of the proposed use.
10. The Hearing Examiner Committee finds/dW#x0S8*xYCPJthe proposed use to be
in harmony with the general purpose and will riot be otherwise detrimental
to the public health, safety, and welfare.
H. The following are additional findings of fact considered by the Hearing
Examiner Committee:
a)
b)
C. ORDER
The Hearing Examinee Committee, pursuant to the aforementioned, finds that the
application of Stage One Realty, Inc, for a Zone Reclassification
as described in the application should be approved /otanimix
Special conditions or Contingencies applied to motion:
k. That the Hearing Examiner Committee after hearing all testimony and a
review of the stat l analysis adopts the proposed declaration of non-
significance and directs the chairman of the committee to sign the final
declaration of non-significance.
2
n SC2~ J
!PzrLO5
Re--,x~ U41 cs~- 7h'12 I . ~
4 Z~
File No. ZE-231-79
Motion by: Myers Seconded by: Sceva, Jr.
Vote: Unani»>ous
HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE
airman
ATTEST: FRED L. DAYHARSH
Planning Director
By:
3
STAFF REPORT
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 1979
TO: HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF
SUBJECT: ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE-231-79
1. GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Stage One Realty Incorporated
STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representative
PROPERTY OWNER: Bernard E. Johnson
REQUESTED ZONING: Residential Office
EXISTING ZONING: Agricultural
PROPOSED USE: Office space and 43 apartments
PROJECT LOCATION: South side of Nora Avenue approximately
1 , 000 feet west of Mamer Road.
I I . SITE PLAN INf=ORMAT ION
SITE SIZE: Approximately 2.88 acres
SITE CHARACTERISTICS: Site contains a single family residence and
several outbuildings. Area i~ i'orested ~vlth a steep slope on the SOUther-1-1
portion.
NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER: Several zone changes have taken place
in this area very recently. Both Residential Office and Multi-family Sub-
urban zoning have been approved to the west. Large lot single family use
exists to the east.
LAND USE: Site Single family and outbuildings
North 1-90, K & M Engineering and Tool and
undeveloped
East Single Family
West Single Family
South Single Family, cultivated
ZONING: North Agricultural, established, 1942
East Agricultural, established, 1942
West Agricultural, established, 1942,
Multiple Family Suburban, established 1919
South Agricultural, established, 1942
Northwest Restricted Industrial, established 1942
Southeast Multiple Family Suburban, established 1927
1
70NF RFCLASSIFICATION "'IMBFR: 7F-231-79
II. SITE PLAN INFORMATION (continued)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential neighborhood
NUMBER OF EXISTING BUILDINGS: 1 Single Family dwelling and
several outbuildings
NUMBER OF BUILDINGS PROPOSED: 5
Number of Units Proposed: 43
Total Square Feet: Approximately 57,108 sq. ft.
Total Building Coverage: 23,604 sq. ft.
Density For Apartment: 18.8%
Apartment sq. ft.: 41,108
Land Per Unit: 1991.86
Office sq. ft.: 16,000
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES: 21~ stories
PARKING REQUIRED: 105
PROVIDED: 117
III. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Several recent gone changes have occurred in this area all to more
intensive residential office and Multi-Family uses. The applicant has failed
to meet side yard setbacks requirements on each office building and is
slightly below county minimum of requiring 2,000 sq. ft. of land per
apartment unit. In addition, consideration should be given to circulation
on site. Congestion and on site conflicts could possibly be avoided if
separate points of ingre,,' fc'r h-t►-, the r~ffl(_e tine
and the apartment use.
IV. AGENCIES CONSULTED/COMMENTS RECEIVED
a) COIINTY FIEF MARSHAL
1 . J he site is located in Fire District fi i .
2. Mains and hydrants are required. Access plans for firefighting equip-
ment pparound the buildfng shall be approved prior to building permit
b) COUrJTY uaE c61NEER
1. Applicant shall construct cement concrete curb, sidewalk and
pave to existing pavement on Nora Avenue. Applicant must be a
willing participant in any future Local Improvement District
(LID), Road Improvement District (RID), or County Road Project
(CRP).
2. Appropriate on and off-site drainage and access plans shall be
approved by the Spokane County Engineer's Office prior to the
issuance of building permits for the project.
2
ZONE RECLASSIFICAT ION NUMBE_ R: IL-('3 I-/1)
IV. AGENCIES CONSULTED/COMMENTS RECEIVED (continued)
b) COUNTY ENGINEER (continued)
3. The design, location and arrangement of parking stalls shall be
in accordance with standard traffic engineering practices. Any
portion of the project which is to be occupied or traveled by
automobiles shall be maintained in hard surface paving.
c) WATER PHRVEYOR
1. Purveyor is Consolidated Irrigation and will supply the site with
adequate water for domestic fire and irrigation uses.
d) COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
1. No comments received.
e) SEPA
1. That the provisions of SEPA's Notice of Action pursuant to
43.21C.080 RCW be initiated by the applicant within thirty (30)
days of final action of the Responsible Administrative Body and
be completed before any site improvements are made.
2. The request has proven to be environmentally non-significant.
Therefore, a final declaration of non-significance shall be signed
by the Chairman of the Hearing Examiner Committee.
f) ZONING
1. The applicant shall develop subject property generally in accordance
with the amended development plan submitted at the hearing presented to
the Hearing Examiner Committee. Minor variations when approved by the
Zoning Administrator will be permitted, including, but not limited to
the following changes: Building location, landscape plans, and
general allowable uses of the permitted zone. All variations must
conform to regulations set forth in the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.
The original intent of the development plans shall be maintained.
2. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for
maintenance acceptable to the Spokane County Zoning Administrator shall
be submitted with a performance bond for the project prior to release
of building permits.
3. Direct light from any exterior area lighting fixture shall not extend
over the property boundary.
4. Approval by the Zoning Administrator of a specific lighting and
signing plan for the described property prior to the release of any
building permits.
5. No structures on site shall exceed 2 stories in height.
3
OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Date November 30
Inter-office Communication
TO Zoning Administrator
From County F,nginaar
Subject M 231-79
#15 - on Nora Ave. (then add #16)
#19
#20
Form 327-C R
t 'Comm .2m, 1"''t -A t• 7
1
.
- 'I l
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
{ II~ J BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING
•.r N 721 JEFFERSON STREET
PHONE 456-2205
SPOKANE WASHINGTON 99260
SPOKANE COUNTY COURT HCU5E
File # ZE-231-79
Section 10 Township 25 Range 44
Classification Agricultural to residential
off ice
Proponent Stage One Realty
T H R E S H O L D D E T E R M I N A T I O N
%4ROPOSED/i(NAL DECLARATION OF SIGN IFICANCE/>/ON-SIGNIFICANCE
1. Description of Proposal: 2.88 acres, two (2) Office buildings and 43
Apartments, 23,100 square feet, open space 81%, Parking, 117 spaces.
2. Proponent: Stage One Realty
3. Contact Person: Bob Bethards Phone: 924-9484
4. County Action Requested: Zone reclassification
5. Location of Proposal: Nore Avenue, Southside, 1,000 feet West of Mamer
Road.
6. Lead Agency: SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact on
the environment. An EIS is not required under RCW 43.21C.030 (2) (c).
This decision was made after review by the County of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the Lead Agency.
7. Responsible Official:
Proposed Declaration: Final Declaration:
Name Fred Dayharsh Name Chairma ~ I-Ck'v -L
Signature Signature
Title Director Title Chairman
Department Spokane County Planning Dept. Department Hearing Examiner
Committee
Date November 28, 1979 Date December 13, 1979
Revised 6/1/79
Zo- Z 7 l-7 7
(o - 4 AT SfTd Fitt M AeO A A
7%, L At on S fTe At
8 L' • 00 &E
of to Nw
Z . P40 I~tTA(a E 14
r ,
7 1 r
J
C/ s~
~cz
1
``l ~ _ Ilff
I : 1
I L LJ
G V t
ECE,
v~
oFC 10 >
919
SPOKANE
PtqN 'CO
NI/VG OEP,q UNry
RrAfENT
5POI~ANE VALLE(I FIRE DEPARTIAENT
EAST 10319 SPRAGUE AVE. • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206 • TELEPHONE (509) 928-1700
December 3, L979
Marcia Raines
Zoning Administrator
Broadway Centre Building
Spokane, Washington 99260
Dear Ms. Raines,
The following zone changes have been reviewed for fire
protection:
ZE-1SS-79 Bracken
ZE-227-79 Spokane County Library
ZE-170-79 West
ZE-231-79 Stage One Realty 0001
ZE-228-79 McCaslin
The above need mains and hydrants to be installed.
Access plans for firefighting equipment around the building
shall be approved prior to building permit issuance.
Al Cook
Lt. of Inspectors
AC : sn
ECEIvEID
DEC 6 197y
COUNTY
SPOKANE
C ~EPARTMENZ
PLANNIN
PREVENT FIRES SA VE LIVES
5'1 AFF R[PUR 1
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 1979
TO: HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF
SUBJECT: ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE-231-79
1. GENERAL INFORMATION
APPLICANT: Stage One Rec-rlty Incorpordted
STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representative
PROPERTY OWNER: Bernard E. Johnsen
REQUESTED ZONING: Residential Office
EXISTING ZONING: Agricultural
PROPOSED USE: Office space and 43 apartments
PROJECT LOCATION: South side of Nora Avenue approximately
1 , 000 feet west of Mamer Road.
1. 1 T F nAN !NF'( F;rv1A-lIN
several with Cr ;tE_rE_I~, Ie~pfi ,gin tiiF s~~ilthEr r,
port lor .
NLi~;iIt3URi-Ii~UD LfIAI;AC I Lk: `.je\el'cai zuii e dhange) 1-iave taken plca(.c~
in this area very recently. Both Residential Office and Multi-family Sub-
urban zoning have been approved to the west. Large lot single familti w.,O
exisi s t() 1-he east.
LAND uSL: te :DIngle lamlly alld ouLbulldifiCis
North 1-90, K & M Engineering and Tool C-and
undeveloped
East Single Family
West Single Family
South Single Family, cultivated
ZONING: North Agricultural, established, 1942
East Agricultural, established, 1942
West Agricultural, established, 1942,
Multiple Family Suburban, established 1979
South Agricultural, established, 1942
Northwest Restricted Industrial, established 1942
Southeast Multiple Family Suburban, established 1927
1
ZONE RECLASSIFICATION "IJMBER: ZE-231-79
II. SITE PLAN INFORMATION (continued)
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential neighborhood
NUMBER OF EXISTING BUILDINGS: 1 Single Family dwelling and
several outbuildings
NUMBER OF BUILDINGS PROPOSED: 5
Number of Units Proposed: 43
Total Square Feet: Approximately 57,108 sq. (t .
Total Building Coverage: 23,604 sq. ft.
Density For Apartment: 18.8%
Apartment sq. ft.: 41,108
Land Per Unit: 1991.86
Office sq. ft.: 16,000
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES: 2~ stories
PARKING REQUIRED: 105
PROVIDED: 117
III. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Several recent zone changes have occurred in this area all to more
intensive residential office and Multi-Family uses. The applicant has failed
to meet side yard setbacks requirements on each office building and is
slightly below county minimum of requiring 2,000 sq. ft. of land per
apartment unit. In addition, consideration should be given to circulation
on site. Congestion and on site conflicts could possibly be avoided if
separate points of ingress/egress were provided for both the office use
and the apartment use.
IV. AGENCIES CONSULTED/COMMENTS RECEIVED
a) COUNTY FIRE MARSHAL
1. The site is located in Fire District #1.
2. No comments received.
b) COUNTY ENGINEER
1. Applicant shall construct cement concrete curb, sidewalk and
pave to existing pavement on Nora Avenue. Applicant must be a
willing participant in any future Local Improvement District
(LID), Road Improvement District (RID), or County Road Project
(CRP).
2. Appropriate on and off-site drainage and access plans shall !:)e
approved by the Spokane County Engineer's Office prior to the
issuance of building permits for the project.
2
ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE-231-79
IV. AGENCIES CONSULTED/COMMENTS RECEIVED (continued)
b) COUNTY ENGINEER (continued)
3. The design, location and arrangement of parking stalls shall be
in accordance with standard traffic engineering practices. Any
portion of the project which is to be occupied or traveled by
automobiles shall be maintained in hard surface paving.
c) WATER PURVEYOR
1. Purveyor is Consolidated Irrigation and will supply the site with
adequate water for domestic fire and irrigation uses.
d) COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
1. No comments received.
e) SEPA
1. That the provisions of SEPA's Notice of Action pursuant to
43.21C.080 RCW be initiated by the applicant within thirty (30)
days of final action of the Responsible Administrative Body and
be completed before any site improvements are made.
2. The request has proven to be environmentally non-significant.
Therefore, a final declaration of non-significance shall be signed
by the Chairman of the Hearing Examiner Committee.
f) ZONING
1. The applicant shall develop subject property generally in accord-
ance within the concept presented to the Hearing Examiner
Committee. Minor variations when approved by the Zoning
Administrator will be permitted, including, but not limited to the
following changes: Building location, landscape plans, and
general allowable uses of the permitted zone. All variations must
conform to regulations set forth in the Spokane County Zoning
Ordinance. The original intent of the development plans shall be
maintained .
2. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for-
maintenance acceptable to the Spokane County Zoning Adminis-
trator shall be submitted with a performance bond for the project
prior to release of building permits.
3. Direct light from any exterior area lighting fixture shall not
extend over the property boundary.
4. Approval by the Zoning Administrator of a specific lighting and
signing plan for the described property prior to the release of
any building permits.
S. No structures on site shall exceed 2 stories in height.
3
AGENDA, DECEMBER 13, 1979 TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2205
SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE
Place: Broadway Centre Building, Second Floor
North 721 Jefferson Street, Spokane
1:30 P.M. (contd.)
C. ZONE RECLASSIFICATIONS (contd.)
7 7. ZE-231-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL OFFICE
(Nora Avenue, south side, 1,000 feet west of Mamer
Road. Section 10-25-44)
Proposed Use: 2 Office Buildings/43 Apartments
Applicant: STAGE ONE REALTY (2.88 Acres)
8. ZE-228-79 AGRICULTURAL TO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN
(Blake Road, east side, 120 feet north of 20th Avenue.
Section 27-25-44)
Proposed Use: Apartments
Applicant: McCASLIN 0.5 Acres)
9. ZW-238-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESTRICTED INDUSTRIAL
(Lyons Road, east side, 940 feet south of Highway
No. 2. Section 25-25-41)
Proposed Use: Manufacturing or Warehouse
Applicant: TILFORD (5 Acres)
10. ZN-134-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME
(Northeast corner of Main Street and Railroad
Avenue. Section 23-27-43)
Proposed Use: 137 Mobile Home Sites
Applicant: ROSS (16 Acres)
11. ZS-208-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME
(Northeast corner of Sherman Road.
Section 11-23-42)
Proposed Use: Mobile Home Park
Applicant: ASTROLITE, INC. (40 Acres)
5:00 P.M. - - - - - ADJOURNMENT
A topic of discussion at this hearing may be whether the Hearing Examiner
Committee has adequate information to assess the adverse environmental
impacts of the proposal.
The State Environmental Policy Act WAC 197-20-330(2) provides that:
In the event that the further investigations authorized by this
section do not provide information reasonably sufficient to assess any
potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposal, an E.I.S. shall
be prepared".
2 -
1o
7*
~ N
b
i~ Al i ro 4a
IMMIETTA AVE. I 'Poem
d
s w
• ~~e r W
10 - - - -
>
rr CZ
♦ MANSFICUi
N
M
t
ZE 23-iL 79
E~ 965 NI►fvlV~ T - - - - ' N- _ -
EJ1Y OA• ~ C `P ~ G.,
90
NON^ r
- t f '
-Lr + M 1 5 5 I O N A V E.
. ; M ,
xw E x
SiNTO I T = O IMT f i.
t
O
Q SMA ( W ,,r,..•
' t N ^
B O ON E ~
OE SME T M r U =
C., s = Q =
W ~ •
"s•.tt DESMET avk ATAL p CA7Al DU " - W
x ?
0 t a
w a t _
Ayr r.«v c T. W a
CAMAL ADO w all
r O Q tn. >
c i oil B A Y
P. 12 ell WAY
' E • 2 r
~iA~~•i~Viiio~ ~ 1 ~ w -
x.
K I ~H' h lido r A v i 4-ti
A• A• ,
DLAVE
L/V~ AyL ,
Z . c VAL LEYW
Y WAY VA LL.. E Y WAY
L- F,
I I
0
a Z 0 SIN
t
q sea .7lf
of i ~iDE AIVERSIUE z u i r J•
3 X 3 a -
~ PR GUE ~ vE'.
. 1 10-1000 ,
• PCST t; FI CE
AvCK uV.
3 ~c t-tSC~p(✓1J
O~G.ca, Id OFr tc.~ b~~ .
~I
1
l3 sQ-~~.s ~ space. s
t3 s t3 spc~s
~ v
5
M~
M
L r
'5f acz
Z? 5PF1c~e.S
4•t
2-7 LvA.-
Z7pr
3
V t Gi Y~ :pro e,~: ~J z
L.~
9 C).
~rA flue.
J' O,1 Lau l 1 r o.~~T:l~crl
s i t~ .
File # ~r 3r- 7S
Sec. to T's h' p R' g e
144 - Classification 46
Proponent
S P O K A N E C O U N T Y
STAFF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
I. In accordance with the Spokane County Environmental 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 subse-
quently been reviewed by the
The following data briefly describes the proposal:
A. Actions(s) Requested:
Zone Change t Preliminary Plat Approval ;
Final Plat Approval Change of Condition ;
Other
B. Description of Proposal:
C. Location of Proposal: hlt-1~,~r~ > a.J : j dp . 1000 A c
II. Kevie•,ti, of Checklist:
A. Si fight adverse impacts are noted under the following questions:
(1) Earth (8) Land Use (15) Energy
(2) Air (9) Natural (16) Utilities
Resources
(3) Water (10) Risk of Upset (17) Human
Health
(4) Flora (11) Population (18) Aesthetics
(5) Fauna (12) Housing (19) Recreation
(6) Noise (13) Trans/Circ (20) Arch/Hist
(7) Light/Glare (14) Public (21 ` Other
Services
B. Potentially significant adverse impacts are noted under the following
s
questions: ,S,je- eN nil-rQ~~~ Ac
Revised ~-!1/7q
C . Discussion of impacts identified above:
Ill. Conclusions and Recommendations:
Based on this staff review of the environmental checklist, the staff:
A. Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse
impacts and recommends/issues a proposed declaration of non-
significance.
B. Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse
impacts and, because of the nature of the proposal, recom-
mends/issues a final declaration of non sign ificance.
C. Concludes that potentially significant adverse impacts do
exist and recommends/issues a declaration of significance.
IV. Staff member(s) reviewing checklist:
Revised 6/1/79
` J 3W -i Asc e tej
Wdrj
sj;CC - mac, S GG . 44-
l3 5Q"oue..S l3 space s
l s t3 ceS
t
-7 5'
I
74*49 4
8 uk,c~ - 2 s 'c~
L
3f ace
5J /
Z~ S~.~Flce.s
Z 7 - z ~I- S G(
990o fi , ? s,7~a mss-/ I
N:,rh Aue-
~ ~ ,r l I
t^ Ji ~ l c~t~l1^,r' 1, _I a~~TL1-Ll
low
"M TTWI
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~II'II' BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING N 721 JEFFERSON STREET
+'~j,-41 PHONE 456-2205
"u 1,
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
SPOKANE COUNTY COURT HOUSE CURRENT PLANNING
MEMORANDUM
TO: 1. Department of Ecology 6. East Valley School District #361
2. Social & Health Services 7. Fire District #1
3. Health District 8. Consoildated Irrigation Dist. #19
4. HUD 9.
5. Department of Transportation 10.
FROM: Spokane County Planning Department
North 721 Jefferson
Spokane, WA 99260
(509) 456-2205
Attention: Marcia Raines
REFERENCE: Lead Agency Designation, Threshold Determination, Staff
Review, Environmental Checklist, map; all or some of which are
attached.
Pursuant to WAC 197-10-203, the Spokane County Planning Department, a division
of Spokane County, has determined that the Count
the LEAD AGENCY for the following project: ZE-231-79~ as an ACTING AGENCY, Is
This determination was made in accordance with WAC 197-10-220.
Information on file concerning this proposed action indicates you or you be either an interested party or an AGENCY WITH JURISDICTION (WACr 197-10 040
(4) or an AGENCY WITH EXPERTISE (WAC 197-10-040 (3)).
Accordingly, if you wish to exercise your option to review and comment as provided
in WAC 197-10-340 (5), a proposed Declaration of Nonsignificance was issued on
November 28, 1979. Please respond, if appropriate, on or before December 12,
1979. ,
The subject proposal or action is LOCATED WITHIN THE DESIGNATED SPOKANE
VALLEY SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER AND AQUIFER ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE
AREA AS DESIGNATED BY THE SPOKANE COUNTY 1208' STUDY. Please advise us
as soon as possible as to whether you feel an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
or a Ground Water Impact Evaluation (GWI E) should be prepared.
A public hearing has been tentatively scheduled for is Amato' be held in Broadway
Centre Building, Second Floor Hearing Room, North 721 Jefferson, Spokane,
Washington.
Enclosures
Revised 6/1/79
' A
r ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
File
a.a••+s cauwncauwt.ou~c
Sec-Twp-Rng •
Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RC'd, requires all state and local
governments agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private
proposals. The Act also requires that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared for all major actions
significantly (and "adversely", as per WAC 197-10) affecting the quality of the physical environment. The
purpose of this checklist is to 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 information 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 award of and concer themselves with the degree of impact, asking you
for more information, if necessary. 'There explanations of your answers are r%quirea, or where you believe
an explanation would be helpful to government decision-makers, include your explanation in the space provided,
or use additional oases, 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 will
help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review without unnec-
essary delay.
The following questions apply to your total proposal, not just 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 proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the
future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review
now, without duplicating paperwork in the future.
No application shall be processed until the checklist has been completed and returned to the appropriate
County department. State law reouires explanations for every "Yes" and "maybe" answer on the checklist.
The person completing the form may be required to provide explanation for 'no" answers, and in some cases,
more detailed information to aid in a threshold determination.
NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies 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.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM R
1. BACKGROUND _Gt+o Y, vjf
1. Name of Proponent: C~1~2, ~~'dt, `1-µi-' Phone Number Te T
2. Address of Proponent: x- A
3. Date Checklist Submitted:
4. Agency Requiring Checklist:
5. Name of Proposal, if Applicable:
5. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design
elements, and other factors that -il give an accurate and rstanding of its s ope and nature):
7. Location of Proposal (d scribe the physical setting of the Proposal, as well as the extent of the land
area affected by any environmental impacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate
understanding of the environmental setting of the propo al): n A
a)eA Pt~25_.L_
8. Estimated Date for completion of Proposal: 1 t81
9. Lis;, of all Permits, Licenses or Government ao r vats Required for the Proposal ;`ederaI, s-taT, anc
local - including rezones;: U ~S
?ACE FOR -XPLANA7I0N iS .NADcn,UATE, PLEASE A1^,C,;~ +ODIT:CNAL ?:GcS. i
:Ca. -_~o you, or the owner in the event you do not own the subject land, have any plans for future :ddi~i^ns.
expansion, or `urther activity related to or connected with this prooosai? .f yes, explain:
V_b
1
10b. Do you own or have options on land nearby or adjacent to this proposal's location? If yes, explain:
11. Do you know of any plans by others including the owner which may affect the property covered by your
proposal or land adjacent or nearby? If yes, explain:
- KO
12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the proposal; if none has been
completed, but is expected to be it at some future date, describe the nature of such application
form: Sew t3/l'
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required)
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic structures? . . . . . . .
(b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? . . . . .
(c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? . . . . . . . . . . .
(dl The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic
or physical features? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(e) Any increase in wind or water erosion or soils, either on or off the site?.
(IF SPACE FOR EXPLANATION IS INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES.)
(f) Changes in deposition of erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream x
or the bed of the ocean or L any bay inlet or lake? . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
K~~ Explanation: tut k~2~2S i
1 A.
2. Air. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No
(a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? . . . . . . . . . . . . X
(b) The creation of objectionable odors? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~c
(c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in
climate, either locally or regionally? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X
bJQ tXLL-
Explanation:c! lCJAug7LX-r<-dN
3. Water. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe .40
(a) Change in currents, or the course or direction of water movements,
in either marine or fresh waters? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X
(b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?. . . . . . . . . .
(e) Oischarge into surface water, or in any alteration of surface water
quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?. . . . . . %1/
(e) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an x
aoui fer by cuts or excavations' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either througn direct
injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosoates,
detergents waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances
into the around waters? . . . . . . . • • . • • • • • • . • • • • • • • •
(i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available Tor
public water suoplies? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exolanation: W ~ Li suaico-
~l~lS Jr W l~t~ -P1~ -
4. Flora. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No
(a) Change in the diversity of species, or nuber of any species of
flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora, and
aquatic plants)? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /X
(b) Reduction of the nubers of any unique, rare or endangered
species of flora? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? . . . . . . . . .
(d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exolanation•
5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No
(a) Changes in the diversity of species, or number of any species
of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? . . . . . . . . . .
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered
species of fauna? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . k
(c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result
in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? . . . . . . . . . . .
(d) Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation:
6. Noise. Yes Mavbe No
(a) Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? . . . . . .
Exolanation•
7. Liaht and Glare Yes Mavbe No
(a) Will the propos 1 roduce new l i`~ht o,~r,, glare? . . .
LJ~Z 6- tk-s `
Explanation:
8. Land Use. Yes Maybe No
(a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or .x
plannea land use of an area? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exolanation: s,f- jS za till L' 10
lateral Resour_es. .4ill one orooosal result in: 'es e 'to
a) increase in the rate cf use of anv natural resources'. . . . . . . . . . . . 1C
~t) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ y
xo1anatian: (r:-(, ) 1,1e ~ c) 0 &%+r" c>-,ng, .2 aferags(y
10. :Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the Yes Maybe No
release or hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation:
11. Population. Yes Maybe No
Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation: :-ncrec.Q ria~ cr~v C 'N c en
12. Housin. Yes Maybe Yo
Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for
additional housing? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X
Explanation:
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No
(a) Generation of additional vehicular movement: . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? . . .
(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement
of people and/or goods? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?. . . . . . . . . . . . X
(f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists, or pedestrians . ..A.. . . . . . . .
Ex 1 nation:
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result Yes Maybe No
in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the
following areas:
(a) Fire protection? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b) Police protection? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(c) Schools? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(d) Parks or other recreationl facilities? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..7L
(e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? . . . . . . . . . . . . CL
(f) Other governmental services? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
S
Exolanation: 15 ef aue-,
L
15. Energy. Will ,hp orooosal result in: Yes Mavbe `moo
(a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~C
(b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require
the development of new sources of energy _
Exolanat;on:(l'1tggLj . os
1
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, Yes Maybe No
or alterations to the following utilities:
(a) Power or natural gas? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A
(b) Communication systems? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(c) Water? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(d) Sewer or septic tanks? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(e) Storm water drainage? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(f) Solid waste nd dis sal? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exo 1 ana ti o Jim A-e_ kekqS - h~ S
S2
Yes Maybe No
11. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazards
or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)?. . . . . . . . . . . .C
Explanation:
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or Yes Maybe No
view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to public view? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation: D C,rLJs yr\ ire,.,\ ec. sft~nc~ c w--
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or Yes Maybe No
quantity of existing recreational opportunities? . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation:
20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a Yes Maybe o
significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building?.
Explanation:
III. SIGNATURF
I. the undersigned, swear under the penalty of perjury that the above responses are made
truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be any will-
full misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part, Spokane County may with-
draw any declar ti of nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance u n th ifs the ist.
Proponent: `
Date:
(Please Print or Type)
Proponent: Address: S~ ~t3 PAS
Phone:
Ibuv
person completing form: VJ,,,LJ K~~~ ~'k Phone: 91-4-1470 Oate: l
Deoartment or Office of County Reviewing Checklist: Z7 r JL11A11-2
staff Member(s) Reviewing Checklist: 17 J A ;.J
5
ZE _231 _
c2 fO..~ c a AvclKL)I-
1-3 s t3 ~p•
V
Z
I
f Sa (c. 3f ace
1
Z~
2-7 wn.~s - Z S~tar1 e.f
Zoo=
I
i
cs
AjruJ.iu.,r~
J
1
cz>3crl- AYE : L. a T
L- 9~
4, rA Aug
`''s ~heC,tr.
r G i-~ ivi H
APPLICATION FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION
SPOKANE COUNTY
Date: y Application No: Ems'
Name of Applicant: ~i' c'~~ ~~~L • J o
Street Address of Applicant: -%LJ1 - NS Rnes Z~~j
~
City: State: C023 Telephone No.-92-4-9-4
Existing Zoning Classification: nadL
Date Existing Zone Classification Established:
Existing Use of Property: Proposed Zone Classification:
Proposed Use of Property: Vr ~~.S &,A &~mek4
IBS l'J .
Legal Description of Property: Ttc;~~
Zao-cp,
o~ ~5c O~ U,.12St' 13
4L
-'"encJ auz~~ (LILVIn w4twc"-~Jc-i
't I U ~'J _J J
Section: io Townshi~x 2.5 Range: 't
Source of Legal: ~5``ZwC
Assessors Parcel Number: (See Tax Statement) US44 ''~05 ~ a-od ~5 ,bS4
Property Size:
Total amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner or sponsor:
Street Address of the Property: t3114 MOW-
Who Holds Title to the Property: &rttat4
If you do not hold title to the property affected by this application, what is your interest
in it?
Furnish a letter from a Title Insurance Company, showing the property owners of record,
their address, within 400 feet of the exterior boundaries of subject property.
-1-
Application for Zone Reclassification (Continued)
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED:
1. What are the changed conditions , of the sit and the ar a, which you fee mak
this proposal warranted? 1-4 :~L' S
4L we-1 6~ 4AS CtLvbsa 6R, tr-cel~b~
1 ~.c 2~ S l.Hl~tX;'-~ Ito `C ~ ~►rv ,
2. What effect will the proposed zone reclassification have on the adjacent properties ?
41, - ~J-
3. Can a reasonable return from a reasonable use of the property in question be
secured under the existing zone classification? (If no, why?)
Lei cuc S ItGS I "'nj Cam u.~e..
K#-> 5 e-
~L:4(e, a. c
I, the undersigned, swear under the penalty of perjury that the above responses are made
truthfully and to the best of my knowledge, in accordance with the requirements of the
Spokane County Planning Department and the laws of the State of Washington.
(Signed)
b
(Date)
-2-
ZONING WORKSHEET For,-,I
Application # 4M4WP f~
This document will provide the Planning Department Staff with written verification that:
1) The site's legal description has been reviewed by the Engineering and Planning
Departments who agree that the legal description is acceptable.
2) That the proposed development can meet the requirements of the County Health
District, the County Engineers, the County Utilities Department, County Fire
Marshal and Water Purveyor.
3) That adequate provisions for the proposed development can be provided for:
residential, commercial, industrial and mining uses.
An applicant is required to resent a copy of the proposed DEVELOPMENT PLAN with
this worksheet to each of the listed agencies for their review and determination as
to whether the proposal can meet minimum State, County and Health District require-
ments. (Note: Applicant shall contact indicated agencies in sequence listed below)
PART I - to be completed by Spokane County Engineer
A preliminary consultation meeting has been held with the Spokane County Engineer's
Office and the proposed development has been reviewed.
1) State DOT Review required: Yes No.
2) :~f Access to be limited to: /~DraG ,
3) Y~s Access permit is required.
4) a. *a Dedication for right-of-way is required.
( feet on Road, Street, Avenue.)
b . Radius ( foot) is required.
(On and Road, Street, Avenue.)
C, Slope easement is required ,
5) e-5 Drainage Plan is required. on-site off-site.
~4W VG 740 6) Ye- -S Paving Permit is required. feet on / Road.)
7) )le-5 Curb is required, (along Road, Street, Avenue.)
8) N Sidewalk is required. (along Road, Street, Avenue.)
9) Applicant must be willing to participate in future LID/RID, on Alora
10) Legal description is acceptable as reviewed.
Parcel No.
Comments:
Signed Da to
ZONING WORKSHEET-continued-2
T-
1,..1 .1AL
and the proposed development plans have been reviewed.
1) The proposed development is not located in a public sewer service area
operated and maintained by Sp kane. Couryty.
2) A storm drainage plan is/is not eq ed for the proposal
Comments:
'Z
Signed Da to
PART III- to be completed by Spokane County Water Purveyor
A. Water Supply
1) The proposed development is located with the Cc A) 50L- i 17aTe.o IV- fL~ (aP - i00
district boundaries.
2) Satisfactory agreement/arrangement has/howaW been made to serve this
proposal
3) We are/are -not able to supply this development with adequate potable
water.
4) We are/are 4aet able to supply this development with adequate water for
fire flow. "r-r_ox Zoo CPM - MAX P+M r-L-ow
5) Water Purveyor is public, private community,
private, other:
6) Water system is/i_ot under State Utilities jurisdiction.
7) Indicate size of main for hook up: !D inches.
8) Distance to main: 4BUTTS PIZ.o P_ feet. Gv
SEC_ MC-4t.
B. to be completed by Appli^ cant
1) Individual water supply will be developed with/without fire protection
capabilities.
Comments:
Signed Date
C. If proposal is outside the boundaries of any water district, the State Department of
Social and Health Services must review the proposal prior to application.
1) I/We have reviewed the proposal. It appears to meet State requirements for
public water.
Signed - D.S.H.S.
ZONING WORKSHEET continued-3
PART IV - to be completed by Sgokane County Fire Marshal
1) Proposal is located in Fire District # z
2) Access and circulation for emergency vehicles is required.
3) Fire flo 'is is not adequate for proposed development and is/is not
required.
4) Main (s) need to be installed.
5) Hydrant(s) need to be installed.
6) Water Supply Cistern shall be installed (of Gallons)
7) ' Nearest fire hydrant is feet .
8) Driving distance to nearest fire station is
Comments:
Signed' Date
PART V - to be completed by Spokane County Health District
A preliminary consultation meeting has been held with the Health District and the proposed
development plans have been reviewed.
1) The proposed provision of sewage treatment and disposal appears to be feasible
and desirable at this time by the following means: Ic - septic tank;
lagoon; treatment plats; other:
Other methods considered were: ,
2) Air quality is s not concern with this proposal.
3) Ground water quality/is not a concern with this proposal.
4) Noise is/,!:n;:) concern with this proposal
5) Light (!g/is not a concern with this proposal.
6) Proposal is subject to review and approval of final plans.
Comments:
a 3
igned Date
SOUTH 813 PINES ROAC SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 9920
STAGE- ONE" R-JEALT-ilyle INC~
• " a (509) 928-7900 - ' c
Mr. Ken Kirsch December 3, 1979
Assistant Zoning A&Linistrator
Spokane County Planning Department
North 721 Jefferson street
Spokane, viasnington 99260
Re: ZE-231-79
Dear Ken:
Enclosed, please find the various affidavits ncc<~ssa to ccvq-le.to
the file on the above captioned rezone.
Mcer 'ely
Robert J. Bethards
VE
ECE,
DEC G 19 .
/y
PLA SPOKANE C4U
NNING DEPARr T Y
MENT _
(M2 4,
.
i
113
REALTOR N c r
AFFT
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
SS.
COUNTY OF SPOKANE
i
Being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says:
That I am a citizen of the United States of oAmer ca
and a resident of the State of Washington, and age of eighteen years.
That on the day of
1979, I personally deposited in the United States mail at
with sufficient postage prepaid, a true and correct copy
of the NOTICE OF HEARING, a copy of which is attaches:
reference, to the
hereto and incorporated herein
taxpayers, as shown
recorded real property
on the Spokane County Treasurer's records 19 of who
day of -
1 within a four hundred
have been found to on property
theproperty
(400) periphery of the applicant's controlled
site and
did notice adjacent property owners to
certified mail. The notices were address d dicat dose
individuals and sent d° hthose
a drincorporated herein by
the attachment attache
reference.
da o f Nde 19
DATED this `d~ y
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to me this 31Z OL day of
19-.OP
NO AR`i PUBLIC IN AN FOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
R siding at Sr ;
F-
APPLICATION NUt"IBER - -
F FII:) ?`d` T. C F POS?' T ',G
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
SS.
COUNTY O S OKAN
r
Being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
That at times mentioned herein he was, and
now is, a citizen of the United States, a resident
of Spokane County, Washington, and over the age of
twenty-one years. d
That on Z" 1979,
he personally posted a true and correct copy of
the hereto attached NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING at
the following location in Spokane County, to-wit:
Oln ~C~O. le,
r ~Vs
1__~
A p icant or Agent
Subscribed and sworn to me /2
Nab?_&ell 19V
.
NO'S' PUBLIC IN AND FOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
R4i ing at Spokane,
Washington
9
i
f
Certification of Title Company: I hereby certify that the foll'owing
list of names and addresses has been prepared from the latest ,
available records and is to the best of my knowledge correct.
1
ij
Signed; For: Transamerica Title
-l
Date: 11/30/79
i
f
AGENDA, DECEMBER 139 1979 TELEPHONE NO.: 456-2205
SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE
Place: Broadway Centre Building, Second Floor
North 721 Jefferson Street, Spokane
1:30 P.M. (contd.)
C. ZONE RECLASSIFICATIONS (contd.)
7. ZE-231-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL OFFICE
(Nora Avenue, south side, 1,000 feet west of Mamer
Road. Section 10-25-44)
Proposed Use: 2 Office Buildings/43 Apartments
Applicant: STAGE ONE REALTY (2.88 Acres)
8. ZE-228-79 AGRICULTURAL TO MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN
(Blake Road, east side, 120 feet north of 20th Avenue.
Section 27-25-44)
Proposed Use: Apartments
Applicant: McCASLIN (1.5 Acres)
9. ZW-238-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESTRICTED INDUSTRIAL
(Lyons Road, east side, 940 feet south of Highway
No. 2. Section 25-25-41)
Proposed Use: Manufacturing or Warehouse
Applicant: TILFORD (5 Acres)
10. ZN-134-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME
(Northeast corner of Main Street and Railroad
Avenue. Section 23-27-43)
Proposed Use: 137 Mobile Home Sites
Applicant: ROSS
11. ZS-208-79 AGRICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOME
(Northeast corner of Sherman Road.
Section 11-23-42)
Proposed Use: Mobile Home Park
Applicant: ASTROL_ITF, INC. (40 Acres)
5:00 P.M. - - - - - ADJOURNMEt,~
A topic of discussion at this hearing may be whether the Hearing Examiner
Committee has adequate information to assess the adverse environmental
impacts of the proposal.
The State Environmental Policy Act WAC 197-20-330(2) provides that:
In the event that the further investigations authorized by this
section do not provide information reasonably sufficient to assess any
potential adverse environmental impacts of the proposal, an E.I.S. shall
be prepared".
VOMFIFAI 'o
i
I
N
IRA:
it s Al i ro40
3~ r I -
I
MARIETTA MARIETTA i AVE. Par
\
" 4 - 10 - - -
~ r fn
(V
tIJ
a
MANSFICIy
N
M♦
Y
ZE 2 31 79
(l (V
LTD
wqp"
WIsY _
90 0
NOMA Q r
Z t '
~ 2r C I MI SSI ON AVE.1
_
xw AXE-- IL W9 L
V-1 TO
O
5~ W ac ,
well"
t N
do ONE p
t OE Sr.~E Y "FT
Q Z
~C Z ~sNs DE S M ET Av t
W
x a. r A. L O C T A, S DO
o r ~ a
LL a : A444_ 4cy14 c r. W a -
lLDO J okox ; v`
0 th.
a i B w
A Y t
bbl'=± h ~ - ;
iAei~latnior
LKI
4
Z VAL LEYW 1
L~ Y WAY O _ VA L. L.E V WAY
Z r
O ' 1
R 2
0
d w MAIN
A I N
v
o! i Rl I OE ' r r R I V E ft 510E Z: u s V io
1993 r°• EL . ~9~ _ PR GUE~~ vE. ~ ~ p_
• 1000 .
i PCST 15 FFI El N2
•
o
I've
- R'
s
.
~ t,
_t
~ a
m
n
~ ~
r
:
u ~ ~ ~
s
a
r. T ~ X
.
Y y ~
.:r r ~ ~ ~ ~ p, . z
um
j ~ m
~
'Mr.
~x'
~
~~:r::
~ ;
r
~,u
-d
i
-
f
~ _w }
1
s
1
{ x.r r
I
i a
k i'
k
_
~ ~
_ _
x
°t
1 ,
~ ~
=L
i
u,, .
i
3
I S
d
s
. ..v. ~ . ,
I
c:
i i
I
it a
~ ~ ~
I
s
5.
E}
r
4
Y
~ Vim.:'.
~~a
°e
t
I # t .
i
l
4
E F
{
_ .
{
i
_
E}
r
4
Y
~ Vim.:'.
~~a
°e
t
I # t .
i
l
4
E F
{
_ .
{
i
_