ZE-35-78 ~
464 Pt GE 1235
c Ilil.11 t()1 WAl Uhl U '7;~U6;i;~,C1;30F; Yf ~ if
~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - :
zE 35-78 t
i h! HL AfA'11 !!t of L1it BIJAM ROAD , N°• -1232
KNulv Atl. i►tl_N U1 TIlL51 I'IU 5t S, Zl,ut Dominick Toulouee ,
, of tne coiancy of 6pol.Ane,
iri tl►t-, Statc of 1Vtis!►ingl.cm, iii cotisidc rilLicai of LhL bcnf-t I t5 arid othPr tinlueble coiisiderntior►s, encl,
ttte st,n of One and no/100, oo.000000000000 U.,llars, paicillia by ttie Coumty of spokane,
~
ti,c i ec.eipt ►%hereof is iiarPby 11( {jio%L]PfIoE CI, liuvc gr witeel, barbitiited, sold and eonveyecl, euui by these E
q presents do grant, Lnrgain, sell ruaa comey tmto said S)*karie Cuunty, the follo►riM describecl paccel
,d
of land, siLteated in S~l.cune Cotu►ty, ict the State of Iva~t►ington, to-wit.
The south 50 feet and weet 10 feet of the east 30 feet of the ea8t 330 feet of the !
~ Northwest Quarter (NW) of the Northeaet Quarter (NFO amrth of the Cbicaga, Nilwaukee
St. Paul aad Pecific Railroad rfght of w,ay together with the following-portione of
eaid Northweet Qua;ter (HW14) of the Northeast Querter (NX4) atore particularly deecribed u
t
ae followe: All the land lyfag aortheaeterly of aa arc coacave to the southrreBt xith
~ a radfus of 2D feet at the northeaBt corner thereof; the ende o.f said aro befng tangent ~
wfth alino para2le1 to and 30 feet eoutherly of the north eeotion line ead also being ~
` tengent wifi.h a line perallel to ead 30 feet d3.etant veeterly of the ceaterliae of
~ Blake Road #1292, and all of the laad lyiag eoutheaeterly of aa arc concave to the
northweet, vzth s radiue of 20 feet at the eoutheaet coraer thereof; the snde of ~
j said arc being tangeat with a liae parallel to and 50 feet distaat northerly from
~ the north liae of the GH St.P & P Railroad right of vay 8nd aleo being tangent vith s
a liae parellel to and 30 feet distaat rreeterly from the ceaterl~fae of Blake Road ~
#1292. '
~
~ 1'lzie conveyance ie made eubject wfth the uaderetaading that Spokaae Couaty vill aot ,
utilize the laads herein conveyed until euch tfine aa they are deenned neceeeary by ~
the SpokBae County Eagineer and a site p18►n,, for permaneat developatent is eubmitt4d
i and approv@d for the lsads de,scribed ae the east 300 feet of the Northxeect Quarter ~
(NW"A) of the Northeaet Quarter (M) north of C,M.St. P. & P. Rsilroad right of vay,
Except the weet 100 feet of the eaet 300 feet of tbe north 150 feet. All fn ~
~
c taasu laX Eatsmp~ t
i'
~ 7at
/1 ~
,
s
i~
Scf.tioll 22 , Townslisp 25 Nortli, Rx4ge 44 , h.►V Ai ,
1
~ T10 HpVE pN7y 10 lqJIU t,lie titune, iu'ito tlie seld Srol+ane Cauntl tor the pur}ioses of a public roacl ~
£orever
In «itr► S►%1if reof ~ j►1%e 11t 1fLQlto st l hauul aiui seal this 17
d.ty uP 19 70 ~ i
,
~
~ ~r(! Tf ii+F~~ I rl, mu.,t be ~ 1Pi ~ cl by uul t _ .na und
2A
i
OFFYCE OF TH-E
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
D A T E March 1, 1978
To Title C ompany ~U`b-l YV 7
Ftom Z Spokane County Planning Department ~
~
Subject Zone Reclassificatton ZE-35-78; Agricultural to Commerctal
Please furnish a list of the owners and t.axp3yers of record of a!1 FropE rty located
within 400 feet and the ftve nearest praperty owr,ers of the property de. crlhed
below.
Also, please include all ma:tage and loan numbers with addresses, when possible,
!n order that proper notiflca'L! or ma;r be mzdr:. If there are no more th.an flde owners
within the 400 foat boundary, pleasa furrilsh a list of the owners and t?xpayers of
recorci for the five ciosest owrersh&Fs. Incomplete or illeq:ble title compay llsts
will not be accepted by thls dapartment. Thanfk you.
(Prcperty Descrtption)
Sectton 22, Township 25 N., Range 44, East 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the TVE 1/4
North of CMSTP & P R.R. r/w except the W 100 feet of the E 330 feet of the TV 150
feet. Spokane County, Wa sh ington
Donimick Toulouse
Ea st 13418 Sprague
Spokane, WA 99216
926-5426
NO,
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ZE-3 5-78 ~
)
IN THE MATTER OF CHANGING THE ZONING )
MAP FROM AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL ) RESOLUTION
)
ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 221
TOWNSHIP 25 N., RANGE 44, E. W. M., )
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON. )
The above-entitled matter coming on regularly for hearing before the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, on this day, and it
appearing to the Board that the Spokane County Planning Commission has given
due notice of the hearing on the matter in the manner and for the time provided
by law; that said Planning Commission has held a public heacing as required; and
that the said JPlanning Commission concurs in the plati to zone the following
described property as•
COMMERCIAL
The East 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 north of C.M.St.P. & P. R.R.
right of way, except the West 100 feet of the East 330 feet of the North 150 feet
in Section 22, Township 25 N., Range 44, E. W. M., Spokane County, Wa shington .
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the above-described property be, and the
same is zoned undec the classification of COMMERCIAL as defined in the Zoning
Ordinance of Spokane County, adopted August 25, 1953, as amended.
AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED That any development on the above-described
property shall be subiect to the following conditions:
1) Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage plans and access
permits before issuance of building permits.
2) Dedications requested by the County Engineer be executed at this time but
not exercised until a site plan is approved for subiect property.
3) The County Engineer and Planning Director shall review said site plan and
make a determination that the dedications requested are, in fact, appropriate
and necessary for the uses proposed.
4) If the above-mentioned site plan has not been submitted within a period of
two years, applicant shall request subiect matter be granted an extension
of time.
S) Construction of curbing and pavement is not necessary until such time as the
site is' developed, the exact time to be determined by the County Engineer.
6) If, after review of the site plan, it is determined by the County Engineer and
Planning Director that certain revisions in the conditions of approval are
appropriate, a recommendation shall be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners concerning these revisions.
7) The applicant shall comply with rules and regulations of the Health District
in providing for adequate sewage disposal. All necessary Health District
permits shall be obtained prior to building permit issuance.
8) Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with the Spokane County
Fire Marshal's requirements.
,
. _ . .
~
ZE-3 5-78 (contd. )
9) A landscape plan showing specific detail and accompanied by a performance
bond shall be approved by the County Zoning Administrator prior to building
permit is suance .
10) That the provisions of SEPA's NotiGe of Action pursuant to 43.21c.080
R. C. W. and the Board of County Commis s ioners' Re solution #7 7-13 9 2 be
accomplished by the applicant within thirty (30) days of formal action by the
Board, as instructed by the Planning Department staff.
11) That a Final Declaration of Non-Siqnificance be signed by the Board of
County Commissioners.
12) That, if after one year from the date of the Planning Commission's action,
the applicant ha s not received final adoption of the zone change, the
application is void.
PASSED BY THE B4ARD THIS DAY OF 1978.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
~
HARRY M LARNED, CHM.
JERRY C. KOPET
ATT EST . M ~ +
VERN ' W . OHLAND
C1 the Bo
By.
Deputy
- 2
.J'+.
e w ,
; * t
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) SS
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
I. Nancy J Voermans, on oath depose and say that the attached is a
transcript prepared by me of the tape recording of the Hearing held
by the Spokane County Board of County Commissioners, October 2, 1978,
pertaining to ZE-35-78, Agricultural to Commercial Said transcript
is true and correct insofar as I was able to interpret the voices as
recorded
Naqcy J Voermans, Secretary
County Commissioners Office
.
Subscribed and sworn to before me the 3rd day of November, 1978
Notary Public in and-for`the State
of Washington, residing in Spokane
h1y Commi ssion expires
,j -
,
5
October 2, 1978
ZE-35-78, Agricultural to Commercial
COMMISSIONER HARRY M. LARNED We will call the Board of County Corronissioners back
into session for the purpose of a public hearing ZE-35-78, Agricultural to
Commercial for Mr. Toulouse I believe Mr. Toulouse is appealing some of the
conditions imposed on him in the findings and orders. We will have the Planning
Commission brief us first and then we will have the appellant Mr Toulouse speak
and then anyone wishing to speak against the appeal will be heard So planning
staff, if you are ready
MR JERRY LITT, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Mr Chairman, because this wasn't actually
an appeal of the action, I'll just briefly let you know where the property is
and what is going on and try to show some of the right of ways The Planning
Commission voted unanimously to approve this action and voted in and altered some
conditions the day of the hearing There were some mistakes in the original
findings so when we get to the engineer's request, we will cover those First
photo shows the general location. The dark strip to the right here would be, if
I am not mistaken Pines and oh, excuse me, it must be Evergreen - Pines is in
this area - Blake runs right up towards the point - that dark road in there Next
slide is the zoning in the general location - as you can see on two sides fronting
on Sprague that is already zoned commercial - Mr. Toulouse's property actually
is just more or less a fill ih of the area There is commercial businesses also
to the northwest of this site, residential office uses to direct north of the
site. As the land use would show here to the west of Mr. Toulouse's property
there is currently commercially zoned property that is not being used. There
is commercial uses all along the east side of Mr Toulouse's property Also
where it shows a residence in the northeast corner of the property that is a
flower shop. It is a non-conforming use and one of the original intents of
changing this zone was to allow a sign to be put up to identify that use and
f - _
~ • t ~
~
Paqe Two
ZE-35-78, Agricultural to Commercial
Nr Toulouse at present does not have actual development plans for this site
He just hopes to rezone it commercial so he can leave it open for commercial
uses. Many of the conditzons that were imposed are to handle the types of uses
that could occur in the comercial zone,which you see is blue on the plot plan,
are areas or buildings that are now in existence There was at one time a dairy
milk barn and a barn and, of course, the house is now a flower shop on that site
Blake is the property to the right-hand side of the photo Conditlons - also the
area - will you turn that other light off, too, Jim - property in question This
is Blake - runs to the railroad and over approximately in this area and goes back
up to Sprague This is the flower shop and these are the old fam buildings I be-
lieve the basic conditions that were not in aareement with a1r Toulouse are that the
applicant was asked to dedicate the east 10 feet which would be along Blake, the
south 50 feet which is - would be an extension of Second Avenue which at present
has right of way from t1cDonald east to this site - 50 feet and also 20 foot radius
on both the northeast and southeast corners of the property and including slope
easements for railroad crossing and improvements The applicant shall construct
a 5 feet - 5 foot cement concrete sidewalk and curbs and pave right of ways. Orl-
oinally, that said 5 foot curb on the findings, I don't think that we have many of
those constructed in Spokane County,and the applicant shall obtain approval for on
and off site drainage before issuance of buildinq permits The other conditions are
basically standard conditions, mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with
Spokane County Fire tlarshal requirements The health district necessary permits
and approvals need to be issued prior to building permits and a landscape plan show-
ing specific detail and accompanied by a performance bond prior to the building
permit issuance Now, even though he doesn't have specific site development plans
at the present, when somebody does come in and either leases the property or buys
it, we would like to see the landscape plan,and the last two conditions are those
including the SEPA Notice of Action which is standard, and that if after one year
r ~
~
~ • Y
Page Three
ZE-35-78, Agricultural to Commercial
from the date of the Planning Commisison's action the applicant has not received
final approval of the zone change that application is void. Also we did in a
letter September 6, 1978, to Mr. Toulouse state that the only conditions required
to finalize the zone besides the Notice of Action would be the dedications of right
of ways. Are there any questions from the Board
COMMISSIONER CNRISTENSEN I don't believe I do I'll find out what conditions
that he doesn't want to meet, I guess
JERRY LITT, PLANNING DEPARTMENT Ok, there is also a site plan in front of you
i f you want to refer to that.
COMMISSIONER LARNED Mr. Toulouse
MR. TOULOUSE This is a piece of property that I operated as a stiock sales yard
for 25 years prior to coming down with bad health The property is under the
grandfather law - should be. I shouldn't even have to come in for comnercializing
but I did, a commercial permit What I am objecting to is that 5 foot, it said
curb, but I knew that they meant sidewalk, of course, I don't think that this
is practical for that area. Now once a development goes in there there is a
lot of these requests that I would have to comply wtth or the lessee would have
to comply with. B1ake runs 8 blocks south and it runs 4 blocks north and it is
already a 50 foot road beside me Their way of figuring - they are using that -
they're taking 21,000 to 22,000 square feet of my ground without due process The
extension of Second Avenue, I can see that what's the - there is a big development
in there that will be a necessary road and I'd comply with that in our agreement.
COMMISSIONER LARNED Mr. Toulouse, am I correct then in assuming that what you
are objecting to is the 5 foot curb and sidewalk - construct 5 foot curbs, 5 foot
sidewalk and curbing and pave the right of way to meet the existing pavement at
the present time.
MR TOULOUSE That is right, that's the only thing that I'm
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE And the dedication of the right of
way, I think.
~
„ Page Four
' 2E-35-78, Agricultur to Commerclal ,
C4MMiSSIONER LARNED And you do not want to dedicate the additional east 10
foot either which would give you a 60 foot road
MR. TOULOUSE. At the proper time, I know that that will have to be dedicated but
I don't think this is the time to do it The property now is potential sales lot
for RV vehicles or mobile homes
COMMISSIONER LARNED Ray, any questions
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN Well, Mr Chairman, I believe that this appeal the
gentlemen is indicating that he doesn't think that this should be implemented at
this t1me. How do I say it? I guess I'm asking when do you think it should be
implemented if you don't want to give the 10 foot or 20 foot - I guess that we
are just talking on Blake, aren't we?
MR. TOULOUSE Yes, we're only talking on Blake I would say that in the next 10
.
years there could be a larger development in there The 10 foot now comes would
go into one of my buildings - would take out a row of shade trees and personally
I don't think now is the time for a big development of the property
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN. Well, I guess then Mr. Chairman, I`d have to ask the
traffic engineer how he sees it at this time.
JACK FINNEI(, TRAFFIC ENGINEER Mr. Commissioners, at this time we don't anticipate
Mr Toulouse doing anything to the property. This right of way would be for
future expansion of the road if and when he does develop the property. At tha t
time then we would require on the building permits curb, sidewalk, and paving to
go in At this time, he would not have to put any improvements on the property,
because he is not doing anything to the property, it stays just as it is. The
10 foot right of way has always been necessary before the zone is finalized This
happened across the street - it has been several years ago - when it also was zoned
commercial - we got 10 foot off the west side of the property and also 60 feet
for the Second Avenue as it runs from Blake on east. This has been a condition
that we have imposed upon them On all commercials like this,too,before the
ioning actually becomes finalized,to get the right of way at that time. We
Page Five
ZIE-35-78, Agricultur o Commercial
won't bother these shade trees Nothi ng will happen It w, 11 Just come off the tax
rolls. That is all that really happens out there at this time, unti l he comes in
wlth deveiopments for the property,whether it is an RV as I heard mentione4 or
some other business out there for commercial aiong wlth the 50 foot for the further
easterly extension of what will be called Second Avenue east to Blake - this is
the last piece between P1cDonald and Blake at this time Is there any other questions
or
COMMISSIONER LARNED Why is McDonald Road
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER McDonald right now McDonald like Blake used to
be a 40 foot right of way McDonald starting from Sprague going south is a mostly
a 60 foot right of way I see one portion down south of the tracks for some
reason we only picked up 5 feet off the east side. Most of what we know as Blake
all the way down to 8th Avenue is 60 foot at this time - at least from 4th Avenue
south because all of the subdivisions as they come in,we got additional 10 foot
right of way So the only place along Blake from 8th north we are missing this
660 feet for 10 foot wide and also from the track down to 4th Avenue we also
do not have the additiona] 10 foot of right of way and going all the way down to
8th Avenue for about looks like-- 200 feet on the west side just north of
8th we don't have the additional 10 foot of right of way making 60 feet So
essentially it looks like about oh, 80 - 85 percent of the area is now
covered That's just a guess,with a 60 foot right of way
COMMISSIONER LARNED On the east side of Blake just opposite Mr Toulouse's
property, is there restrictions there that that shall be curbed and paved
curbed and sidewalked.
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER I don't believe, I'm not sure about the sldewalk.
I don't have that information I would almost be willing to say that it is
curbed and sidewalked and paving requlred there also~uut I'm not sure if we were
requiring sidewalks when this was done. I did not get in on this zone change
myself,it was done a few years back
P.age Six
ZE-35-78, Aqriculturi- _o Commercial
COMMISSIONER LARNED Could that information be made available to us.
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFiC ENGINEER Yes, sir
COMMISSIONER LARNED Do you have any further questions?
COMMISSIUNER CHRISTENSEN Well, let's be sure that we understand what the
developer sayiny Is that true that 1f he provides sidewalk and he's giving up
20,000 square feet or 22,000 sgu.are feet, I believe I heard him say that,and I
can see why he don't want to do it. Now if he sells it to somebody else for
coninercial for say $5.00 a square foot what is that,$10,000 I don't blame
him either I wouldn't want to do it either Would it be that many square feet
that he would be giving up
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER It would be about 6,000
C4MMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN 69000
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER If he has a piece of property say 600 feet deep
beeause part of the raiiroad I belleve at least 30 feet of that railroad if
not all of the railroad came off that old property that was there,so it is about
600 feet deep by 10,so it would make 6,000 square feet on Blake.
COMMISSIONER LARNED And how much a]ong the raiZroad track.
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER Along the railroad track for the extension of
Second Avenue I'm not sure how deep his property is I don't have the exact
dimension but it looks iike we're
COMMISSIONER LARNED Says 610 on this map
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER That's 610 feet deep
COMMISSIONER LARNED Yes, from Sprague to the property 1ine.
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER And 10 feet from that would be 6,100 or 6,100 0r
310 on the back or 310 we have to remember that extra 10 feet we take off
so we'11 just make it 300 square feet that's 15,504 square feet off of the
rear and the side we've said 6,100 square feet and also one little radius on
the northeast corner which would roughly take in additional,say 75 feet just
' guessing from trigs that would be roughly so altogether we're talking about 2I,675
i
Page Seven
ZE-35-78, Agricultura o Commercial
feet.
COMMISSIONER CNRISTENSEN Pretty close on his figures, then isn't he.
COMMISSIONER LARNED That seems like a pretty fair piece of ground doesn't it,
whe you add it all up. Under, I don't know whether you have the same sheet that
we have, Jack, but this says County Engineer Office Special Findings that
request the County Engineer's Office has requested that the following be considered
if the rezone is approved Is this you have requested that it be considered
you haven't said that it will be mandatory
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER. This is common language that we use all the time
because we can't we act as advisory to the Planning Commission we're asking
them request this be considered and they normally have gdne along with our the
wishes; not 1n all cases, but in most of them they have so we don't demand
anything we're only acting as advisory to both the Planning Board and yourselves
here We have more and more, this is, I believe this type of hearing may be coming
up because of the requirements the engineers are making. In the past we have
requested these rights of way and have they have been granted almost 100 per
cent you know but imagine with land going up and up all the time it will be more
and more money to the people looking at it This is the only method we have to
get these improvements in or widen at some furture date if we don't get these
rights of way then this would mean that we would have to at some future time in
all zones start purchasing all these rights of way
COMMISSIONER LARNED (Illegible)
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE At the price of land, that might be
more accurate
COMMISSIONER LARNED Do you have any further questions, Ray
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN Well, I hate to put legal counsel on the spot but for
the traffic engineer but let's say that in approving this for commercial and
that condition is not met and this gentlemen decides to sell that as a commercial
site to someone else, can we or the Planning Commission require that condition
from the other buyer?
.
Page Eight
a ` ZE-35-78, Agricultur to Commercial
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE It is very difficult because the only
action left would be the issuance of the building permit and we have never we
have never considered that the Building Codes Director have the authority to
require the issuance of or the granting of additional rights of way merely upon
the issuance of the building permit Notably, when the zone change was approved
within a very short period of time previous to that so I would say, if the
Board is considering that, it should do so at this time rather than defer that
decision to a later date. The only thing that I have some concern about is that
if my figures are rough figures but we're taking a substantial portion of
this gentlemen's property at values that may that are substantial if you value
the you know the property alQng Sprague Avenue, it's very expensive, and it
seems to me that we are taking 21,600 square feet of property that may be valued
as high as 5-- $3 to $5 a square foot and although the back half of the property
is not valued as high We can do so if we can say that that these rights of
way are specifically and uniquely attributable to his development, and we can
require the dedication of land, but they must be specifically and uniquely
attrtbutable to Mr. Toulouse's development not just fit into some oYerall plan
for road development, and this Board just simply may not use their authority to
approve zone changes as a method of acquiring additional rights of way You must
determine that the dedication the dedication of the land you are seeking from
Mr. Toulouse is specifically and uniquely attributable The necessity for
of the dedication specifically and uniquely attributable to Mr Toulouse's
development. Otherwise, Mr. Toulouse hit the nail right on the head when he said
"you are taking my property without due process of law" and that's just simply
Article One, Section 16 and that is where he is I'm saying you do have the
authority but I'm also saying on the other hand you must find that these dedications
are specifically and uniquely attrlbutable to his development plans with the traffic
that will be generated from his facility is necessary Obviously perhaps once he
develapes that property I can see the necessity for access on Blake that's
Page Nine
4E-35-78, Agriculturc o Commercial
~
more readily than it is a continuation of Second Avenue onward The difficulty
Mr. Toulouse that we have is that you're asking the Board to approve of a zone
change without having any development plan to know what the amount of traffic
will be generated.
MR. TOULOUSE I've told the Board that it will be for recreational vehicles and
mobile homes sales lot it's ideal for that --garbled-- It is not practical at
this time. There will come a day that to give them that 50 feet, but as of right
now and garbled-------
COMPiISSIONER CHRISTENSEN Well, what you're saying, Mr. Chairman, what legal
counsel if I understand is saying to us is we basically, no question about
it we don't have a basic plan to make a judgement decision whether this is
needed in the overall plan Nowjust because a developer says that he is qoing to use
tni s property for a parti cul ar use at this time he hasn't shown the Planning
Commission nor has he showed this legislative body what his basic plan is Is
that right legal counsel?
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Yes, that is a problem in this Board
arriving at a determination of whether or not because of the use that Mr
Toulouse wishes to make of the property that it is also necessary to dedicate
the additional rights of way. I think that that for a high traffic for
a commercial activity that's of a hlgh traffic nature this Board very we11 could
conclude that it is necessary that it has addltional access rather than just the
simply access that obviously would provide off of Blake or direct access off of
Sprague---if the engineers felt that would be appropriate The only thing that I
haven't heard from the engineers is that is that they feel that the dedication
is necessary because of a development of a commercial development such as Mr
Toulouse has proposed. What the traffic department seems to be saying is that
this is just the continuation of an overall general plan and I think the law differs
in our ability to require dedications merely because it fits into some general
overall plan than it does in determining that the dedication is necessary because
Page Ten
ZE-35-78, Agriculture o Commercial
it is specifically and uniquely attributable to Mr Toulouse's development This
Board could go ahead and require Mr Toulouse to submit a development plan if
it wanted to and require the zone change be developed in specific conformance
to that development plan or an RV site if they chose to do so and could require
if they determine that the traffic generated by Mr Toulouse's development
necessitated additional access to McDonald off of Second and additional rights
of way on off of Blake onto Sprague but I don't think that you are in a position
to try and make that decision at right at this particular time
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN One more question, Mr Chairman, how wide is the street
on Blake at the present right of way that the county has 40 feet 50 feet
COMMISSIONER LARNED It is quoted at 50
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN 507
COMMISSIONER LARNED Correct?
JACK FINNEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER Yes, the original 40 feet plus additional 10
feet on the east side to be picked with the commercial development so at this
time it is 50 foot of right of way not equally off the cneter line it is
30 feet on one side on the east and 20 on the west--
.
COMMISSIONER LARNED Mr Toulouse, do you have any plans at this time to,let's
say in the next year or two years to put that into an RV site could it conceivably
go into something other than an RV site.
MR TOULOUSE Garbled-------- I have people right now that are interested
in it for a sales lot for RV vehicles Garbled---------
COMMISSIONER LARNED And this you feel quite sure is what wi11 go in there
it would not be something else
MR. TOULOUSE Garbled--------- 1'll put my name on a piece of paper that's
what I'm going to do with the property. I don't think that it's going to be
used for a big development We're getting too many big development out there
the way it is.
COMMISSIONER LARNED Ok, thank you, Mr. Toulouse Do you have any more questions,
Ray.
a •
Page Eleven
ZE-35-78, Agricultural to Commercial
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN I gue!fi not Mr Chairman I suppose I shouldn't say
it but it looks to me 1ikesMr. Chairman,that when we start, Legal Counsel,-- when
the Planning Commission starts rezoning property to commercial without a basic
plan it shouldn't be rezoned commercial until that plan is drafted up. Now we
done it on one large commercial site in this county and in the future I don't
think this Commissioner is going to vote for a commercial site without a basic
plan. '
COMMISSIONER LARNED Is there anyone to speak against the appeal?
MR DOUG RIDER Garbled------- I'd like to add a comment
COMMISSIONER LARNED Mr Rider,
MR DOUG RIDER I'm Doug Rider, Chief of Fire District No 1-- Spokane Valley.
The only thing comnent I'd like to make the extension of Second Avenue
west of Blake is needed for fire protection purposes. Eventually that whole
area is going to be commercial He's talking about rezoning to commercial and
it gives access for fire protection purposes on the back side of that property
We have too many places really in the valley right now that we don't have
good access to commercial property and extension of a street like this from our
standpoint fire protection standpoint I think is necessary.
COMMISSIONER LARNED Has this ever been brought up to the Planning Commission or
Planning Staff at any time in the last four or five years.
MR DOUG RIDER I don't know. I've been I was gone for a while and what
the status is now I don't know.
COMMISSIONER LARNED ----By shaking your head------
MR DALE HAYE Garbled--------- Not to my knowledge
COMMISSIONER LARNED Not to your knowledge
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Mr Rider, let me ask you specifically,
are you in a position to say that the extension of Second Avenue is necessary for
fire protectionfor Mr. Toulouse's property or just merely for the properties back
in that general vicinity?
~ ' Page Twelve
ZE-35-78, Agriculturai to Commercial
MR DOUG RIDER That would depend on what he builds there and what is built to
the westgif it's Secand Avenue doesn't extend through then it can create problems
for us for access to other commercial properties.
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Even though he would front off access
off of Blake Avenue.
MR. DOUG RIDER Yes, if we don't have access all the way through
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE To Mr. Toulouse's property you
could come in off of Blake
MR. DOUG RIDER Yes I
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Then you are saying that you would
also need access off of McDonald?
MR DOUG RIDER We might oh, another thing that should be considered in
situations of this type the water company and the power company needs to
loop their water systems and if they don't have an easement or street it makes
it difficult for them to loop their water systems also to provide adequate
fire flows and again we are back to the question what is going to be built
on the property.
COMMISSIONER LARNED So this probably should have been instigated say from
Farr throuqh Bowdish to McDonald and to Blake all the way through Is this
correct?
MR. DOUG RIDER Yes, sir, in my opinion very definitely
COMMISSIONER LARNED Ok, do you have any questions, Ray
COMPIISSIONER CHRISTENSEN No questions
COMMISSIONER LARNED Thank you, Doug Do you have any further words, Mr
Toulouse? •
MR TOULOUSE I think we're going into the area of assumption too much. The
property west of ine has been zoned for 15 years and it's as it was 15 years ago
when Mr. Postell bought it Now I agree with you, it's even if he would make a
development and I wasn't in on the development I would still open that south 50
Page Thirteen
' tE-35-78, Agricultur( o Commercial
feet to generate traffic off of Spraque Avenue again, but it doesn't seem practical
to me to put all these restrictions on my Qroperty at this time and to sell to
have a sales lot which I had out there for 25 years under the grandfather law
I could have gone that way.
MR. JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Mr. Toulouse, do I understand
you to say that when and if the property to the west of you is needed, excuse me, the
development to the west of you occurs
MR TOULOUSE And needs my property----
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE And that the extension of Second Avenue
in the view of the engineer is necessary,you would be willing to dedicate that property
MR. TOULOUSE I would concede to that definitely.
MR JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Well, would you be agreeable
then to making a dedlcation of it but it would only be exercised by the engineer's
department when in their view they felt that it was absolutely necessary to complete
the extension of Second Avenue isn't that what we are all saying then
MR TOULOUSE That's what we are all thinking but there`s been a time that the
engineer and I have a personality conflict. Ne talked about widening of McDonald.
Well, they're going to make a 4 lane highway this side of the track and then
narrow it down south of the track so I didn't go along with that. I said go on
ahead and buy 5 feet or 10 feet from each so that you don't bring the people up
and its klnd of a dip now I will say we've never had an accident there they
did it the way I thought was practical and since that time we've had a conflict
of personalities
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN That property west of yvurs is that zoned commercial
now
MR TOULOUSE Yes, I. helped Sam Postell get it all zoned
COMMISSIONER CHRISTENSEN Is there a plan for that what they're going to put
in there.
COMMISSIONER LARNED They put the old highway bed in it.
.
Page Fourteen +
iE-35-78, Agriculture o Commercial
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFfICE Is that does that
MR. TOULOUSE We put Sprague Avenue in it
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Is there a dedication excuse me,
.
I realize there is a dedication,but was there a plot plan for the development of
the property to the west of Mr Toulouses's does anybody here
MR TOULOUSE From Postell's
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Yes
JERRY LITT, PLANNING DEPARTMENT No, that was zoned without conditions It was
zoned in two pieces, one in 65 the southerly most portion I have a feeling
that's when the right of way for Second Avenue was dedicated because he didn't
have access to the southerly portion to Sprague and the northerly portion was
done in 1971
COMMISSIONER LARNED Mr Toulouse, would you like to tell us exactly when that
piece off of McDonald going east was dedicated I think that is where your house
sits now.
MR TOULOUSE Yeah, that's where I-- that was in let's see I was over in
w
Seattle and I've been back here 6 years and that was about 7-8 years ago,and
they came to me with plans to go to the rai7road track this wide and then go
across the railroad track and then be that wide and I didn't figure with the
dip and everything garbled--------------- distant sometimes you can't see
the small cars and I think if you'll look at the traffic record that we've never
had an accident there but they finally conceded and instead of condemning me,
which they could have,we widened it for about 200 feet there,which gaye the
people gave the people some where to jump. I've always been in the my
way of thinking has been for the good of the valley.
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Do you know,Mr. Toulouse,does
Sam still own the property to the west of you?
- •
Page Fifteen
ZE-35-78, Agricultural to Commercial
MR TOULOUSE Pardon, no, 6i11 Tombari owns it now
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Do you know what he what his
plans may be for the development of
MR TOULOUSE Well, he's just like any other person who owns a big piece
of ground out in the valley they all have covered with blacktop and big
buildings and personally I think we are getting too much of it out there a
saturation of it
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Is that property being used now
its just he would if something came along that he would be agreeable with then
MR TOULOUSE That's right, that he would be agreeable with
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Well, would you at that time
would you at that time be willing to have the property made avai]able to the
county for roadway purposes when he developed it then
,
MR TOULOUSE I've said that I would dedicate the 50 feet the south 50 feet
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Well, when that other property to the
west is developed
MR. TOULOUSE When it is developed now I. don`t mean just put a little
hamburger stand on it
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Developed and necessary or something
to that light I'm trying I'm trying to arrive at something were we can
kind of get off dead center here see we've had Mr. Haye from the Fire Department
tel l us , or one of hi s empl oyees tel 1 us that, that i s necessary for f i re protecti on
purposes,and the engineer is saying it is necessary when we develop the property
as a continuation of that,and you seem to be saying the same thing,but you obviously
do not want to give up the use of the property until it is absolutely necessary
MR TOULOUSE I'm the one paying the taxes on it.
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Well, it could
MR TOULOUSE If I did anything with it I would have to let the man know that
I've already dedicated
. r~
. o
~ Page Sixteen - ,r-
~ A'- ZE-35-78, Agricultura o Commercial
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY`S OFFICE Al1 right, could we do this would
we could does the Board mind my could we approve the zone change on
the condition that you dedicate the right of way the 50 feet and that the
right of way you would have the right to use the right of way until in the
view of the englneer the development of the property to the west of you
necessitated the extension of that right of way is that what we are all saying?
MR TOULOUSE We're all thinking on the same thing.
COMMISSIONER LARNED• Well, we will you have no further testimony today
MR. TOULOUSE Only that lt does for any friction puts a problem but I've been
assured of the garbled----------
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE All rlght
JERRY LITT, PLANNING DEPARTMENT That's what we found by the way. We called a
couple of title companies to find out about the conditional zone changes and
they said to their knowledge they've never had one yet that title was actually
clouded by what was there. I think we found that case in Empire Homes out in
the valley that the property can be sold without conditions being met. So the
problem
JERRY NEAL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY'S OFFICE . I. think Mr. Toulouse has been
around long enough that I don't think too many peoQle are going to pull anything
over on him I don't think he's lost too many
COMMISSIONER LARNED We I think should I should have made that point to
start with and didn't that Commissioner Kopet is not here for this hearing. Before
we render a decision Commissioner Kopet will listen to the tape and will visit the
Site as will the other Commissioners and hopefully two weeks from today we
will render a decision at our regular Monday Board Meeting We are adjourned
/
78 1430
NO.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY. WASHIN GTQN
FINDINGS AND ORDER REGARDING ZOIVING MAP PROPOSAL, ZE-35-78,
AGRICULTURAL TO COMIvi},RCIAL: TOULOUSE
WHEREAS, The Spokane County Planning Commission did, after public
hearing on July 21, 1978, and continued to August 16, 1978, forward to the Board
of County Commissioners a recommendation that the Zoning Map be changed from
the existing Agricultural classification to the Commercial classification on property
described as follows•
The -£ast 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 north of
C.M.St.P. & P. R.R. right of way, except the West 100
feet of the East 330 feet of the North 150 feet in Section 22,
Township 25 N., Range 44, E.W.M., Spokane County,
Washington.
and,
WHEREAS, The applicant before the Planninq Commission,
M~. Dominick Toulouse, did subsequently request a hearing before the 8oard of
County Commissioners to present evidence and testimony in favor of this
application, and,
WHEREAS, The Board did hold a public hearing on October 2, 1978, to
consider the recommendation of the Plaruninq Commission and test#mony and evidence
of the applicant and other interested parties, and,
WHEREAS, At said hearing opportunity was afforded those favoring and
those opposing the above-described zone reclassification, and the Board of
County Commissioners fully considered the testimony given, the recocds, and
minutes of the Planning Commission and all evidence presented, and having
individually acquainted themselves with the site and vicinity in question, does
hereby find
1) Tha t the Board of County Commis sioners uphold s the recommendation
of the Spokane County Planning Commission to approve said zone
change, subiect to findings and conditions as contained in the
Planning Commission's minutes of August 16, 1978, provided that,
a) Dedications requested by the County Engineer be executed
at this time but not exercised until a site plan is approved
for subject property.
b) The County Engineer and Planning Director shall review said
site plan and make a determination that the dedications
requested are, in fact, appropriate and necessary for the
u s e s propo s ed .
.
~
(contd. )
~
FINDINGS AND ORDER, ZE-35-78 TOULOUSE (contd.)
c) If the above--mentioned site plan has not been submitted
within a period of two years, applicant shall request subiect
matter be granted an extension of time.
d) Construction of curbing and pavement is not necessary until
such time as the site is developed, the exact time to be
determined by the County Engineer.
e) If, after review of the site plan, it is determined by the
County Engineer and Planning Director that certain revisions
in the conditions of approval are appropriate, a recommendation
shall be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners
concerning these revisions.
2) The Board also concurred in the Planning staff's recommendation
that a Final Daclaration of Non-Significance be signed by the
Chairman of the Board.
. 1978.
DATED This /3 day of
7L-,A~
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
HARRY M LARNED, CHM
liAV lAi=-IC .
1ERRY C. KOPET
. ~ - ..rK
ATTEST:
, VERNON W. OH LAN D
lerk o Board
~~aie
By
Depu ty
.
-2 -
~
l3El~ORE TIiE LOAkD 0: (,OLNiY C.OiItiISSION...~~ UA? S:OKAP124 COj3Nl~Y, 1IASiIII;Gr0i1
IN '1'HE IiA1TEd CONCEitNING )
`LONE P.ECLASSIa'ICA'rIOV )
ZE-35-78, AGKIGULTUitAL ) LNOTICE OZ PUELIC IIF.A:crIVG
TO C0I1MItCLAL: TOULOUSE )
NOrICI: IS GIVEEN tl,at the Loard af County Cocnmissioi:ess of Spol.ane
Couni.y, 4lashington, will hold a public heaiing at 1'A0 p.m., on Octobcr 2,
1978, ai. Cheic office in Ltie CounL-y Courtliouse to considex the a0bove-rMTtioned
zone reclassitication on the tollowing descriUecl property.
Section 22, Township 25 tIorth., Range 44 E.17 PI.
The East 330 feet of the Ml 1/4 of the N:: 1/4
north of CJI SC.P.&P.R.R. risht o'L way, e.~cepC
L-he West 100' oL the :.ast 330' oF Lhe horth
150' in Section 22.
I30rICE IS kTKTIiEi GIVE:V TIiAT A topic cf disctA:.sion :.t Chis hearing may Ue
wllether or not this proposal will have a significant adverse environmenLal
impact.
NOTICE IS FU1tTiMER GIVhN tha6 any person inteLested niay appeaz at said
hearir►g and present testimony efther for or against the applicdtion zor
the above-nientioned zone reclOssiticatioii.
El' ORD OF TliL L'OAItD ttiis 31s t day ot Augus t, 1973.
' l1NOla 1.1 OI11.FiND
r
~ CLE l7 IE I30Ar
~ -
.
by ,
sanne Piontague, Deputy G1^ Ic
7► _
2
~ ~1 p t ~ ,
~'L ~M' AIE y y~i .1..t~ p~"' ~ t"r'~•
~ VA! ~~YwA
vA LLE WAY ~
p
• ' t _ _ p~
ix z ~
~ T W
AV ~ ' 14rN
i Se~ iGr ru y~ < 'r~ rt QC W
~ RIVEFtStOE ~ Z
u ~ _ vr s Ji
SPRAGUE~I~►vE. ~ ► 1 9 W e'' 9
t J
FiCEt N_ 23
.
0 a o
.
~ cc / ~ _
_now +
- - ~ ~ iI)
AVE _ ~000
r~ ~
ej TA-0
4TM AVE
,--ti ,r-,-.,•.w.a
_ ~P . . ,,,~k ~
Closwr
T Q,' Q ~ •t
T N • ~
J ~ ' '
Av E. 4 • • r a L - r•+ p
1 1 ~
C, Z I ~ Q~
Y 7T •,vE 7TM q ~
~ M V, •
oV ~ a Z > 1 S TN AvF
uz~w t~ . _ .
- - 1 ti6
/
• ~ !
,
. ' ..i .
c
AGENDA, JULY 21, 1978 'rLL.EPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKA PLANNING COMMISSION
T ime : F ciday , July 21, 1978, 1: 3 0 P, M.
Place: Broadway Centre Buildinq, Second Floor
?OUE REG -ASSIFj A ION North 721 Jefferson Street, Spokane
10. 7-3 S-7A , Agric tural rQ -ommercial •
a. Loca tion: Section 2 2, Township 25 N., Ranqe 44 , E. W, M.
. The East 330 feet of the N1N 1/4 of the NE 1/4
north of C.M.St.P. & P. R.R. riqht of way, except the West 100' of the Ea9t 330'
of the North 150' in Section 22.
b , Applicant: Dominick Toulouse
East 13418 Spraque Avenue
Spokane, WA 99216
c. Site Size: 4 1/4 Acres
d. Exis tinq Zoning : Agricultural, es tablis hed March 27, 1942
e . Proposed Zoninq: Commercial
f. Proposed Use of Property: Retail Business
q. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4. 21 , Section 4. 21 .040
h. Environmental Impact: A topic of discussion at this hearing may be
whether or not this proposal will have a siqnificant adverse environmental impact.
7
_ . . c. •
t v
~ ! a ♦ ~O
Av
• a
: r
~ z
t~ ca' ~ VA i iC-Y W~
va L.L- Er' wAv ~ .
~ r.
,
• ~ -
. ~
~ i 2
. . W O
t W M~w ~
~ .
o S~~ • s~1
< r..~.~..+ _ < • W
` A I v E R 5 IOE ~ ~ JT L 11S+p -~s
` P R G V EflI~►v E'.
FiE. , N 4 2 1.
~o
O •
v E, 4TM AVE-
iz'j
. .
- - -
p ~ ~~'l/' ~ TM >
T
~
~ , ~
~
AV E.. ? . . . ~ . r. m
Lill 1n G
ITh ° ~
Y Z Y
7T^4VE 7T.. A
_ J u •
o r
Z > f ~ 6 TN AvE • ^ L
~f'_ . • ,t~. ~~414 -
I
I ~
~ It 1 l:fl'iOI•' W:11 t)h:F.U ~f
- - - - - - - - _...L~
~F- - - - - -
~
~
, -
I\'1' ! l L•: !11:1'1"1' I:1 t~,1 t. i ~BLAKE ROAD h o. 1292 !
uN !jl' 't'1~t.til•' ~~c~•:~~'~7'ti, '1'~ ~a t Dominick Toulouse , I
i hNuw AI.I. ME
ku Id , hi s►%i f e, of' ttie Gotmty of Spokarie,
iit tlic• State uf' IVas}iirioLi~n, iii coiisid(-raLioli oi' t1ie benet'its etid otl►er valuable eoiisiderutiotls) arid. ~
~ tt i+ ~ ~,tm ut' One and no/100 . . . . . . . . . Uul l <<rs, pa IciJ}JM b v the County ot' Spokane, i
t,f►o rec:eipt ul►treot' is huretiy uc•I:iiu►%lc,il,,ecl, have brwiCecl, bitrg<<icieci, sold ancl conveyecl, Fuui by these ;
~ NrE.~sf!r►ts do gr:uit., Lurbaiti, sell ruitl c.un%,ey tmtu said 5J►okmie Cuunt.y, the follo►ritb describecl parcel .
uf' lutO, situute-41 iti SEx►I.auie Cutuit y, it► tt►e Statp of' IVasliington, to-►vi t: ,
! The south 50 feet and west 10 feet of the east 30 feet of the east 330 feet of the ~
+ Northwest Quarter (NW)4) of the Northeast Quarter (NW) north of the Chicago, Milwaukee ~
, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad right of way together with the following portions of '
said Northwest Quarter (NW34) of the Northeast Quarter (NEA) more particularly described
~as follows: All the land lying northeasterly of an arc concave to the southwest with
a radius of 20 feet at the northeast corner thereof; the ends of said arc being tangent '
; with a line parallel to and 30 feet southerly of the north section line and also being ;
's tangent with a line parallel to and 30 feet distant westerly of the centerline of ~
j Blake Road #1292, and all of the land lying eoutheasterly of an arc concave to the
~ northwest, with a radius of 20 feet at the southeast corner thereof; the ends of ~i
said arc being tangent with a line para11e1 to and 50 feet distant northerly from ~the north line of the CM St.P & P Railroad right of way and also being tangent with
a line parallel to and 30 feet distant westerly from the centerline of Blake Road
, #1292. I ~
This conveyance is made subject with the understanding that Spokane County will not
~ utilize the lands herein conveyed until such time as they are deemed neceesary by
~ the Spokane County Fhgineer and a site plan, for permanent development is submitted i
and approved for the lands described as the east 300 feet of the Northwest Quarter t~
(NW"A) of the Northeast Quarter (M) north of C.M.St. P. & P. Railroad right of way, ' Except the west 100 feet of the eaet 300 feet of the north 150 feet. All in
i ~
. ,
~ „
! i
St •4! t ior1 22 , Ioanship 25 Nortli, Niukge 44 , E.W.M.
I '1'l► ItAVE ANll '1'(► t(o1(ll t}ip, srumo, iuito ti►e siticl tipokane County t'or the purposes of apublir, roa(!
fur•evcr•.
1
' Ir) witrless W116-1-cof' h<<~'o tlort•lulto sf-t ti~uul auul seul_ this ~f
, .iu` u f' •
(5f'.~)
r
t'
,
,
~ .y= TI li::l 111wit. Uf.' ti ~f" od b,y bW.... ._:tnd tlTid .1v . . ~ . _ _
I 7~~
I
FILE
►
t.~ ~"U.%
A
'-~f 4 , • _ 7HRE5zHOLQ QETERMINATIQN
r
o ~
proposed/final
4V4A)5 ~,t1a
(siqnificance/nonsignificance
Descri pti on of Proposa l:,~~/{l~ p" ps ~
~N- t Snud F&e w el SuDp 9~ Ey 4! La A077s
2. Proponent:
ConLaC~ ??r50n: Phone:!~ M
~j~
(;r~, ac-ion Reauested: _~Zone Chanqe; Prelfminary Plat
Aocroval: Final Plat Approval; Change o` :ondition
Other:
zpi Ad~~ ~
•
Tni p o osal has been determined to ~have a sianificant adverse impact on the env,ronment. An c:5 -s
required under RCi1 43.21C.030 ,c . This decision was made after reviea by the rcunty ir a;,im-
a ete environmental cneck?ist and orher inr^rmacion ofi =41P -ne '6aQ enc:.
. ?esoon5ible Official:
'-oposed Oeclaration: r~nal Jec~aration:
~ r' d1112
A-T NdfllE
=ignature?o,4~~/ SionaLure
'itie ~ i Title
iepartment Department C~
Ate 7-PW Oate ~ 1~ ~P .
8. For Declarations of Significance Onlv:
Date of Expected Jraft L-I5 Availabilitv !determined bv qesQOnsicie 0f=ic'ai;
1 / Ddte of Issuance
70 9F COMPLE;ED BY RESPONSIBLF OFFICIAL:
a. 5rief dESt?"DCi0f1 3nd '15ting pf 'hose °f1V1POfltii@nt3l impaC*_S lZddlflQ C sUC`1 :2rldY3l:i0't:
4-rtef exoianation or ,vnat measures, if any, ~ouid be _dkEn by ~he .ooiicant ~o ~rpvent r ~~~~ca=e 'ne
enviranmenta] impact of the Rraposal to such an extent that the responsfb+e :3rficiai --ouid .onsirer 3 ray;;z,~
oroposai ~~vith a cossible +'esulCtnq decldration ot non5ior,ific3nC°:
~ ~ - .4
►I
fR4o J. WEf7NICK LAW OF FICES OF
r-EOkG- L. MLOOD II9541
JANN J. O'1JR1tN tIo56► WETTRICK, TOULOUSE, LIRHUS & HOVE iAR1UBL J. WETTFi1CK llOtl91 SUITE 877 UEXTER HORTON BUILDING
OfORfi[ J. TOULOUSE. JR.
CLAqBNCE A. LIRHU6 SERT7LE. WASHINGTON 99104 :
RALPH C. HOVE _
R. MICHAEL lTOCKINO (208) 823 • 7250 TERHY L. KUKUK
FqEDERICK C. CANAVOR. JR. '
WILLIAM G. dPRINOER
February 28, 1979
Mr. Jim Johnson volD C
Assistan ' ~
t Zoning Rdniinistrator
Spokane County Planriing Department 4
Public Works Building
N. 811 Jefferson Street ~
Spokane, Washington 99260
°E~SPD~aN~'4C~~*La
N1N~
P~►N
Re: ZE-35-78
Dear Mr. Johnson:
On December 12, 1978, our firm wrote to the Honorable Board
of County Commissioners regarding their decision to allow for
zone reclassification subject to certain terms and conditions.
To date there has been no response to that letter and I have
attached a copy for your consideration.
The problem that our client, Mr. Dominick Toulouse, has with
the conditions attached to the zonei reclassification are that
they entail the dedication of a considerable part of the land
which is being reclassified for which no compensation will be
paid. At the hearing before the Board, it was clear that Spokane
County does no t have a need for the property they want dedicated
at this time and may in fact never have a need for this property.
Certainly, it was clear that whatever need for the property may
develop in the future it will not be related to the zone reclassi-
fication and future use of Mr. Toulouse's property.
The case of State Ex Rel. Myhre v. Spokane, 70 Wn.2d 207,
422 P.2d 790 (1967), stands for the principle that authorized
city councils in establishing local improvement districts may
require owners of property benefited by zone reclassifications
to reimburse the authority fo r costs of condemnation necessary
for the regula tion of anticipated traffic. In short the Supreme
Court held at page 216 that:
"Widening streets and installing electrical
controls for the safety of both pedestrians and
vehicular traffic are regulatory measures which are
within the proper exercise of the city's police power.
•4
L
Mr. Jim Johnson .
Spokane County Planlliny Departmeiit
February 28, 1979
Page 2 .
• ;
When the city requires that the cost of such safety s_
measures be borne by the company, it is not bargain-
ing away its regulatory police power but, rather, '"Srdetermining that the cost should be borne by the .
persons who created the necessity for the expenditure
of such funds, instead of by the city generally. Such
a determination is within the city's legislative
authority. It follows that a written concomitant
agreement resulting therefrom is not ultra vires.
Other jurisdictions have recognized that such
con tracts are valid and are not violative of the
right of the legislative body to exercise police
power. Bucholz v. Omaha, 174 Neb. 862, 120 N.W.2d
270 (1963) ; §Ylvania Electric Prods. v. Citx of
Newton, 344 Mass. 428, 183 N.E.2d 118 (1962); Church
v. Town of Islip, 8 N.Y.2d 254, 203 N.Y.S.2d 866
(1960).11
The above decision was cited in Gerla v. Tacoma, 12 Wn.App.
883, 533 P.2d 416 (1975), which held that an application for a
special use permit which created the necessity for wider streets,
pedestrian walkways and other improvements created expenses which
should be borne by the party seeking zone reclassification rather
than the city.
But in each of these cases one point was clear: the cost
which was passed on to the party seeking zone reclassification was
necessitated specifically by the new use which would be made of
the specific property which had been reclassified. Judge Neill,
in his dissenting opinion in the case of Chrobuck v. Snohomish
County,, 78 Wn.2d 858, 480 P.2d 489 (1971), set forth the require-
men ts for adding these conditions to the exercise of zoning power:
"Synthesized, these cases express our recogni-
tion that concomitant agreements may be valid append-
ages to the exercise of zoning power. The indicia of
validity in such agreements include: (1) The perform-
ance called for is directly related to public needs which may be expected to result from the proposed usaqe
of the pro ert to be rezoned. (2) Ful f illment' of
those needs is an appropriate function of the contracting .
governrnental body. (3) Performance will mitigate the public burden in meeting those resulting needs by
placing it more directly on the party whose property use will give rise to them. (4) The agreement '
involves no purported relinquishment by the governing body of its discretionary zoning power." Chrobuck v.
Snohomish CountY, supra, at 889. (Emphasis added.)
46
r
Mr. Jim Jotiiisuii
Spokane County Plaiin iny Departmeiit
February 28, 1979
Pagc! 3
There is little question that the land sought from our client
for dedication will not be required because of any use he or any-
one else intends to make of the reclassified property. Accozdingly,
it would seem improper to require the dedication of this property.
If at a later time it becomes necessary to develop a public road through Mr. Toulouse's property due to the development of greater
traffic which has expanded the public need, then it may be '
necessary to condemn part of the property, but there is no such :
indicatior, at this time when and if that may develop and at that
time our client would be entitled to reasonable compensation. ~
We would appreciate your advice on the best way to present our position to the Board of County Commissioners and any other
advice or information you can provide us which would let us
mutually reach a more equitable and desirable result.
Thank y• .u for your attentioii to tliis matter.
Very truly yours,
WETTRICK, TOULOUSE, LIRHUS & HOVE
~
By~~ J
Frederick C. Canavor, Jr.
FCC/cmw
Enclosure
cc: Dominick Toulouse
. ~ ,
,
• F
, • . - ,p t , ';,,;`~~I
• . ' t~..
.i q. ~
~ . . . ' t'
• ~ e • : • lp
~ ~ . .~z • . ~
. j
. . ~ .~•ti '
• . y - ~ '~'g~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ : i ~
,v
. 'i . Y't; n• ,i , .
• ,
. ' ~ v .
t 1. ~
or 12, 19•7V
. ; . t.
. . • ' ~ y , r d
, ~ y..
• •y
. :~i:Ul~~~~ 1.i3 '~~•~!:l~ (:c:'i?~G" :1:. ~11.~ '1'w , ~ i
apoY. aiie. Cc-~'.111t;y C(-)ul: t.'c>>.Isc:
r,1)o}:n r'..:'~ ~;a c,1A11c,;t0I1 C, 0 ' '
. ;Cc nt•.1
. ~
►,1►~~ ;~r;~ir~~.-:~i.~.1;~ec~ r~-prcsentg Do;,inick x'oulouse. . : ,
.~r. ,,;~,c~-~1:~ tih~ clcci stc~n of tho 33o.~l'c1 af qc~I.t~~ty , {'t~..,:~i~•. o. -Vs1490 in tltQ fnllc~tvfnq narti.cii I arg.
:;r.. "oul...-a~ e co->>-:1:oluis that he t••ould Le cii~it1Fd to 3i-lye crrant as a n<,it:ter. OL ta~,► 010 i•.hak i:lla Cottnty ru,d
i.ts ro.-rd oi rr.s:ir,tx: ("t..~~ni:~si_c~•T1c~iS has 11o a~ltl:ov i ty to ci>»c:i.ti.on. ~
1:~1~3 Y~•:.~)I1~: U~ t:~lt? :~Z~i1~Cr'~.)~ ~ll i1~1~:ii'~~)11 ~'iY t_;tl': t.1c~l.~; i1~~ l'1'• ~~t~U~Gi)~',E` .
i:U 1Nli:%= (1 C:0 1t 1.Ci I:S 0£ .Z c1J'o.3t •a r%,'.? C,) F~l i S n ]"1~~ ro ]C' Ui') 1 1C
pllrpo:~,oS 1Jj.tiloilt (:C'!'o-w•Ils.zi ion. T.te .;)2'C C)f l:llo c•;-AMoIl that
the c;onditions as f:r,.i,ed t,,ould cle»y I-ir.. :'oulo,i:>u of his proi,.:orty
toi tliout (lue proce ss o g law and. t}1(z. r(-)uiit.v is, i n~? Ly ,
U-ikinq the land it s4--c:hd to lt<<ve de•lic:.Ztelj, vi.nl.af.i.r.ky VOt;I1
the fe(ln.ral constii:i.itiotl anci the state cor~si:it_il 1-.ion.r 1-.a t:et I
:~i-np1}~, ft 3.s a c;~~2~,]i-*;n.ztiQn ~:•it}:nut P~~ym~~t~t ~1~~ it i:~ tl~~e
c:ld "eticl:-and-cnxrot" v.ethod af extrilctfng frorr. a
for r»ik.lic pLirposes his piovw-?-ty wi rhout pr-j)(jnj>>it t!:Wr_p_FOr
itl a11 asi,rnipriFlt@ co31c?c?rIl.'1f:1('?il pl'rl('c?C~li11g. j;X. TqUlntil.^:C iS
ac:ceptable to rozone wit:h(>>it the c:om! fti.nns attielied Lut jze
will riot accept the c-c,n.lltlnI1`3 afitai:hed to t'.:e rezone L-ecause,
in our judg:.~ent, tlley aie tt-iriraiaou>>t to a taking oll! his propert;►
witliout ciue nroc%:--.-ss of 1ai:*. ' tinless soTne araanRenimt is recriched, .
trie clccis-ion of ttie noard will be appPaled to the .11'pokane Coiinty, ~5t~;:erivvc Cottr* c)r a Oirect action shall Lc: to compell .
,Zoniiiq v:ithout the ai:tach-ment of the conditfc>»s. .
At the hear. inq betore the I3oard, it is clc.-ir from the . cc>>--►me:lt3 of c:ounsel for the ]3oarc', of County Co: aniss ioncr4, a
t•sr. i1ea1 a(,r~io-s with Tol:1ousP's poaitinn. ;_i•
. -~;af
w' t
• . ~i~.~ .
• . , .e ~ ' q
. • 1 • '
, ~ •r' } , ' ~
, F • '
r
~
,
~ .
. , • ; .
„ r ' ~.1~~ yy
• ' ~ ~ '~7~~ r
• ' ! y "if" r ; ~
rs
~ 2,, 1 i ~ C7 • ~ ro;~: ? ~1
T' l';~ l: ~a Q _
♦ . 1 ~ kK
. ~t.
t C± i '
j. ' . _ . . . . ~ , . • - . ~ . . . . _ . ~ . . ; h ~ ' . ! . ` i
j•
uL)Ui Alii.l`}; .nl)1l~(111.~"►~ t:ll(: otit'Ilel^ %'•')lf) 3."ectue:at.l3d
, ' r ~ c f i or*r tll~~it tlti~. 74-:>> : ll
Z ~ 0ll fih._ I:id UC c:han as.Sk-i(.t1l.-:1»-al to .conPla3.ricd to the
`'1.~►~ . 1~~~ C',-,,ia,',~ ~-1i:~:•.i~~-~er. s t.hat tl:r_ actinn
t") ' :iAnc; :ly l.ind witlloiit c?l1e proce:=,a.'
, ,
,tI-► Ly the ~:c~;:►t,,i:~qlor:et"g1 r~
r.c~(.1 ci. clo it .i f t:he nr_eci fnr ttie rt(jhts '
~ of_ t-,,,y i s .,~,'-i i" i.:.-r 11 yan,] un iclUely stti:i ibu l;able
~ ta the Tr.►litc,t:.c doxreloplw»t-. 6i:hP,rwise vou t-ire
l-akfilg ],3.s ,,-roporty Without (1iie nroco:is,' lie kold
r3ranoy .a»d Llin, f;C•):Jn1sS.Lfa11l?r9. '
ria),,cy c':y~<:i►~:c~~1 tlie request, se-tying, 'This is tlle only noL-ho~~ ~.,7e have to ryet land for expan-
sion nf ricrhts of <<,ay, otherwi3a we will have
to Luy it.'
l'.ut 1:e.z1 quC$t 1one?tj f_he pr.3ctfce which in
the `c`o:Aou~~ case. woult-? t::ike a'substiintia1'
ror. ~1,--7n o` t:-se nroperLy i:•rich nay hP k*orth
$ 3 a q;uare foot.
?'e :~clvi~~:cl the co):rr:issioners that 'you ca»'t
.
t:se your atithority to anPtova zona chnnqPs to V
. acruir.e .rir-hts of way. "For Riqht of 104y LAnc1o%-,ner
Protests Plan," anokane *`.c:viQw, netohex 30 1978; -~~~',~:'::~~f . . , . . Y .,.~i,• .
•_~_.y•~~ ~'•r ,
Tltis latter will give yrnu not ice of anpnal of 0:a
Doard' sdecision to the apokane rounty Superior Court. . lvo1zld ,
appreciate yoiir advising us in the premises.
Very truly yours, . ~-t:T•.TTRIt+K, TOULQUSF, LI RM1S ti I1OVE - - . :
. ;
. ,
By ' .
- Georc~o J. TOulouse, Jr. . . :
. ~
. .a .
GJT/vlv . . . ' x.',.,..
cc: Dotninick Toulouse . .
. . L, .
. . ` . . s • " , .
. _ • , . . ' . ~ 1 .
. . . 4
~
. . ~ ,t
~
5
~
~ttC E i14 fE 0 `
FE6 2 G WJ East 2720 sinto Avenue
Spokane, Washington 99202
G4t1NTY CO!►'M,fSSIdAW February 23, 1979
Boarn of County Commissioners
Sookane County Courthouse
Spokane, ~•►ashincton 99201
Re: Ordir.snce ::o. 78-I490
Findincs and nrcier re-garding L"oning r:ap
Proposal ZE-35-78
Ayricultural to Com:,«:rciai: ouiouse
Gentlemen:
Reference is r.made to the above zoning resolution passed
through your office on November 13, 1978.
I have been advised and informed that Thrifty rlobile
Homes has executed a lease with Dominic Toulouse for 15 years
to develop property covered by the subject resolution.
>
I also have been advised that Dominic Toulouse has not `
complied with the conditions 1(a)(ka) (c)(d) (e) of the attached
resolution.
As a citizen and adjoining property owner, I request and
demand that you forthwith require Dominic Toulouse to comply
with tlle terms and conditions of your resolution No. 78-1490.
It is imporc.ant ancl irnperative to me that you enforce
these conditions as I own the property immediately to the
iaest and unless the roads are dedicated at this time, there
wi 11 be a dead end street and probler.is that wi 11 clevelop in
the future. It also appears that failure to dedicate the road
at this time does violate the spirit and intent of your reso-
lution.
y
I am, therefore, requesting that you commence the neces-
sary proceedings through the civil department of the Spokane
Prosecuting Attorney's Office to enforce the conditions of
your resolution imnediately. -
~;.Flease=:~advisa~
Thanks for your cooperation,
Very truly yours, ,
n~•~~
tlilliam A. Tombari
'.:AB.lk
_ e.pc.mb.r 6. 197 e
Mr. Domiaiak Toulouse
South 123 MoDoneld Road
Spokane. WA 99216
Dear Mr. Toulouse:
Res ZE-3S-7/
ln reply to our telephone oonvwsation oi Septomber 6. 18 78, I hsv* coa-
iinaed that your property titl• ls aot "olouded" by tho aond ition• pleosd on tbo sonis
reola asifioa tion oi your propwty.
?b• iollowinq ar• •peaial fitrdinqs and oonditions as aawnded durinq the
hearinq on Auqust 16, 1978:
n) Th• County En4ineer'a 4ffias ha• reqwsted the followin9:
Nat,ac A11 requirod impravemwt• stiall be built ta most or exoesd aaintmum
CouAty conotruotion standatds.
1) Appiioanc •hall dedioat• th• Bast 10' and the South SO': 20' radiua
on the NE end SB oomara iACludiA9 aeoeaaacy alo➢a •aseeent ioc
csilroad oro~sUp lmprovenoat.
Z) J►Dpliaaat shail construat a' aovAat conarete sidiwalk, vucb*, and
piw riqht• oi way to meet wdotfng paveamt.
Applicant ahall obtain appraval tor on and oIt-sits dratnaqe plam
and acaoss pernaits boton lssuanoo oi building pennits.
b) ?he appllcant shall oomply with tule• aad tvgulations oi the Hsalth Dlsttict
!n provLdinQ for adeqwt• •ewaq• disposal. All nocessacy H"lth District
permits •hall bs obtalned priar to buildino pwmlt isswnce.
o~ Msina and hydrant• to be instailed fA aaoandinoe with the Bpokane County
Ffn Marshel'a requireeaents.
d) Tbet a Final Declaretion of Nas-8iqaiiioanw be •iqned by the 8oard o[
County Commiss ionwo.
0) A lendscape plan shawinp •pecitio detail and •coompanisd by e poriorasanoe
bond •hall b• apptowd by ti~e Couaty Zonlnq Adminlmtrator pciar to buildfnq
poraut !sauanae .
. ~ ~
Mr, Dooninick ?oulous• - Z- S~pt~o~b~c 6, 1978
i~ ?hat the provislon• ot 8Et11'• pucsuaAt to 43.21o.OB0 RCW
and the gosrd of Caunty CoamissioMts' Resolution #77-1392 be
aaoompllshed by the aoplloaAt within thlrty (30) days oi iorau1 aatioo by
the ooard, a• insuvated by the Pisnoiaq Depactnaent statt.
q) ?hai, tl atter one y"c b+on the date ot the Planninq Commiselou'• aotion,
the appliaant ha• aot rwmiwd tiaai sdoptiaa oi the sane ohanqe, tho
•pplioatiou votd.
Pleas• aote that the only canditiaa• nQuind to finallse the sone raolassitiaatioe
arri a) i. (Applioant •hell dedloat• the lsat 14' wrd the South 50'= ZO' ndiu• on
the NE and 89 cornerat inaludLnq nweseary slope eaaeaeAt tar the railroad croaainq
imprarveseat). Tb• proper torms an avallabl• in the Couiaty Enqirsost's Otfiae.
?he otlNr condltians plaoed aa the sone roclassiftoation will have to be lnoluded in
ariy future devalapaent plan• pRiar to roooiviAq the appropriate buiLdinq pennito.
It yau have aAy Questloas nqardbq Zt--36~78, oc altemativoi. Y+ou MY
pusote, fNl trM to oall.
81AOerely.
JIDri ]OHNBON
Assistant Zonlnq 11d'niniatrttor
1T:amw
co: twry Licc
jaok Ftnney
-
ZE-35-78 - AGRICULTURE TO COMMERCIAL - DONINTGK TaULOUSE
I. FINDINGS OF FACT.
a} Land Use:
1. Site: Fiawer Shap & Residence
2. North: Single Family Residence and Real Estate affice
3. West: Vacant
4. South: Single Family Residence
5. East: Carpet and Furniture Stare
b} Zane Classifieation:
l. Narth: Agricultural Suhurban 12/3J57; dnd Residential Office 2/22/73
2. West. Commercial and Residential affiee
3, Svuth: AgricuZtural and Residential flffice
4. East: cormercial and Residentiaj Office
c) Regional Comprehensive P1an - 1968
The Rlan Map has designated this area as apprapriate for Residential
Development.
II. SPECIAL FINaINGS:
a} County Engineer's Office:
The County En.gineer's Office has requested the follawing be eonsidered,
if the rezane is approved:
N o t e: All required imprvvements snall be built to meet or exceed
minimum County construction standards.
i. Applicant shall dedicate the East 10' and a20' radius on the NE
carner and the SQUth 50' (fLr slQpe easement). ,
2. Applieant sha11 cvnstruct 5' curb~sond pave right af ways tv
meet existing pavement. , . • .
,
3. Appiicant shall Qbtain approvai for on and off-site drainage
plans and access permits before issuance af building permits.
b} Spokane Count,y Health District:
The applicant shall compiy with rules and regulations of the Health
aistrict in providing for adequate sewage dispasa]. All necessary
Nealth District permits shall be obtained privr to building permit
1 SSuaT1Ce.
c) Fire Protectian.
Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with the 5pokane
CQUnty Fire Marshal ` s requi rements.
_19 _
.
MINUTES
Auqust 16, 1978
4. _ • KQEIAERL. (cantd. )
. drafnage Plan befvre issuance of bui}.dinq permits ".(Mrs . Byrne rnaved ,
Mr, Culler secondeal. Vate was unanimous. )
~ . ZL-35--7$ . AGFtI ,C,QMMERCIAL. TOULQIJSE
(continued fram P.lanning Commissfan's July 21, 1978 hearinq,)
That the zvne reclassification request (File Numher ZE-35-78) be approved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff" s findings as khe Planning Cvmmission's
Findinqs of Fact as well as the canditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Fi.nal DecZaration af Non-Signi,ficance be issued; and the following
additional conditian, that the applicant shall dedicate 10 feet af right af way
for sidewalk and curbs an Blake Road; and that Condition "b" fn the Staff's
Findings be delet+ed as well as deletion of the request from the Caunty
Engineer's C)ffice f4c 5' curbs.(Mr. Quiqley moved, Mr. Main secanded.
Vote was unanimous. )
6.
Tapics of discussion included zoning of large deveaopments and- implementation
of the Hearinq Exam#.ner C]rdinance.
Planning Staff Present; Dayharsh, Davis, Litt, Blanchand, and Wesche. Prvsecutoc's
Office: Emacia, Engineer's C3ff#.ce: Finney.
DATED THiS 24th DAY t7F AUGUST. 1978.
By: Myrth Blanchard
Chris 'VVesche
Recvrding Secretaries
' For: Ted McCoury
Planninq Commissivn Chairman
Fred L. Dayharsh
Plannfng Directar
.
_
MINUTES
July 21 , 1978
12. ZW-73-78, AG2ICUL.TLjRA_L. TO RESTRICTED INDUSTRIA .AN,12 RESIDE,jY,TjAL
QFFIC E: TRI-R-CO _ .INC _
That the zone reclassification request (File Number 2W-73-78) be approved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff's findings as the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, ana
that a Final D-aclaration of Non-Significance be issued; and to delete thH
requirement of the County Engineer's Office that the applicant shall dedicete
the North 14' of the advertised property for right of way. (Mr. Quigley
moved, Mr. Kennedy seconded. Four voted "Yes' ; two abstainad from voting,
Motion carried, )
. 13. ZE-71-78 , AGRIC UL.TURAL S JRURBAN TO R SIDENTIAL QFFICE; SYKES
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-71-78) be continued
to a special hearing scheduled for August 16, 1978 ,(Mrs . Byrne moved,
Mr. Quigley seconded. Vote was unanimous.)
14. ?E-141-77. ACRICULTt1RAL TO COMMERCLAL: KOFMEHL
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-141-77) be contirtued
to a special hearing schedule for August 16, 1978. (Mrs. Byrne moved,
Mr. Quigley seconded, Vote was una►nimous.)
15. 7E-3 5-78 . ACRIGtTI.Tt1RAL TO CQMiviLRC'I,AL: TQtILOL1SE
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-35-78) be continued
to a special hearing schedule for August 16, 1978 .(Mrs . Byrne movred,
M► . Quigley seconded, Vote w3s unanimous.)
Planning Staff Present: Litt, Johnson, Horobiowski, Fergen, Wesche, and 81a,nchard,
Engineer's Office: Finney. Prosecutor's Office: Emacio,
DATED THIS 27th D,W OF JULY, 1978.
~
By: Chris W~asche
Myrth Blanchard
Recording Secretaries
For: Ted W;Coury
Planning Commission Chairm•3n
Fred L. Dayharsh
Planning D irector
-8 -
. .
v ~,~5
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION APPEAL REQUESTCO~~`~iii cU~,IS(ONERS
r
a
Your name: Date:
Address: j- "
---t--~
v
Phone No :
on Action Being Appealed
~
J~ ~ ~~t
L ~
I. D. rlLlmber ,7 Date of Action
.
Signature
Your Reasons for Appeal:
~
.
~ ~ / - _ ~ r= ~ • ~ 4~ F
~
i
~ -
~ • ~
98-574
• 2/_19_7FNU 125 f
. ) AY
TO 'ttlF
-nRDER OP
I.A. Il 5
H ~ TM/S
, VALL ORANGH
a 9'FARMERS & MERCHANTS I3ANK
0/ I~OCK/ORO
~OPPOR7VNITY.WASHINGI"ON
of: 12 5 Lif'O 5? 4l; r-
i . .
'
~ • f, • s` ; =r• , j. •
~ ; ~ ' ' ~
'
4
1 •
_ , ~
.
..^t
•
, ~r*'" i
p
:r
~ =i ~ ' ~ _
_ .
, - -
. ' -a-.~
_ ~
. ~ A _
~,>z. -
•;.y ~1 r ~~'?~~'t: ~~s-. . '
' - ne- -
000,
/
~~v
• ?f .
9
S
ii .
f~ .
,
- -
. >i
~
~ ~~7- -m. Iv
kt.* " . J4
.0,
~ ~ ~
. :
Y ~ .r~ r
~ ~ ~
. ~ ~~~Y•:
. _ . ~
. . r , ~ .
~ , f i' : _ _
~t , ` , . ,
~
k.ti~ ~ ' ~~c'a . ~ K _ _ _
_ _
pk.
- e -
. 'r'~ - ' _.~r* _ , ~ ~ .
. . ~r v-~ . . . _ . . . ~ -
"1 ~
_
,
~
Y ± `t.
tA
r
1
~ •
~
,
~
, . .
- - '
/ ~ ~ • ~ '
~ ~
~~~a`~i~~~~~
IL ~
• 'A::~~ )g •
, t
~ ~ ~ ~ '
r
r~
F~~
~ ~ ~ ~i
-
~
R
~I ~
` ~Y
I ( .
~
v ~
~
I ~
,
, 1
~ •
• _ ` - . ~ .
~
. l
.1
e~`...,
t . ~ r „ ~
~ _ ~ ~ .
-t
- - ~
I "
,y - . - - ~ ~ - ~
_ _ - .ao~'. : 7
:
r
r
~ '
s
rt
~ - ~uawuTE
+~xP►A ~ , .
•
. .
~ ..-r..+ ,
✓ .
'w
~yw . , ~ .
~
R ~ . • ° } C°r ~~I i
,x ,
Yff
~
~<<~'
FRED J. wsTTRtGK LAW !DFFICES OF
C,F£7RGE E. FLQQL7 (1934)
rvxN J. v•sRIEtv c1956a WETTRICK, TOULOUSE, LIRHU~ & HO!.JE
SAMUEL J. wE1'7'RtCK tis68) 5L7{TE 677 QEKTER H(7RTON E3UILQ4t4r=
Grz4Rf'+E J. TC7fJLOUSE. JR.
CLAF2ENCE A. L[RHl1S SEA'T'TLE. WASHIRIG7ON $8104
RALPH C. FiQYE
R. hi1CHAEL S7C7CKINCi
TERRY L. KUKUK (206) 62$•7250
FREbFfi21CK C. CJ#NRVpR..1Ft.
WILLEAM G. BP€tINGER
, Feb~ruary 2$, 1979
~
Mr. Jim Johnsan
A ~
ssxstant Zoning Administratar
Spokane County Planning Department UD
F11b11G WDrkS $Lll],.dlng
N. 811 Jefferson Street
Spokane, Washington 99260
P
Re: ZE-35-78
Dear Mr. Johnson:
On December 12, 1978, aur firm wrote ta the Honorable Board
of County Commissioners regarding their decisiQn ta allow for
zone reelassificatiQn subject to certain terms and cvnditions.
To date th.ere has been no response to that letter and I have
attached acopy fve your consic3eration.
The probSem that our cli.ent, Mr. Dominick Toulouse, has with
the conditions attached ta the zane reclassificatiQn are that
they entail the dedicativn of a considerahle gart of the land
which is being reclassified far which no compensatian will he
paid. At the hearing befsre the Board, it was clear that Spakane
County does nat have a need for the praperty they want dedicated
at this time and ma,y in fact never have a need for this property.
Gertainly, it was clear that whatever need for the praperty rnay
develop in the future it will nat be related to the zone reclassi-
f ication and f uture use of Mr. Toulouse' s property.
The case of State Ex Rel. Myhre v. Spakane, 70 Wn.2d 207,
422 P.2d 790 (1967), stands for th.e principle that authorized
city councils in establishing local improvement districts may
require awners of property benefited by zone reGlassificatians
to reimburse the authflrity fcar cvsts of condemnation necessary
for the regulation of antieipated traffic. In short the Supreme
Court held at page 216 that:
"Wia.ening streets and instal.ling electrical
controls for the safety of both gedestrians and
vehieular traffie are regulatory measures which are
within the proper exercise of the city's police pov,rer.
t
Mr. Jim Johnson
Spokane County Planning Department
February 28, 1979
Page 2
When the city requires that the cost of such safety
measures be borne by the company, it is not bargain-
ing away its regulatory police power but, rather,
determining that the cost should be borne by the
persons who created the necessity for the expenditure
of such funds, instead of by the city generally. Such
a determination is within the city's legislative
authority. It follows that a written concomitant
agreement resulting theref rom is not ultra vires.
Other jurisdictions have recognized that such
contracts are valid and are not violative of the
right of the legislative body to exercise police
power. Bucholz v. Omaha, 174 Neb. 862, 120 N.W.2d
270 (1963); Sylvania Electric Prods. v. City of
Newton, 344 Mass. 428, 183 N.E.2d 118 (1962); Church
v. Town of Islip, 8 N.Y.2d 254, 203 N.Y.S.2d 866
(1960)."
The above decision was cited in Gerla v. Tacoma, 12 Wn.App.
8831, 533 P.2d 416 (1975), which held that an application for a
special use permit which created the necessity for wider streets,
pedestrian walkways and other improvements created expenses which
should be borne by the party seeking zone reclassification rather
than the city.
But in each of these cases one point was clear: the cost
which was passed on to the party seeking zone reclassification was
necessitated specifically by the new use which would be made of
the specific property which had been reclassified. Judge Neill,
in his dissenting opinion in the case of Chrobuck v. Snohomish
County, 78 Wn.2d 858, 480 P.2d 489 (1971), set forth the require-
ments for adding these conditions to the exercise of zoning power:
"Synthesized, these cases express our recogni-
tion that concomitant agreements may be valid append-
ages to the exercise of zoning power. The indicia of
validity in such agreements include: (1) The perform-
ance called for is directly related to public needs
which may be expected to result from the proposed usage
of the pro ert to be rezoned. (2) Fulf illment of
those needs is an appropriate function of the contracting
governmental body. (3) Performance will mitigate the
public burden in meeting those resulting needs by
placing it more directly on the party whose property
use will give rise to them. (4) The agreement
involves no purported relinquishment by the governing
body of its discretionary zoning power." Chrobuck v.
Snohomish County_, supra, at 889. (Emphasis added.)
Mr. Jlm JohnSdn
Spvkane County Planning Department
February 28, 1979
F age 3
There is little question that the land sought frorn our client
far dedication will not be required because of any use Yie or any--
vne eTse intends to make of the reclassified property. Accardingly,
it would seem improper to require the dedication of this groperty.
.
If at a later time it becomes necessary to develop a public road
through Mr. Taulause's property due to the development of greater
traffic which has expanded the public need, then it rnay be
necessary to condemn part of the property, but there is no such
indication at this time when and if that may develop and at that
time our client wauld be entitled to reasonable compensation.
We would appreciate your advice on the best way to present
Qur position to the Board of Cvunty Commissivners and any ath.er
adviee or information you ean provide us which wvuld let us
mutually reach a more equitable and desirable result.
Thank you f or your -attention to this matter.
Very truly yours.
WETTRICK, T{]UL4t3SE, LI RHUS & H4VE
By
Frederick C. Canavor, Jr. ~
FCC/emw
Enclosure
cc. Domi.nick Toulouse
1=01:0l"cl}.AC: TOa?'CZ o? L.O11Iity Co. ..•~1:~:~1c;,i~~I'
Spokane County Court j'ouse
Spokznne, ',7asnington 99260
The undersigned represents Donfnick Toulouse.
X. Tr.,ilouse appeats the decisi.on of the Doar.cl of County
,.,-,;<-.:;,)por;; 731490 in t?:e ro].1o<<*inrT par.ticill,,r.r,
i.l!at `I(-, I•-ou1d l:)e ca„titlcc! to
je Rrailt as a rnai:ter o£ Iaw anc3 that the ('oiinty anci
-i.ts 3oar.cI of ro,_iiztv Co:nr^.issieners has 1zo autr.ority to conditi.c ;
~?ie rez.onP of tlie pr_n»Frty in quesl_ion by co;-tnollinct Mr.
to ma}:c cledications of a gr.eat area of his land for public
purposes witliottt cempensation. I•'e are of the opinion
the eoiiciiLions as fraMed woulc.l (Teny I•ir_ . Toulouse of his p-. ~,Yithout c3ue process of law and the County is, in ef Fect, hy
taking the land it seekr to hzve c3e ; icated , violaf.ina hoth
the federal constitution and the state constitution. State :
::.impl}►, it is a conderznation u-ithout pay:;ient and it is the
cld "stic3:-and-carrot" met}lod of extr-cicting from a citizen
for puLlic purposes Iiis property without pay;nPnt therp-f.or
in an appropriate conc?eMnation nro6eeainc,r. ?.tr. Toulouse is
acceptable to rezone without the conditions attached hut he
will not accept the conditions attached to the rezone becalise,
in our j udgrient, tliey are tantamour_t to a taking of his property
wittiout diie process of law. ' Unless sorcte araanqement is reached,
the decision of the Board will be appealecl to the SPokane County
Superior Court or a (lizect action 5ha11 be commeneed to compell
zoning v: it~~out the attacliment of_ the con(?ifi ions.
71t tl-ie he4rinn bezore the Poarc3, it is clcar from the
comme::ts of counsel for the I3aard of County Commissioners, a
r'r. ':ca1 aRrees with To,_i?nusP's position.
*
' .
I?onorable i oard of Co«nty Go;n.riissioners
DecemLer 3_2, 1978
Page T`:To
"Dominic}; Toulouse, the owner t,,Iio reqtiestetd
that the zoning on the land be chanc;ed fro-m
acrricultiaral to corunercial, corlplaincd to the
Spokane County corrumissioner. s that the action
amounted to `takinq my land without clue process.'
Jerry Neal, lenal chunsel ror the conmis4ioners,
agrced. ' You can c7o it if the need for the rights
of way is specif ically ai1d unicruely attributable
to the ioutousc dE?VE3lnp?'1C'Ilt. 6thPY'W1SP_ voL zire
takinq Izis pzoperty without (iiie process,' li-e tolcl
Finney and the corvmissianers.
Finiiey c3efended the request, saying, 'This
is the only method we have to get land for expan-
sion of rights of way. Otherwise we will have
to buy it.'
Put ISeal cruestioned the practice tahich in
the Toulouse case would take a'substantial'
portion o` the prnperty which may bP worth
$3 i-<a 8; a sc;uare foot.
I',e aclviscd the cor:rr.issioners that 'you can't
use your authority to anprove zone changes to
acruire rinhts of way. "For Riqht of ?••ay Lan0oi.-ner
Protests Plan, " Spokane I'.ev3.ew, nctoher 3, 1978.
This letter will give you notice of appeal of the
IIoarc3' s clecision to the Spokane County Siiperior Court. t•Je votild
appreciate yoiir advising us in the prenises.
Very truly yours, _
t:'I:TTRICY., TOULOUSF, LIRIdUS & I?OVE
By
- George J. Toulouse, Jr. GJT/vlv
cc: Dominick Toulouse
•
:
NO , 78 16,z)
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON,
ZE-3 5-78 )
~
IN THE MATTER OF CHANGING THE ZONING )
MAP FROM AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL ) RESOLUTION
ON PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 22, )
TOWNSHIP 25 N., RANGE 44, E.W.M., )
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
The above-entitled matter coming on regularly for hearing before the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, on this day, and it
appearing to the Board that the Spokane County Planning Commission has qiven
due notice of the hearing on the matter in the manner and for the time provided
by law; that said Planning Commission has held a public hearing as required; and
that the said Planning Commission concurs in the plati to zone the following
described property as •
COMMERCIAL
The East 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 north of C.M.St.P. & P. R.R.
right of way, except the West 100 feet of the East 330 feet of the North 150 feet
in Section 22, Township 25 N., Range 44, E. W. M., Spokane County, Wa shington ,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the above-described property be, and the
same is zoned under the classification of COMMERCIAL as defined in the Zoning
Ordinance of Spokane County, adopted August 25, 1953, as amended.
AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED That any development on the above-,described
property shall be subiect to the following conditions:
1) Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage plans and access
permits before issuance of building permits.
2) edications r quested by the County Enginee xecutPd ak this tirr~ ut
/npot exercise until a site plan is approved for subject property.
3) The County Engineer and Planning Director shall review said site plan and
make a determination that the dedications requested are, in fact, appropriate
and necessary for the uses proposed.
4) If the above-mentioned site plan has not been submitted within a period of
two years, applicant shall cequest subiect matter be granted an extension
of time.
5) Construction of curbing and pavement is not necessary until such time as the
site is developed, the exact time to be determined by the County Engineer.
6) If, after review of the site plan, it is determined by the County Engineer and
Planning Director that certain revisions in the conditions of approval are
appropriate, a recommendation shall be forwarded to the Board of County
Commissioners concerning these revisions.
7) The applicant shall comply with rules and regulations of the Health District
in providing for adequate sewage disposal. All necessary Health District
permits shall be obtained pcior to building permit issuance.
8) Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with the Spokane County
Fire Marshal's requirements.
(contd. )
~
rb
s
Z E-3 5-78 (contd. )
9) A landscape plan showing specific detail and accompanied by a performance
bond shall be approved by the County Zoning Administrator pctor to building
permit is suance .
10) That the provisions of SEPA`s Notice of Action pursuant to 43.21c.080
R.C.W. and the Board of County Commissioners' Resolution #77-1392 be
accomplished by the applicant within thirty (30) days of formal action by the
Board, as instructed by the Planning Department staff.
11) That a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be signed by the Board of
County Commissioners.
~
~ 12) That, if after one year from the date of the Planning Commission's action,
the applicant has not received final adoption of the zone change, the
application is void.
Pje64,:m~
ASSED BY THE BOARD THIS DAY OF , 1978.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
HARRY M LARNED, CHM.
RAY W. CHRISTENSEN
IM C. KOPET
,~..,r y
ATTEST:
VERNON OHLAND
Cler he Boa
By:
Deputy
~
~
-2-
~
~
~
ZQNE CHANGES PaSTED Q11T Z 1VG MAPS
Applicativn No. Re s . No. 7,f - i 3el Re s. Date rir l 7 LT
From; 4? j1 t (A1J41FA1 To. &)WA Wk.C r`C l 43
Posted By• R96 Date Fosted .
Acres• Sec, .Z 2. Two. 2.,T' Range AL
EAST
(V1Ta11 Map) Building Codes Department Sca1e• 1" - 1400'
0K_ (Wall Map) Front Office Scale 1" - 1000'
10 K (Wali Map) Middle Office Scale I" - I000'
{Section Maps} Front Office Scale i" - 400'
(File Map) Traci.ng #34 (Valley Zvning Map) Scale I" - I000'
Iv lak (Ffl.e Map) Metro 411 (T?irector's C)ffice) Scale 1" - 2000'
~A- (File Map) County - Front Office Scale 1" - 1 mile
OA- (File Map) County (Map Room) Scate 1" - 2 miles
(Score Gard) Middle Office
5+~..~UTH EAST
(Wall Map) Building Codes Department Scale 1" - IQOQ'
('V1Ia11 Map) Front Office Scale 1 - 1000'
(%31l Map) Middle Office Sca1e 1" - 1004'
(Section Maps) F'rant Office Scale 1"- 400'
(File Map) Tracina 034 (SoLsth East Zoning Maps) Scale - loao"
~(Flle Map) Metro #1l {Direetors Office} Scale: 1" - 2000'
(File Map) County-Front Office Scale: I" - i mfle
(Fxle Map) County (Map Room) Scale 1" - 2 miles
(Score Cards) Mxddle Office
Q , go 78 ~ 4~
NO.
BQA D OF COUIVTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
FINDINGS AND ORDER REGARDING ZONING MAP PROPOSAL, ZE-3 5-78 ,
AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL: TOULOUSE
WHEREAS, The Spokane County Planning Commission did, after public
hearing on July 21, 1978, and continued to Augu s t 16, 1978, forward to the Boa rd
of County Commissioners a recommendation that the Zoning Map be changed from
the existing Agricultural classification to the Commercial classification on property
described as follows
The East 330 feet of the ATW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 north of
C.M.St.P. & P. R.R. right of way, except the West 100
feet of the East 330 feet of the North 150 feet in Section 22,
Township 25 N., Range 44, E.W. M., Spokane County,
Wa shington .
and,
WHEREAS, The applicant before the Planning Commission,
Mr. Dominick Toulouse, did subsequently request a hearing before the Board of
County Commissioners to present evidence and testimony in favor of this
application, and,
WHEREAS, The Board did hold a public hearing on October 2, 1978, to
consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission and testimony and evidence
of the applicant and other interested parties, and,
WHEREAS, At said hearing opportunity was afforded those favoring and
those opposing the above-descrlbed zone reclassification, and the Board of
County Commissioners fully considered the testimony given, the records, and
minutes of the Planning Commission and all evidence presented, and having
individually acquainted themselves with the site and vicinity in question, does
hereby find
1) That the Board of County Commis sioners uphold s the recommendation
of the Spokane County Planning Commission to approve said zone
change, subiect to findings and conditions as contained in the
Planning Commission's minutes of August 16, 1978, i2rovidgd khat,
a) Dedications requested by the County Engineer be executed
at this time but not exercised until a site plan is approved
~
for subfect property.
b) The County Engineer and Planning Director shall review said
site plan and make a determination that the dedications
requested are, in fact, appropriate and necessary for the
uses proposed.
(contd. )
FINDINGS AND ORDER, ZE-3 5-78: TOULO USE (contd.)
c) If the above-mentioned site plan has not been submitted
within a period of two years, applicant shall request subiect
matter be granted an extension of time.
d) Construction of curbing and pavement is not necessary until
such time as the site is developed, the exact time to be
determined by the County Engineer.
e) If, after review of the site plan, it is determined by the
County Enqineer and Planning Director that certain revisions
in the conditions of approval are appropriate, a recommendation
shall be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners
concerning these revisions.
2) The Board also concurred in the Planning staff's recommendation
that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be signed by the
Chairman of the Boarod.
DATED This 1.3 day of /Ivnan6~ , 1978.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
HARRY M. LARNED, CHM.
1ERRY C. KOPET
ATTEST:
VE ON W . OHLAND
k of th ard
By•
.
Deputy
,
_2_ %
\
~
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTOiV
IN THE MATTER CONCERNING )
ZONE RECLASSIFICATION ~ COMMISSIONERS' DECISION
ZE-35-789 AGRICULTURAL TO )
COMMERCIAL Toulouse )
This being the time set by the 6oard of County Commissioners of Spokane
County, Washington, to render its decision concerning the request of
Dominick Toulouse, East 13418 Sprague Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 for the
above captioned zone reclassification, and
The Board having received the recommendation of the Spokane County
Planning Commission to approve the zone reclassification, subject to
findings and conditions as contained in the Commission's minutes dated
July 21, 1978, and
The Board having conducted its own public hearing on October 2, 19789
at the request of the applicant, Mr Toulouse, and after visiting the
site and reviewing the testimony, and
The Board being fu11y 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 of the Spokane County Planning
Commission to approve said zone change, s~l~ct to findin,s and conditions
as contained in the Planning Commission's minutes of Jpjly,
,
PROU DED tha
t
) Dedications requested by the County Engineer be executed
at this tlme but not exercised until a site plan is approved
a► for subject property
2) The County Engineer and Planning Director shall review said
site plan and make a determination that the dedicatlons requested
are, in fact, appropriate and necessary for the uses proposed
3) If the above mentioned site plan has not been submitted within
a period of two years,applicant shall request subject matter be
granted an extension of time
4) Construction of curbing and pavement is not necessary until such
time as the site is developed, the exact time to be determined
by the Gounty Engineer
5} If, after review of the site plan, it is determined by the
County Engineer and Planning Director that certain revlsions
in the conditions of approval are appropriate, a recommendation
shall be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners concerning
these revisions
The Board also concurred in the Planning Staff's recommendation that a Final
Declaration of Non-Significance be signed by the Chairman of the Board
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
APPROVED BY THE BOARD this 23 day of October, 1978
VERNON W AND
Clerk of e Board
by
osa ne Montague, Deput le
3.•: ' ~ ,
~ ~ ~ ~
~
.~r
I R~+M. .
~ ~
" ~ ~
~t ` ~ j'afJ'
1~
~ ~ ~
.
1 ~ _
~
~ - ~
'~r
4 ~
~
No. 73$710
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
NO O8URANCE COYERA6E PROYIOEO-
NOT FOR NITERNAT10NAl MAII
(See Reverse)
SENTlow%~v\n aC
S T AND NO.
~ f z 3
P,O., STATE AND ZIP CODE
~
POSTACa~ / I 1
3
y CERTIFtED FEE
~ SPECIl1l DELIVERY I a
~ RE5TAICTED DEUVERY ~ Q
U. V C $Hpyy TO WHOM AND
~
~ > a DATE OEUVEREp
<
SFiOW TO WF10M, OATE,
~ J p' DEAND L1VEDp RESS Of Q
40 d O V
yj SHOW TO WNOM AND DATE
~ ~ Q DfLIVERED WITH RESTRICTEd ~
~ z DELIVERY
~ SHOW TO WHOM. DATE AND
V ru ADOHESS OF OELIVERY 41fITH ~
Q RESIRICTED DELIVEFiY
- ~
~ TOTAL PpSTAGE AND FEE8 $
~
~ POSTMARK OR DATE
~ ?f717 F
~
~
~
H41 SENDfiR: Complae icems 2, anJ 3.
o Add your address in the "RETVRN TO" spsa on
~ ttVtiSC. ~
3
~ 1. The following aervice is requested (check one
~
~ Show to whom and datt dclivend............ 159
w
Show to whom, date, & addresa of delivery.. 350 :
° E] RESTRIC:TED DELIVERY. N Show to whom and date delivered..._..._._... 650
RESTRICTED DELIVERY.
Show to whom, date, and address of delivery 850
2, AR~CLE ADDRESSED TO:
~
~ < Vv1
Zib
~ 3. ARTICIJE DESCRtPT10N: -
~ REGISTEREO NO. CERTIFIED NO. INSURED NO.
m 73
~
~ wari obtaln signatun of addressa~ or aasnq
N
r4n I ave eived the article described above.
a S N UR ❑ dresse ❑ Authoriud agent
z '
(h
C 4 .
~ A E O LI7,0e Y r POSTMARK
> z S. A DRESS (Com ii nquosttd)
C
~ .
~
~ 6. UfMABLE TO DELIVER BECAUSE: CLERK'S
~ 1N{T1ALS
~
r ~ l
I GPO : 1475-~-047
I
P
~ ~.p c~ . •t~.~~-~- t.. ~ ~ . _ _
.
a
1~ ~q
/ Vi
. ■
r
t•~~ s. ~
i ~ ' -
.
~
SPOKANE COUNTY p ± ;c~ 14
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
N. 811 JEFFERSON
SPOKANE, WASHIN<3TOTi Mgm .
~
~ Frank Hollen
N 121 Wal nut Rd
~ .001" Spokane, WA 99206 R-E C E 11 E
~
JUL 20 1978
SPOKANE COUNTY
p
~ 0 Pi c'~. PIANNING DEPARTMEMT
~
I r1 r.` 1 r, n • f~"
137~
LJ i_ ' • -
~n,_„
.
_1✓ -
x , ~
y S r 'k~ 'S ~ i~ 1 h-.a 1 1 r F ~ 'v ♦r > r~ t +7 ~ ~ ♦ ~ a 'f'~ t~ ~ a,a ~ L,ryt 4
'pr
~4#, , t l~ T a r .+Xtq } r
"s'1'► Ft 'f4 ~ ~It t'Y
,
ZE-35-78 - AGRICULTURE TO CONUNERCIAL N - ICK TOULOUSE
I. FINOINGS OF FACT:
a) Land Use:
1. Site: Flower Shop & Residence
2. North: Single Family Residence and Real Estate Office
3. West: Vacant
4. South: Single Family Residence
5. East: Carpet and Furniture Store
b) Zone Classlfication:
1. North: Agricultural Suburban 12/3/57; and Residenfiial Office 2/22/73
2. West: Conmercial and Residential Office
3. South: Agricultural and Residentlal Office
4. East: coromercial and Residential Office
c) Rgional Comprehensive Plan - 1968
The Plan Map has designated this area as appropriate for Residential
Deveiopment.
II. SPECIAL FiNOINGS:
a) County Ensineer's Office:
The County Engineer's Office has requested the following be considered,
if the reione is approved:
No te: All required improvements shall be built to meet or exceed
minimum County construction standards.
✓ 1. Applicant shall dedicate the East 10' and a 20' radius on the NE
corner and the South 50'4(for slope easement).
2. Applicant shall construct rrcurb~ and pave right of ways to
meet exi sti ng pavement.
3. Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage ,
plans and access permtts before issuance of building permits.
b) Spokane County Health Dfstrict:
The applicant shall comply with ru]es and regulations of the Health
District in providing for adequate sewage disposal. all necessary
Nealth District permits shall be obtained prior to building permit
issuance.
c) Fire Protection:
Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with the Spokane
County Fi re Marshai ' s requi rements.
~ -19-
i
. . ~
ZE-35-78 - IIGRICULTURE TO C014MERCIAL - DONINICK TOULOUSE cont.
d) Envlronmental Review:
The staff recommends that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance
be signed by the Board of County Commissioners.
III. CONDITIONS:
If the Planning Canmission approves this request, the follawing conditions
should be considered:
a) Compiiance wfth all requests stated under Specific Information above.
b) Improvments shail be in substantial conformance with the plot plan
on file.
c) A landscape plan showing specific detail and accompanied by a per-
formance bond shall be approved by the County Zoning Administrator
prior to building permit issuance.
d) That the provisions of SEPA's Notice of action pursuant to 43.21c.080
R.C.W. and the Board of County-tamn#ssioners lTesolution #77-1392 be
acconplished by the applicant within thirty (30) days of formal action
by the 6oard, as instructed by the Planning Department Staff.
e) That. if after one year from the date of the Planning Commission's
action, the appiicant has not received final adoption of the zone
change, the application is void.
- 20 -
A;LvIA, jUL`I 21, 1978 -:I.EPHONE NO, 456-2274
SpOKANE COUNTY PLANNINC WviISSION
T ime • F riday , july 21, 19 :78, 1 30 P, vt .
Place: Broadway Centre Building, Second Floor
Z NE RECLASSIFICaTION North 721 jefferson Street, Spokane
10. ZF-3 5-7A , Aoncultural to Comrn-ercial
a. Location. Sectfon 22,Townshfp 25 N.,Range 44,E.W,M.
The East 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4
north of C,M.St.P. & P. R.R. right of way, except the West 100' of the East 330'
of the North 150' in Section 22.
b. Applicant Dominick Toulouse
EasC 13418 Sorague Avenue
Spokane, WA 99216
c. Site Size 4 1/4 Acres
d. Existinq Zoninq• Agricultural, estaolished March 27, 1942
e. Proposed Zoning Commercial
f, Prooosed Use of Property Retail Business
q. Application of Zoning Provision CSapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
h. Environmental Impact. A topic of discussion at this hearinq may be
whether vc not this prooosal will have a significant adverse environmental impact.
u
1 . c. ~ ya
J J ~1 ~ : J
v ~_►A~E
r~--tAi
: ~ ,r
L j ~
~j 'J/1 r i CYWht
~ - VA LL Ev W AY ¢
r~
►
Nix Z -
~ i W M~~N r
~M A,
ww 1
t
~
.t
o S.i i~O < W
` pIVER510E a ~E~s+o >
SPRAGUE'~AvE. k
- • - - ' ~
Orl CE 23
A vE
r J ~ `.r
~
w ~
a d T N A V E
h T~'^P ;t Z
C Cbl~rQ ~ d
T C a 1 l/ ~O r~ ~ >
~ J~, F ~
~ C
~i V E. Q ..~,TN
1 z~ . r
ot Y ~
Y = - OI 7T~ 4vE 7z+• A
~ , ~ ~ •r • . J I E > ~ ~ 8 TH AvC
: . ~ 14
a ~
~
,
MINUTES
August 16, 1978
4. ZE-141-77, AGRICULT3LRAL Tn COMMF,RC 11L. KOFM .uT, (contd.)
drainage plan before issuance of building permits",(Mrs , Byrne moved,
Mr. Culler seconded, Vote was unanimous.)
2E-35-78. AGRICLILTtTRAL TQ CQMN,ERQjAL, TOULOUSF
(continued from Planning Commission's July 21, 1978 hearing.)
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-35-78) be approved,
rand in so approving, adopts the Staff's findings as the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Final Declaration of Noi -Significance be issued, and the following
additional condition, that the applicant shall dedicatp.,,,10 f P~_t o_f ri ht of way
_.JW sit~out,",,,61,8d curbs nn Rlake Road; a that Condition "b" in the Staff's
Ffndings be deleted as well as deletfon of the request from the County
Engineer's Office for 5' curbs.(Mr, Quigley moved, Mr, Main seccnded,
Vote was unanimous. )
6 LLncheon Meetina
Topics of di scussion included zoning of large developments and implementation
of the Hearing Examiner Ordinance.
Planning Staff Present Dayharsh, Davis, Litt, Blanchard, and Wesche. Prosecutor's
Office Emacio. Engineer's Office: Finney.
DATED THIS 24th DAY OF AUGUST, 1978.
By Myrth Blanchard
~ Chris Wesche
Recording Secretaries
For Ted McCoury
Planning Commission Chairman
Fred L. Dayharsh
Planning Director
-4-
ZE-35-78 - AGRiCULTURE TO COMMERCIAL - DOraINICK TOULOUSE
I FINDINGS OF FRCT
a) Land Use
1 Site Flower Shop & Residence
2 North• Single Family Residence and Real Estate Office
3 West Vacant
4 South Single Family Residence
5 East Carpet and Furniture Store
b) Zone Classification
1 North Agricultural Suburban 12/3/57, and Residential Office 2i22i73
2 West Comercial and Residential 4ffice
3 South Agricultural and Residential Office
4 East commercial and Residentia] Office
c) Regional Comprehensive Plan - 1968
The Plan Map has designated this area as appropriate for Residential
Development
II SPECIAL FINOINGS
a) Count,y Engineer's Office
The County Engineer's Office has requested the following be considered,
if the rezone is approved
No t e All required improvements shall be built to meet or exceed
minimum County construction standards
1 Applicant shall dedicate the East 10' and a 20' radius on the PJE
corner and the South 50' (for slope easement)
2 Applicant sha11 construct 5' curbs and pave right of ways to
meet exlsting pavement
3 Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage
plans and access permits before lssuance of building permits
b) Spokane County Health Oistrict
The applicant shall comply with rules and regulatlons of the Health
District in providing for adequate sewage disposal Al1 necessary
Health District permits shall be obtained prior to building permlt
issuance
c) Fire Protection
Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance wlth the Spokane
County Fire Marshal's requirements
. o
ZE-35-78 - AGRICULTURE TO COMMERCIAL - DOPdINICK TOULOUSE cont
d) Environmental Review
The staff recornmends that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance
be signed by the Board of County Commissioners
III CONDITIONS
If the Planning Commission approves this request, the following conditions
should be considered
a) Compltance with all requests stated under Specific Information above
b} Improvments shall be in substantial conformance with the plot plan
on file
c) A landscape plan showing specific detail and accompanied by a per-
formance bond shall be approved by the County Zoning Administrator
prior to building permit issuance
d) That the provisions of SEPA's Notice af Action pursuant to 43 21c 080
R C W and the Board of County Commissioners Resolution #77-1392 be
accomplished by the applicant within thirty (30) days of formal action
by the Board, as instructed by the Planning Department Staff
e) That, if after one year from the date of the Planning Commission's
action, the applicant has not received final adoption of the Zone
change, the application is void
„
.A~'►
.V3^
~
,
='l~ XTAWW
~
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC WORK3 BUILOINO A1 811 JEFFERSON STAEET
PHONE 45$-2274
~
SPOKANE WASHINOTON
SPOKnnE GOUnTr GOURT NOUSC
September 6, 1978
Mr. Dominick Toulouse
South 123 McDonald Road
Spokane, WA 99216
Dear Mr. Toulouse:
s "
Re: ZE-35-78
GJ ~
In reply to our telephone conversation of September 6, 19 78, I have con-
firmed that your property title is not "clouded" by the conditions placed on the zone
reclassification of your property.
The following are special findings and conditions as amended during the
hearing on Auqust 16, 1978:
a) The County Engineer's Office has requested the following:
Xpta: All required improvements shall be built to meet or exceed minimum
County cons truction s tandard s.
1) Applicant shall dedicate the East 10' and the South 50'; 20' radius
on the NE and SE corners including necessary slope easement for
railroad crossing improvement.
2) Applicant shall construct 5' cement concrete sidewalk, curbs, and
pave rights of way to meet existing pavement.
3) Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage plans
and access permits before issuance of building permits.
b) The applicant shall comply with rules and regulations of the Health District
in providing for adequate sewage disposal. All necessary Health District
permits shall be obtained prior to building permit issuance.
c) Mains and hydrants to be ins talled in accordance wf th the Spokane County
Fire Marshal's requixements.
d) That a Ffnal Declaration of Non-Significance be signed by the Board of
County Commissioners.
e) A landscape plan showing specific detail and accompanied by a performance
bond shall be approved by the County Zoning Administcator prior to buildinq
permit is suance .
I
L ~
s
•
Mr. Dominick Toulouse - 2- September 6, 1978
f) That the provisions of SEPA's NQtic~ e of_ A= pursuant to 43.21c.080 RCW
and the Board of County Commissioners' Resolution #77-1392 be
accomplished by the applicant within thirty (30) days of formal action by
the Board, as instructed by the Planning Department staff.
q) That, if after one year from the date of the Planning Commission's action,
the applicant has not received final adoption of the zone change, the
application is void.
Please note that the only conditions required to finalize the zone reclassification
are: a) 1. (Applicant shall dedfcate the East 10' and the South 50'; 20' radius on
the NE and SE corners; includfng necessary slope easement for the railroad crossing
improvement). The proper forms are available in the County Engineer's Office.
The other conditions placed on the zone reclassification will have to be included in
any future development plans prlor to receiving the appropriate buildi,ng permits.
If you have anx questions regarding ZE-35-78, or alternatives, you may
pursue, feel free to call.
Sincerely,
JIM JOHNSON
Assistant Zoninq Administrator
JJ: cmw
cc: Terry Litt v1
jack Finney
x
~
5POAANt VALLtq FIRE DEPARTPIENT
"V 7s, t e- *4 A w ,a~ &I/.*/
EAST 10019 SPRAGIE AVE • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206 • TELEPHONE IM 948-1700
.
_ ~ tR 114JO Xh& 006V
Ju1y 6, 1978
Mr. Fred Dayharsh, Pl aAning Di rector R ECEIVED
Spokane County Planning Commission J U L 7 1978
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99201 MMNE COUaN
~ Dear Mr. Dayharsh : 't~W~
,
The fol l owi ng Zone Change hpt,,beh, reviewed for ftre protection:
ZE-31-78 A ricultural to~t itr1c ~'Industrial I
Wel l s B. McCur~y Tr ' s \ Mains and h~ydrants need to
h be instal led ~n this rea n required storage to
provi de ade~ e fi ri f1 ow.
- . ~t
. ZE-32-78 Freeway C rcial a Agricu,,t al to conwrcial
Wells B. n ~d,y i.~s and ~y~ nts n~eed to be instalied
in this acotu A d rekd statagq provlde adequate
fire ftm.n~.
.r ? le
_ 1 1 t ~
A letter from the t,C~~f ipi ce'Ao tF~ o zone chenges
wi 11 fo 11 aw.
ZE-64-78 Agri eultura} to ~ 4~ i 1 Su
~ EqUiftb1e lhves ,nd`~ ran s n ed to be
Jns
,
,~al ledrfin
, 1
ZE-77;1~ Alricul tur~~ tt~'~;~~ bur~an rcial
~rdon Ri c o v ~re
y ~r `*ixisting ra ts wi11 needed.
■ ,f i1 y Y~~t~ la A t ~ ~~~t~ i1l i
~
Zt-aS4-77 AgricUltuftl tv dl Offqce Or 1 iple
Famiay Suburbah
d Wi111am Y. Hillstead- Th~r~e aro q#ci ti°ng m in~ s
'area but hydrpn.ts wi 11 ~be ~r~eed~~. ~
d
ew ~
ZE-50-78 Agricultural to Moltiple Family SvkqrjZ(kn
Peter E. Goldberg- Mains and tydrants need to be
instal1ed in this area.
PRE VENT FIRES SA YE LI VES
:
Page 2 '
ZE-41-18 Agrf cul tu ral to Res tri cted Indus tri al
Robert A. Bon ucce 11 i- Ma ins and hydran ts need to be
installed in this area and spacing of fire hydrants to
provide adequate fire flow
ZE-3-78 Agri cu] tural to Resi denti al Offi ce
Phi i ip L. Rudy- There are existing mains in tbis 4rea,
but hydrants wi11 be needed.
ZE-71-78 Agricul tural Suburban to Residential Office
R1ck Sykes, c/o Senske and Masgai, Inc.- There are
existing mains in this area but hydrants will be needed,
ZE-141-77 Agricul tural to Commercia]
Geral d E. Koffiehl- There are exf sti n,q main$ fR tfiis iarea but hydrants wi 1 i be needed.
e3--78 Agricultural to Coaunercial
Dominick Toulouse- Mains and iydrants need to be
installed in this area.
o
Lt. of Inspectors
AC:sn
DAT~ March 1, 1978
Spokane County Planniny Commissioa ZE-35-78
~ounty Court House
Spokane, vv ashinyton 201
Gentlemeiz
vweg tlie ui~dersiyndd proparty owiiers, requc:st tne oi,okane C:ounty Planning
Gommissioa (to co,lsider a zoninr plan) or (to consider chanyi,ly the Loniag map) from
Agrtcultural to Commercial
on the followiiic, desc;ribed property Sectlon 22, Townshlp 25 N., Range 44, the E 330 feet
of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4, N'orth of the CMSTP&P R.R. r/w except the W 100 feet
of the E 330 feet of the N 150 feet. Spokane County, Washtngton
I*4 A064 -E ADDRt:SS LEGAL DESCRIPTI4N OF PROPERTY '
1
2.
~
.
4.
5
6
7.
8
5.
10.
11.
12.
l ,i #
14.
15.
lb
EEi-URE rHE .i,UARA U~ Gt3UNTY (.O1k.lISSI011i;a~, 01' aPaKANE CQUTtT7~~ WASELIT GTON
Iid "L'HE ifATTER CONCERNIiIG }
~GY~E P.ECLASSI~•yIGA'~ION )
ZE-35-78, AGRICL'I.TURAL } taOTICE OF PUELIC IMRING
TQ COM1EiZCIAL: T(?ULQUSE }
210TICIZ IS ~:HELY GIVEN th--t ti'le yoaid of CounLV Con-iLssioners of Spol.ane
County, Washin;tan, c7l1.1 hoZd apu~ lic hea-%nt, vt 1•30 p.n , oi-i Qctober 2,
1978, at thei,: o~f,-ce in the Count~r Caur-LhQ Lse to consicler t~le above-rent2vi,eo
zoae reclassification on the iollor7in~ d~escribed prope~i.;~.
Sectzon 22, Totmsliip ZS I3orth , Renve 44 E.Ij 11.
Tlae East 330 feet oi tbe IZT ? j4 oa: t,ie P3L 1i4
noith af C.4 St.P.&P.tk R. right o~ ifay, e~,cept
tlze li'est 100' of the '""ast 330' oi the Iiorth
154' in Sec -Lian 22.
N4TICE IS FURTHER GIVETd THAT A topic ci d3.scu..sion this Iiearin; maq ~.~e
inether or not this propasal W31I hzlie a sigaificant adverse environrn.enLal
impact.
L(?TICv IS FUItTH~.~R +GIVE.3 i.hat ary person interestecr Tlay appeai at said
hearing and present testimon3 either fok or "agninst the application xo,
the above-mentianeci zone reclassifzcaLion
uY ORDE. 0F THE FiOARI3 th3.S 31S t aay o~ Au-yLIS t, 1972.
VERNOId TI OkILAI'3D
C r..'IC 1~ ~ DAR.D~
r, A-
4asnine -
TIont4Su.e, Depzzty C1
PUBLISH : Va lley Hera ld
September 13, 1978
AGENDA, jULY 21, 1978 !ZPHONE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Time: Fciday, july 21, 1978, 1:30 P.M.
Place: Broadway Centre Building, Second Floor
ZONE BECLASSIFICATION North 721 Jefferson Street, Spokane
10, ?F-3 5-7 S. A ricultucal te Comm~rcial
a. Loca tioa: Section 2 Z, Township 25 N., Ranqe 44 , E. V1r . M.
The East 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4
north of C.M.St.P. & P. R.R. riqht of way, excepC the West 100' of the Eagt 330'
of the North 150' in Section 22.
b. Applicant: Dominick Toulouse
East 13418 Spcague Avenue
Spokane, WA 99216
c. Site Size: 4 1/4 Acres
d. Exis ting Zoninq: Agricultural, es tablis hed March 27, 1942
e. Proposed Zoninq: Conunercial
f. Proposed Use of Property: Retail Business
q. Application of Zoninq Provision: Chapter 4.21, Section 4.21.040
h. Environtnental Impact: A topic of discussion at this hearfng may be
whether or not this proposal will have a siqnificant adverse environmental impact.
t0
J KAv 3 4.KI
- : O ~r
g _
VA! LEYW~
~ vA L.L Ev W AY m
i XCNM
0
~ W
~ M r..~..:
s.. 4
0 I-_
t RIVERSIOE v~p s
~
? PR GUFRAVE.
~
.
iriCE N° 23
` J ~ 0 ;f o
~ ad (
~
" Av EL ' ~
4 T H A V E
- . . ~
~ p T 1 4 J-b? ftr TM d
~
N ' Jf . . i in C
. oV E.. <
v L'. ? t O .
Y = Q• 7t»AVE 7TM A ~
O ~ ~r ~
8 TN AvE
~v • M j
-14-
h
. ti
AGEN'DA, jULY 21, 1978 EPI3C]NE NO.: 456-2274
SPOKA►NE COLTNTY FI.ANNING CO NIMISSION Time: Frfday. Tuly 21, I97$, 1:30 P.M.
piace; Brvadway Centre Buil.ding, Second Floar
ZQM RECLA~SIEMA'_I= Nocth 721 jefferson Street, Spokane
9. zE-141 ~77 ._ABricu1=.1 to,.+G.=merclala. Locatfon: Sectf an 10,TawM ship 25 N., Range 44, E. W. M.
Lvts 163 , 164, and 165, Pinecroft Second
Addf tion.
b. Applicant: Gerald E. Kofinehl
South 2304 Aprf1 Court
Spokane. WA 99216
c. 5ite Size: 36,000 square feet
d. Exfsting Zonfnq: Agricu3tural, established Apcil 24, 1942
e. Praposeci Zoning: Commercial
f. Proposed Use of Pmperty: Restaurant
g. Applicatien of Zvning Frovisfon: Chapter 4. 21, Sectfon 4.21.040
h. Envinomes3tal Impact: A topic of discussion at this hearfng may be
wheCher or not thf.s proposal wi].1 have a signiftcant adverse environmental impact,
Q rw
r= ~ a3
r ~ MARIETTA ~►vE
~~.,..1 . ~
~ x ~4 ~ h
rt~ t .
GII~L1$~ + I► q ~ tw • .
i ~
q EBRI M.a~
. CC
~ • ILtJ f 1~ `
J.
~
Et 19 6'T ~n+r.~. ~ ~~,ar~rJ Av E.
~ • ~s.--n.1 ' ~
~
~ l h
~ 1V 00
q 9"Q
oa~ ~ p
~ ~ ~ MORi►
E 1IQ
7 " ~ = t~ r.o►+ ~
.
Axvti% E x
EL L s„mro~ t t' t o 1904 ra
► fl
sw►a
¢
t30 oM E
.0 n n r_ .
-13-
~
. ~
,r
September 6, 1978
Mr. Dominick Toulouse
South 123 McDonald Road
Spokane, WA 99216
Dear Mr. Toulouse:
Re: ZE-35-?6
In reply to our telephone conversation of S,-=ptember 6, 19 78, I have con-
firmed that your property title is not "ciouded" by the conditions placed on the zone
reclassification of your property.
The following are special findings and conditions as amended durinq the
hearing on Auqust 16, 1978:
a) The County Enqinaer's 4ffice has requested the following:
Wnta: All required improvernente shall be built to meet or exceed minimum
County construction standards.
1) Applicant shall dedicate the East 10' and the South 50'; 20' radius
on the NE and SE corners includinq necessary siope easement for
railroad crossing impcovement.
2) Appllaant shall construct 5' cement concrete sidewalk, curba, and
pave rights of way to meet existing pavement.
3) Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage plans
and access permits before issuance of building permits,
b) The applicant shall comply with rules and requlations of the Health Dietrict
in providinq for adequate sewage disposal. All necessary Health District
permits shall be obtained prior to buildinq permit issuance.
c) Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with the Spokane County
Fire Marshal's requirements.
d) That a Final Declaration af Non-Significance be signed by the Hoard of
County Commissioners,
e} A landacape plan shawing apecific detail and accornpanied by a performance
bond shall be approved by the County Zoning Administrator prtor to building
permit issuance.
. ~
~r
Mr. Dominick Toulouse - 2- September 6, 1978
fl That the provisions of SEPA'8 Ngtice ef Actioe pucauant to 43.21c.060 RCv4'
and the Boerd of County Commisalonsrs' Resolution #77-1392 be
acoomplished by the applicant within thicty (30) daya of formal action by
.
the Board, a s instructed by the Planriing Department staff.
qj That, if after one year from the date of the Planning Coramiesion's action,
the applicant has not received flnal adoption of the zone chanqe, the
application is void.
Please note that the only conditions cequired to finalize the ione reclassification
are: a) 1. (Applicant ehall dedlcate the East 10' and the 3outh 5020' radiud on
the NE and SE corner8"er including necessary slope easomant far the railroad ccossinq
impcovemsnt). The forms are available in the County Engineer' a 4#fice.
The other conditiona placed on the zone reclaseification will have to ba inctuded in
any future development plans prior to receiving the appropciate buildinq permite.
If you have any queations reqarding ZE-35-78, or alternatives, you nay
pumae, feel free to call.
Sincerely,
jIM JOHNSON
Assistant Zoning Administrator
JJ:cmw
cc: jeny Litc
jack Finney
p a
MINUTES
August 16, 1978
4. ZE-141-77. AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL: KOFMEHL (contd.)
drainage plan before issuance of building permits". (Mrs. Byrne moved,
Mr. Culler seconded. Vote was unanimous.)
N S. ZE-35-78. AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL: TOULOUSE
~ (con tinued from Planning Comrnf s s ion' s july 21, 1978 hearing.)
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-35-78) be approved,
e~.1 and in so approvinq, adopts the Staff's findinqs as the Planning Commission's
~ Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
~ that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be issued; and the following
~ additional condition, that the applicant shall dedicate 10 feet of right of way
for sidewalk and curbs on Blake Road; and that Condition "b" in the Staff's
Lindinqs be deleted as well as deletion of the request from the County
~ Enqineer's Office for 5' curbs. (iVir. Quigley moved, Mr. Main seconded.
Vote wa s unanimous. )
6. L ncheo Meetincr
Topics of discussion included zoning of large developments and implementation
of the Hearfng Examiner Ordinance.
Planning Staff Present: Dayharsh, Davis, Litt, 8lanchard, and Wesche. Prosecutor's
Office: Emacio. Engineer's Office: Ffnney.
DATID THIS 24th DAY OF AUGUST, 1978.
By• Myrth Blanchard
Chris Wesche
Recording Secretaries
For• Ted McCoury
Planning Commission Chairman
Fred L. Dayharsh
Planning Director
-4-
~ t
1VIINUTES
August 16, 1978
2. ZE-31-78. AGRICULTURAL TO BgSTRICTED INDUSTRIAL: McCURDY
7E-32-78 . FREEWAY COMMERCTAL AND AGRICULTUR AL TO CQMMERCIAL.
- -
McCURDiY (conCd. )
g) Countv Roads and R/'W. The County Engineer's Office will require improve°
ments to Liberty Lake Road, Kenney Road, and Henry Road, and acquire
riqhts of way necessary to handle the impact of these rezones. Also,
costs for these fmpcovements shall be the burden of the developer as set
focth in the Ietter from the County Engineer dated Auqust 16, 1978, and
as corrected at the hearing. Said 1epter is on record with the ffle.
h) That Che developers, Hiqhlands and Homestead, will cooperatively work
on measures to adequately address the potential air pollution problems.
i) That a storm runoff water drainage plan shall be approved by the County
Engineer's and Spokane County Health District prior to issuance of
building permits.
j) That a detailed landscape plan shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator
pr1Qr to is suance of buildinq permits.
k) That an agreement between the developer and the Liberty Lake Sewer
District has been acvomplished to handle sewage and waste water
disposal.
I) That all mitigating measures in the E.I. S. shall be adhered to.
GONDITIONS ; That Paragraphs E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L above adopted
as special conditions for approval of the zone change.
3, &E-71-78 . AGRiCULTURAL• SLrBLrRBAN TO R STDENTiAL OFFiCE; SYKES
(continued from Planning Commission's july 21, 1978 hearing.)
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-71-78) be approved,
and in so approvinq, adopts the Staff's ffndinqs as the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be issued. (Mr. Qufgley moved,
Mr. Main seconded. Vote was unanimous.)
4. ZE-141-77. AGRICULTfTRAL Ti0 COMMERCIAL: KOFMEHL
(continued from Planning Commission's july 21, 1978 hearing.)
Tha t the zone recla s s ifica rion reque s t (F ile Number ZE-141-7 7) be approved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff's ffndings as the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in thettaff's findings, and
that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be issued; and the additional
condition that the building be limited to one story or 20 feet in height; and to
delete the words, "and off" trom Condition #2 of the County Engineer's Office
requireinents fio make it read• "Applicant shall obtain approval for on-site
- 3 - (contd. )
.
. .
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNIIVG COMMISSION
North 811 Jeff erson
Spokane, Washington 99260
August 24, 1978
Honorable Board of County Co:nmissioners
Spokane County Court House
Spokane, WA 99260
Gentiemen:
At a special hearing of the Spokane County Planning Commission on Wednesday,
August 16, 1978, at 8:30 A.M. to 11:45 A.M., reconvening at 1:30 P.M. ro
2.30 P.M., in the Broadway Centre Building, the enclosed action was taken and
is recommended to the Board of County Commissioners.
Members present: Mr. McCoury, Mrs. Byrne, and the Messrs. Culler, Main,
and Qufqley. Due to a conflict of interest, Mr. Main was excused from attending
the afternoon session of the hearing. Planning staff present: Dayharsh, Davfs,
Litt, Blanchard, and Wesche. Prosecutor's Office• Emacio. Engineer's Office:
Finney.
Sincerely,
SPOKANE COUNTY PIyAN1VING COMMISSION
C/
Te McCoury, Cha rman
Fred L. Dayhars , Planning Dfrector
McC• FLD:cmw
Official minutes and record of action
taken by the Spokane County Planning
Commission at a special hearing held
on August 16, 1978.
•
' RE,CEI VED
111JG2 1 i 978
~
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION APPEAL REQUESTCAM COMN MIISSIONERS
~
~ &
1~6, ~
Date•
Your name• fhar,
Addre s s~? o_--
" Phone No._~~~~
Planning Commission Action Being Appealed
- ~ Title
~
I . D Number Date of Action
Siqnature
, Your Reasons for Appeal.
~
98-574
1251
,
,
)TOTHE ~
f ,ORDER O r
r LLAR S
P`aP g.a VALL BRANCH i
# a ~ ► FARMERS MERCHANTS BANK
or Ro"►ono
Ot'PORTL7NiTY.WASHINGT'ON ~
awcwu wtwn ae60 ° ti , 1 t t
RECEI AUR
SPOKA NF rn►~r oll
OCANiYING DEPARTMENT
a ' ~
'1'~ j ~j~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
MINUTES
July 2I , 1978
12. ZW-73-78, A„GRIC ULTURAL TC) .$E TRICTED INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDFnT'TIAt,
OFFICE: TRI-R-CO _ .INC _
That the zone reclassiffcation request (File Number ZW-73-78) be approved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff's ffndings as the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Final D?claration of Non-Significance be issued; and eo delete the
requirement of the County Engineer's Office that the applicant shall dedicate
the North 14' of the advertised property for rfght of way. (Mr. Quigley
moved, Mr. Kennedy seconded. Four voted "Yes' ; two abstained from voting.
Motion carried. )
13. ZE-71-78, AGRICULTURAL SUBURBAN TO RESIDEMIAL OFFICE. SMES
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-71-78) be continued
to a special hearing scheduled for August 16 , 1978 .(Mrs. Byrne moved,
Mr. Quigley seconded. Vote was unanimous.)
14. ZE-141-77. AGRICULTURAL TO COMME$CIAL: KQFMEEL
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-141-77) be continued
to a special hearing schedule for August 16, 1978. (M. s. Byrne moved,
Mr. Quigley s econded . Vo te was unanimou s.)
V 15. E-3 5-7 AGRIC ULTURAL TO CO M1/IE RCIAL: TO ULOUS E
That the zone reclassffication request (File Number ZE-35-78) be continued
to a special hearing schedule for August 16, 1978 .(Mrs . Byrne moved,
Mr. Quigley seconded. Vote w3s unanimous.)
Plannfng Staff Present Litt, Johnson, Horobiowski, Fergen, Wesche, and Blanchard.
Engineer's Office Finney. Prosecutor's Office Emacio.
DATED THIS 27th DAY OF JULY, 1978.
~
- By Chns Wp-sche
Mvrth Slanchard
Recording Secretarles
For Ted M cCoury
Planning Commis sion CLiairman
Fred L. Dayharsh
Planning D irector
-8 -
MINUTES
Tuly 21, 1978
7, 7E-77-78, AGRICULTUR.AL• AND AGRICJLTURAL ~UBURBAN TO COMVIER~
RTC,H D30N and H_ O'JER
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-77-78) be approved,
and fn so approving, adopts the Staff's findings as the Planning Commissfon's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be issued, and to delete the
requirement of the County Engineer`s Office that Che applicant shall dedicate
10 feet on both sides of Adams Road for right of way as the dedication has
already been made. (Mr. Thomas moved, Mr. Kennedy seconded. Vote was
unanimous. )
g. 7E-1 54-77 . AGi21CtILTU,RAL SU LTgBaN TO RESIDFNTTALOFFLrE o$ M~=`
FAM i T r~ RB N., HI LSTEAa
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-154-77) be denied,
as the mfltion for approval lacked a quorum vote of the Commission.
M: s. Byrne moved, W. Kennedy seconded, that the zone change reclassifi-
cation be approved to Multiple Family Suburban, and in so approving, adopts
the Staff's findings as the Planning Com-nission's Findings of Fact as well as
the conditions stated in the Staff's fi,ndings, and that a Final Declaration of
Non-Significance be issued.(Three voted "Yes"; three voted "No". The
motion was lost for lack of a quorum.)
g. 7E-50-78 AGR C~ULTURAL T MTJLTI LE FAMiLY SUBURBAN._ GOLL)BERG
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-50-78) be aPpcoved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff's ffndings as the Plannzng Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's ffndings, and
that a Final Daclaration of Non-Significance be issued, with the follownng
additional conditions approval for 112 units, and the County Engineer's
Office requi.res paving on Bow3ish to 30' wide, curbing and sidewalks; and
also curbfng and pavfng required to meet the existing paving on Jackson.
(Four voted "Yes two vated "No". Motion carried,)
10. ZE-41-78 , AGaICULTURAL TQ REETRZ r,~D rN 'JSTRIAILa,.3nl\=CEI
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-41-78) be approved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff's findings as the Planning Commission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditfons stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance be issued; with the additional
conditions presented by the applicant to be attached to the approval, including
a 6' fence. (M:. Culler moved, Mr. Thomas seconded. Vote was unanimous.)
11. ZE-3-7A , AGRT(".tJLTU L TO RESIDENTI$L OFFTCF;j, RT,TDY
That the zone reclassification request (File Number ZE-3-78) be approved,
and in so approving, adopts the Staff's findings as the Planning Com-nission's
Findings of Fact as well as the conditions stated in the Staff's findings, and
that a Final Doclaration of Non-Significance be issued; to include the
following additional condition That the access to Argonne Road be limited;
and that at the time of a new proposal, curbtng, paving, and sidewalk be
provided on Alki Avenue. Mr. Kennedy moved, Mr. Ouigley seconded. Vote
ws s unanimous. ) - 7 -
8EF4RE THE PIANAiING COMN~ISSICN OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINCaTON
) NOTICE
QF
CONTIATUANCE
~
Tbe above entitled matter cominq on reqularly for hearinq before the Planninq
Commission of Spokane Crnanty, Wa shington, and the Commisslon being
deslrous of glvlnq said matter futher consideratton did determine to
contlnue this hearlnq to
J&r~ A J /778
DATED AT SPOKANE THIS D►AY OF i-" , 1979.
TED NC COURYJ CHAIRMAN
By: Fred L. Dayharsh
Dtrector of Plannlnq
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
North 811 jefferson
Spokane, Washington 99250
July 27, 1978
Honorable Board of County Commissioners
Spokane County CQUrt House
Spokane, WA 99260
Gentlemen.
At the regular hearing of the Spokane County Planning Commission on Friday,
July 21, 1978, at 8•30 A.M. to 11 50 A.M , reconvening at 1 30 P.M. to
6:25 P.M., in the Broadway Centre Building, the enclosed actfon was taken
and is recommended to the Board of County Commissioners
Members present• Mr. McCoury, Mrs. Byrne, and the Messrs, Culler,
Kennedy, Thomas, and Quigley. Planning staff present Litt, Johnson,
Horobiowski, Fergen, Wesche, and Blanchard. Engineer's Office• Finney.
Prosecutor's Office: Emacio.
Sincerely,
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMivIISSION
Ted McCoury, Chairman
F red L. D.3yharsh, Planning D irector
TMcC. FLD cmw
Official minutes and record of action
taken by the Spokane County Planning
Commission at their regular hearing
held on July 21, 1978.
~ . .
ZE-35-78 - AGRICULTURE TO COMMERCIAL - DONINICK TOULOUSE
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
a) Land Use:
1 Site. Flower Shop & Residence
2 North: Single Family Residence and Real Estate Office
3. West. Vacant
4. South. Single Family Residence
5. East: Carpet and Furniture Store
b) Zone Classiflcation:
1. North: Agricultural Suburban 12/3/57, and Residential Office 2/22/73
2 West• Conanercial and Residential Office
3. South. Agriculturai and Residential Office
4. East: commercial and Residential Office
c) Regional Comprehensyve Plan - 1968
The Plan Map has designated this area as appropriate for Residential
Development.
II. SPECIAL FINDINGS:
a) County Engineer's Office
The County Engineer's Office has requested the following be considered,
if the rezone is approved
N o t e A11 requlred improvements shall be built to meet or exceed
minimum County construction standards.
1 Applicant shall dedicate the East 10' and a 20' radius on the NE
corner and tfie South 50' (for slope easement)
2 Applicant shall construct 5' curbs and pave right of ways to
meet existing pavement.
3 Applicant shall obtain approval for on and off-site drainage
plans and access permits before zssuance of building permits.
b) Spokane County Health District:
The applicant shall comply with rules and regulations of the Health
District in providing for adequate sewage disposal All necessary
Health District permits shall be obtalned prior to building permit
issuance.
c) Fire Protection:
Mains and hydrants to be installed in accordance with the Spokane
County Fire Marshal's requirements.
, -19-
Ij
ZE-35-78 - AGRICULTURE TO COMMERCIAL - DONINICK TOULOUSE cont.
d) Environmental Revlew:
The staff recommends that a Final Declaration of Non-Significance
be signed by the Board of County Corranissioners.
III. CONDITIONS:
If the Planning Cortanission approves this request, the following conditions
shouad be considered:
a) Compliance with all requests stated under Specific Information above.
b) Improvments shall be in substantial conformance witfi the plot plan
on file
c) A landscape plan showing speciflc detail and accompanied by a per-
formance bond shajl be approved by the County Zoning Administrator
prior to building permit issuance.
d) That the prvvisions of SEPA's Notice of Action pursuant to 43 21c 080
R.C.W. and the Board of County Commissioners Resolution #77-1392 be
accomplished by the applicant within thirty (30) days of formal action
by the Baard, as instructed by the Planning Department Staff.
e) That, if after one year from the date of the Planning Commission's
action, the applicant has not received final adoption of the zone
change, the application is void
- 20 -
i
~ ra
" STAT~ OF 1)F PARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WASHING?ON
tlH► e0 Uzu i 2 tn.ynesi
Utxy Lee Rdy t`fty il~ 2 111 Mayf at Stt"t
G01!@I1TU1 Nntlh ( iersi#a! `)Idtum
5pc j4,nt Wuhuigt illwAh
~
t f, %*A
July 18, 1978 1
~ ~lt
~.coil
~v~►~
jP0Mr. Fred DaYharsh, Directar ~
Spokane County Planning Commaission
North 811 Jefferson Street
Spokane, Washington 99201
Spokane County Planning Commiesion
Agenda July 21, 1978
Dear Sir:
This office is in receipt of the agenda of your July 21, 1978 Planning Connniasion
Meeting and would commnent on the following items.
ZE-141-77 & ZE-71-78
This office would not oppose the rezoning of these parcele but would advise the
applicanta that future controls on Sign Route 27 (Pines Road) could Xestzict acceae
to right turn only movements along Sign Route 27. This office would also $dviae
applicants to consider all access onto Pines via existing coumty road system
inasmuch as the multitude of present accesses have caused traffic operatiou
problems. If unable to comply with this restriction, all access oato Pines muet
be applied for through the Department of Transportation.
ZE-32-78 & ZE-31-78
Our previous statements are attached in ouY correspondence dated M8y 11, 1978.
ZE-35-78, ZW-73-78. ZE-3-78, ZE-41-78? ZE-50-78, ZE-154-77. 2E-77-78,, Z$-64-78 j
~ This office would not oppose the rezoning of these parcele. ,
~
This of€ice has no comment on ehe proposed amendments to tbe Spokane County zoniag
ordinances.
Very truly yours,
. i
O`
f ~
' yL-~
, 4~;ZRl H G, P.E.
District Adminietrator
WRH.mb r
Attach
cc: EWFerguson
RREarnest
Record Control
ALA' , C i~~ ~ 7
- - -
• , ; . PLANNING DEPARTMENT
•J :~1 I I II
; :i1 { p PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING N. 811 JEFFERSON STREET
PHONE 458-2274
~v . . . .,rt . 7
~ SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
SpOKANC CaUNTY COURT HoUSE M E M O R A N D U M
ToO. CD. &~.T1~ tJi sT. Qp51J.S
Sf~ ~ t7uv~~R p~'~V ; 3't~s 1uS
}}t~4e.~
~u,
grtw : R►jys S TauAC
FROM: Spokane County Planning Jepartment
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, WA 99260
509-456-2274
Attenti on : Te" Ky -
REFERENCE: Lead Agency Destination, Threshold Determination, Staff
Review, Environmental Checklist, map; all or some of which
are attached.
Pursuant to WAC 197-10-203 (3), the Spokane County Planning Department, a
division of Spokane County, has determined that the County, as an ACTING
AGENCY, is the LEAD AGENCY for the following project:
Ze-- 35 '78
This determination was made in accordance with WAC 197-10-220.
Information on file concerning this proposed action indicates your agency to be
an AGENCY WITH JURISDICTION (WAC 197-10-040 (4) ) or an AGEPJCY WITH EXPERTISE
(WAC 197-10-040 (3)
Accordingly, if you wish to exercise your option to review and comment as pro-
vided in WAC 197-10-340 a proposed Declaration of Nonsignificance was
issued on ~ . Please resPond, if aPProPriate, at Your
earliest o portuni y, ut no later than
9 ) ~ 7A
The subject proposal or action (IS, r2RVW LOCATED WITHIN THE SPOKANE
VALLEY SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER OR ITS VIATERSHED. Please advise us as soon
as possible as to whether you feel an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
or a Ground Water Impact Evaluation (GWIE), pursuant to the Environmental
Protection Agency's Sole Source Designation or regulations pertaining to this
designation, should be prepared.
Enclosures
FrLE 3 tr-- 7d
G''~
.
.
STA~'~ ~
+ e ,ia,~.9 R-E'~IEW I ~
k. . -
- OF Q1'~l'v~LN'TAL CHEQLIST
SPOKANE GOLJI+TY GflIY#7 F{4'USC
In accordanee with the Spokane Ccaunty Environmental (]!-dinance and WAC 197-10,
an Environmental Cizecklist has been submitted by the applicant or his agent.
This checklist and any addi.kf.onal pertfnent d:ata has subsequently been reviewed
by th e l. 4141.42 L A2 4 $°7A FF
The following data briefIy describes the praposal:
_ A. Action (s) Reques ted: ~V Zane Change,• Prelfminary Plat
Approval: Fzna1 Flat Approval; Change af Condition
0 ther:
. B. Descriptzan of Proposal: FiiOW1 l44 T'a C?w~wdlj?l rl"~5 &vs?
.0`LOw rof %Sk" /-07-
C. Lacatian of Proposal: 4OF ~MA44'V*` !f-
73"Jo
f.e- J~► ~ .
IZ. Review of Checklist:
A. Slight adve: se impacts are nated uncier the failowing questions :
(1) ~Earth (8) -k!!!~ Land Use (15) Ener9Y
(2) &00' Air (9) Natural (I~) -Jge Utilities
Resources
(3) ~W3ter (10) Risk of {17} Human
Upset Health
(4) ,koo""Flora (11) Populatian (Ig) --j.,iA?sthetics
(5) Fauna (12) Housing (I9) R:ec.
(6) Noi.se (I~) Loolra.ns (20) Arch./
~ Circ. Hist.
(7) ~Light & (1.4) Public (21) Other
Glare Servi.ces
B. Potentially si nificant adverse impacts are noted under the following
ques tions : ~O IV b~
C. Discussion of impacts identified above: NdA)6
III. Conclusions and RecommPndations: Based on this staff review of the environmental checklist, the staff:
A. -too'000*Concludes that there are no potentially s?gnificant adverse impacts
and recom:nends/issues a proposed declaration of nonsignificance.
B. Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse impacts
and, because of the nature of the proposal, recomm'n-nds/issues a
final declaration of nonsignificance. I
C. Concludes that potentially significant adverse impacts do exist and
recommend s/is sues a declaration of significance.
i
~
IV. Staff inember( s) revi ewi ng checkl i st
, ~r=3~-~8
~ .1:~.~.
~
~
~
s
GPOKAI{[ GSUhi♦ (.VyW[ M()US[.
ENVIRONMENTAL 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 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 environment. The
purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a
proposal is such a ma jor action.
Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information
presently available to you. Please answer questions as "yes" or "m3ybe" if, in your
opinion, even only slight impacts will result. The reviewer5 of the checklist will be
aware of and concern themselves with the dectree 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 additional paqes, if necessary. You should
include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are
relevant to the answars you pravide. Complete answers to these questions now will
help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmenral
review without unnecessary 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 returneci
to the appropriate County department. State law requires explanations for every "ves"
and "mavbe" answer on the checklist, The person completing the form may be required
to provide explanations for "no" answers, and in same 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 varlous 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
1. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent: L? yy"Z,
2. Address and Phone Number of P_rQponent:
r 1 3 5, ,^-t e- Da , "~1"i (7.ck
s tAL)r% , 9 9,;2 i ~
J
51 .7 j-
3. D-3te Checklist Submitted: bZ,
4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Spokane Countv, Wa,
5. Name of Proposal, if Applicable:
-
~
(IF SPACE FOR E{PLANATION IS INADBQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES.)
6. Nature and Brief Descri.ption of the Proposal (includinq but not limited to its size,
general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate under-
s tand ing of i t s s cope and na ture) :
L ~ r' c r sJ~Si_
c t a~ tij ~ r t sra (;~_f
~ /
e ~ ,C1, 1 cA_ ~
~
PS-4 It-4 ~O COV<°-r ,t►.LeS rjhC~• ~
7. Location of Proposal (describe 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 proposal) :
bC1Ve.
0
L L4J e r ,5
cl -tft Cd*
.
8. Estimated ate for Completion of the Proposal:
~//A
9. I.ist of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal
(federal, state and local - including rezones):
10a. Do you,or the owner !n the event you do not own the subject land, haue any
plans for future additions, expanslon, or further activity related to or con-
necte¢ with thls proposal ? If yes, explaln: .
t~;ti o t ~ /=-7,pr
~d ~d cts ,P u S~~
lOb, Do you own or have options on land nearby or adiacent to this proposals
location? If yes, explaln: ,
__y e 1 }~W C, 111. C~, 1~,.7C" 4 -a s
_kX4 a ~ c-e ~ +o +AnI,'3 ~
11, Do you know of any plans by others lncluding the owner which may affect the
property covered by your proposal or land adjacent or nearby? If yes, explaln:
12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the proposal;
if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date,
describe the nature of such application form:
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are requit'ed)
Yes Maybe No
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: ^
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in qeologic
structures? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~S. •
(b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering
of the soil? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Z _
.
.
,
(IF SPACE FOR EXPLANATION IS INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES.)
Yes Maybe No
(c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features
r -
a
(d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique
geologic or physical fea tures ? . , , , , , , , , , , X
(e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either
on or off the site? . . . . . . , . . , , , , , ,
(f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may
modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of
the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake ? . . . , , . . . ~
Explanation: . . ~
Y.ea Ma,xhe No
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality?
(b) The creation of objectionable odors? . . . . , . . , . ~
(c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature,
or any change in climate, either locally or regionally?
Explana tion:
•
3. Water. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No
(a) Change in cunents, or the course or direction of
water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
(b) Changes in absorption rates, drainaqe patterns, or
the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters
(d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water •
body ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration
of surface water quality, including but not limited
to temperature, dissolved oxyqen or turbidity? ~
(f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground
wa ters ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - ~
(g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavatfons ? . . . . . . . . ~
(h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through
direct injection, oi- through the seepage of leachate,
phospates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria,
or other substances into the ground waters ? , . , ,
(i) Red,lction in the amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . x
Explanation: -T T ! Cp7,S e J 4'Q 12. (J- , e
,?~S .
t~f C1 S 6 r ai+e-`r' e ci • ' Lb e -
I ~cL.5 e- %A.Z4~ ccn--r~LAS e-
Q
-3 -
~
(IF SPACE FOR EXPLANATION IS INADBQUATk PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES,)
Yes Maybe No
4. Flora. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of
any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass,
crops, microflora and aquatic plants) ? . , , . . , . ,
(b) Reduction of the numbers 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 ? . . . . , V-- _
Explanation:
C - S. ~ S e S W:. L,~ t!
Ccit
Yes Mavbe No
S. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: ~
(a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of
any species of fauna (birris, 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 are3, or
result in a barrier to the migration ar movement of fauna? . ~
(d) Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat?
Explans*ion:
Yes M.3ybe IVo
6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels?
Expianation:
Yes May~e No
7. ~ht and Glare. VNill the proposal prc~duce new light or glare?
Explanation: ~ •
Yes Mavbe No
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the
present or planned land use of an area ? . . . . . . . . . . ~ x ~
Explanation: S
.
~
~ I
~
(IF SPAGE FOR EXPLANATION IS INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES.)
Yes , Iaybe tio
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources ~
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? ~
Explanation:
Yes Ma Xbe NL:)
10. Risk of Uoset_ Does the prnposal 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
Explanation:
Yes Maybe No
11. Population. Will the proposal alter Che location,
distribution, density, or growth rate ot the human
population of an area? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
Explanation: 12. Housinct. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or ~
create a demand for additional housinq ? . . . . . . . . .
Explanation: Yes Maybe No
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? X-
(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? . . . . . . . . . x'
(e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic ? . . . . . . ~
(f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians ? . , . . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation: i.Vp u ¢
. c
c, ~ ~-S e s s ~J ca ~ ~ ~ ~
+
~ •1, ~ t~-~- i c. a c 5..N6.
r - i -S-
i
(IF SPACE FOR EXPLANATION IS INADEQUATE, PLEASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAC3ES.)
Yes Maybe No
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon,
or result 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 recreational facilities ? . . . . . . . . ~
(e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
(f) Other governmental services? . . . . . . , . , . .
£xplanation: •06
Ye s Maybe No
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Use o# substantial amounts of fuel or energy? x
(b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require
~
the development of new sources of energy? ~
Explana tion: '
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) Communicatlon systems? . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(c) Water? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
(d) Sewer or septic tanks ? . . . . . . . , . , . . , ~
~ .X
(e) Storm water drainage? . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(f) Solid waste and disposal? . . . . . . . . . . , . A
Explanation:
Yes Maybe No
17. Human Health. Will the proposal resLilt in the creation of
any health hazard or potential health t azard (excluding
mental health) ? , , . . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . .
Explanation:
-6-
,
f
(IF 'SPACE FOR E{PLANATION IS INADEQUATE, P:,EASE ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES.)
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 an aesthetically offensive site
open to public view? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ^
Explanation: Va L',v.~
Q.4--Ak- y e. u v- e.,
.
.
AV 'Z) + L'ej . , c c....S-,~.{ P ``Q.~. s \ . ~ ( t,,,L L ~
J v~ ~ ~ r. v~ 0 -Q t} ♦ ~ w` ~k ~C_ \ ~
Yes Maybe No
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the
quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities ~
Explanation:
`_'es N1~3ybe No
20. Archeological/HistoiZCal, W-,11 the proposal result in an
alteration of a significant archeologic~:l or historfcal site,
structure, object or building? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~
Explana tion:
III. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, swear under the penalty of perjury that the above responses are
made tnuthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, should there be
any willful misrepresentation or willful lack o f full disclosure on my part, Spokane County
may withdraw any declaration of nonsignlficance that it might issue in reliance upon this
checkli st o
. /
Date: Proponent: t (Please Print or Type)
Proponent: ~ ~ ~,.,~v.. ~ vv~- S ~
Address: /If G D 4 K- -L, l ~ ~ ` ~w..•.,..e ~~~(o
Phone:
Person completing form:
Phone:
Da te:
Dapt, or Office of County Reviewing Checklist:
t
Staff Member(s) Reviewing Checklist: zlit) ~
►1711 T
-
-7
4
-F t -
r ~ v
~ r~ O E CHANGE PRE-APPIICATION
~
~Cj Date / 7J> Appltcation No 5-7
Name of Applicant ou/oevJ'e . f, /oZ3 ~c.~czebe Pe-e
Street Address City: SP06*-vP State ~~'stC
Telephone No. W(
Existing Zone Classification C;~ZZ4.4 2e
Existing Zone Classification Established. 37- ~Z
Proposed Zone Classification ct--g
Propo sed Use of Properry•_,&-v4tcZNo. of Acres_4L*/V
Lega 1 De s criptiopL ot Property 42 S-/-/Z/ ,E, 3 3 0' ~
~ ~ t / • ~ f ~S/ ° ~ ~4r ~ C~ C ~l SS/ /Q ~ i
. ~ '
62 /G O~ o~ ,E 33 C3 cV ~/SC) -!~oo CcCO~ C
~
~
Section Township. SA✓ Range
Street Address of Property: g5
Who Holds Title to the Property.
If you do not hold tftle to the property affected by this application, what is
yo ur in tere s t in it ?
c~O-erc~.~e
-V4 .~kz4w oc'.6
•
~
SPOKANE COUNTY PLAN1vING COMMISSION
Couut House, Spokane 1, Vliashington
APPLICATION FOR LOCAL BUSINESS QR COMMEROIAL ZONE
PART I• Information to be furnished the Planning Commission with an application for
a Zone Change to Local Busine s s or Commercial.
1. Development Plan - a scale drawing of applicant's property and
surrounding streets showing.
a. Size, number, and type o# proposed establishmertts;
b. Off--street parking and loading areas proposed;
c. Proposed acce s s and egre s s points (curb cuts), and
d. Landscaping, screening, or fencing proposed.
2. Economic analysis fndicating the need for the proposed development
which i s to include.
a. Type and size (square feet of sales space) of each establishment to
be built within the area propose3 to be zoned;
b. Number of spaces of off-street parking proposed,
c. E stimate of annual s ale s ne eded to support e ach e stabli s hment,
d. Location of and distance from nearest competitive facilfties,
e. Estimated market area of establishments within area proposed to be
zoned (indicate on a map showinq the vicinity of proposed zone
change), and
f. If estimated market area fncludes competitive facilities, indicate
percentage of sale s expected to be received by proposed facilitie s.
3. Furnish a letter from a Tftle Insurance Company, showing the property
owners of record, their address, wfthin 400 feet of the exterior
boundaries of subject property.
PART II•
Date, 71 , Application No..
IVame of Applicant• TQ_U_~ e
Stre et Addre s s• C ity. State :
Telephone Number. UJ4,~-~2 `
1
Existing Zone Classification; araw:_4~~ ,
Date Existing Zone Classification Established. 7- ~
~
Proposed Zone Clas siff cation: _~~.j ~~i►~~ ~
Proposed Use of Property: W
v No. of AcresJ
i
.
1
Legal Descriptioa cf 7rdperty: 16 - Al zl ~ 3 D
6-1
.
Section. 6 ~ Township Range:
Street Addre s s of Prope rty; 1,-3 J ~
Who Holds Title to tho Property:
If you do not hold title to the property affected by thf s application, what is your
intere st in it ?
A SKETCH OF THE AREIk PROPOSED FOR A ZO1VE RECI.ASSIFICATION MUST BE
ATTACHED WITH THIS APPLICATION. THE SKETCH MUST BE ON A SCALE OF 1" -400' .
iVIaps may be secured from the County Engineer's Office, Court House.
ALL OF THE FQLLOVvING QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED.
1. What are the changed conditions which are alleged to warcant other or additfonal
zon
/ S .
2. What facts justify the proposed zone reclassification based on the advancement
of the public health, safety, and general welfare?
3. Vvhat effect will the proposed zone reclassiftcation have on the value and
character of ad j acent property ?
I
~
J
4. Can a reasonable retum from or reasonable use of the property in questian be
secured under the existinq zone classification?
A1VY APPEAL FROM ACTION OF THE COUNTY PLAN1vING COMMISSIOIV MUST BE
PRESENTED IN WRITING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS -WITHIN TEN
(10) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING HELD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
r ,
~
(uigned)
Z E-3 5-7 8
A hearing to consider changing the Zoning Map from Agricultural to Commercial on property
described as the East 330 feet of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 north of C.M.St.P. & P.
R.R. r/w, except the West 100' of the East 330 feet of the North 150 feet, in Section 22,
Township 25 N., Range 44, E. W. M., Spokane County, Washington.
(West of Blake Road, south side of Sprague Avenue.)
AFF'IDAVIT 4F POSTING
STATE OF V'lASHINGTON )
) ss
COUIVTY OF SP4KANE )
, betnq first duly sworn on oath,
deposes and says:
That I am a cttizen of the Untted States of Amerlca, and a resldent of Lhe State of
Washington over the age of 18 years.
,
That on the day of 19 I personally
posted one (1) or more true and correct copies of the hereto attached and incorporated
heretn by reference 1VOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIIVG In a consplcuous manner at each of
the following locatlons, to-wlt:
1. -L &L Z04o"IA J24a am
~
foA
~ r S
2.
3.
DATED THIS DAY OF , 19 .
r
SIGNED
Subscribed and Sworn to before me this day of , 19
Notary Public ln and for the State of
Washington, residi-ng at Spokane, WaShingtor ~
SPOKANE COUNTY PLAN111ING DEPARTMENT
ZONE RECLASSIFICATION CiiECK IZST
Applicants Nanne Address Tel. No. Appliaants No.
u~"~ l:~ ~°~C~~~ • ~ - - ~
initials
PRE-APPLICATION FEE, ($10.00), RECEIPT NU MBER ,
(date)
APPLICjUION APPOINT IVM
(date (time)
JPAP4 1 627 7 S'
ENGINEERS SECTION MAPo
ASSESSORS SECTION MAP. (Legal Description, 400' Boundry).
ZONE C HANGE APPLICATION.
;ZOATING WORK SBEET.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECK LIST.
PLOT PLANS (5 Black Line).
PHOTO'S (EM" and Discrlpt,fon)
FILING FEE (s) RECEIPT NU MBER
APPLICATION NUMBER.04:z-- 367-;7F PROPONENTS NA1VE
PART II.
RECORD PARCEL NUMBERS (Within 4000) ON LAND FILE POLL CARD FORM ~
7/ (date)
MAiL HEARING NOTICES TO SURROUNDING PROPEItTY OIVNERS
te
POST SURROU NDING AREA*
(date)
HALTH DISTRtCT, FIRE MARSHAL AND ENGINEERS REVIEW (Plot plan and legal).
PLOT PLAN AND AGENDA TO GRAPHICSo
MAIL NOTICE AND AGENDA TO CONCERNED STATE DEPTS o
AGENDA MAILED TO l1PPLICANT o
(date)
FINDINGS PREPARED.
PART III.
MINUTES MAILED TO APPLICANT.
(date)
HEARING FINAIIZATION (Conditions . o oETC o )
RESOLUTION TYPED o
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ACTION (RESOLUTION)
(date)
. _
- r° ~
_3a _ ~ -
F O R INI G
ZGNZNG ti1TORKSHEET
This document will provide the Planning Department Staff with written verific3tion
that :
Th ^ :.i t-.3c-z 1c- 7.a.1 ,-ipSCr'4ot11T1 haS h°eI1 r?v1E".,Ved ZP.d apDrroi,'v"d I-y d l1C°T"iserl
s urveyo r .
2. That. the proposed development meets the requirements of the County reait7
District, the County Engineers and the County Utilities Department.
3. That the proposed development can be provided adequate w3te: i: c u;,.mesr;V
~
o mr,i e .rci c r r_ ati`~;
. _ . _ S .
An appiic~.a•ilL ls required ~c pr esent a copy of rhe proposed cievelopment plan 'Co
of the above listed agencies for their review and deterr-`--=`--~ -'proposal L-neets minimum State and County requicements
PART I- To be completed by Licensed Survevor.
The legal description for Zone Reclassificatian ,
has been reviewed by me or under my supervision in accordance.
,
,
c, - '7 / I 00 5
Signed i;aza
~ E.
~S S1,,
~ .
Aso .
9967
~
NAL
PART H - To be clor:,,plet-ed bv r ealth Dist: ict
~riealth Dist;ict require.ents ior .ne proposeci dzvelopment have been satisried.
, I
S t w e
r ~ , r y
~ .
, Signea. ~at~
Commer.ts:
+r.
Zonincx Worksheet (Continued)
PART III - Ta be campl eted by Ca untv Enq ineer
Spokane Cvunty Engineers requirements fvr the proposed development have been
.r + `4
~
Signed ~ Da te
Cvmments:
PART TV - To be cQmpleted by St)okane Countv Utilities Department
Spoicane Gounty `Ji:f].iiies DepaitinerzL requirEiircnts foc&ie prcposed Cevel;pment
been satisfied.
.
7-1
e~
Signed Date
Co mment s :
~
PART V- To be completed by Water PurvevQr
, y.y
i~i ~ ~aO~:.~~.--.~ ~ewelopT7141t fioc°'~'} Led t!~ithin Ll'ie IIERti
district boundaries.
We are able to supply this develapment with adequate water.
~
ct
P'L.ZI'V@yU OftamF? Dat@
~
§igned Title
' Camments:
gLe-
2
,
, ` y
Zoninq Worksheet (Continued)
PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW:
A. An engineering report and plans for the proposed sewage system
REQUIRED
YES NO
B. A storm drainage plan for the proposal
RTQUIRED
YES NO
C. A Specific landscape plan
REQUIRED
YES NO
D. Other Plan requirements or Comments:
DATE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DATE CURRENT PLANIVING ADMINISTRATOR
-3-
N377 3~ £ Ya3
4 9 5 i 1• A ( v
,a
~ ~ V ° ~P~ l ~ ~ Ir~1 M A1
~~A►~
a~ SP T fT l.E • . ~ o
~:..J f A ~ys .~L
AM -E~ ~1 ~ ~
oKANE
: 3
N„~
~ FlRST AyE r ~
. ~04 9920d ~ ~
ao ~,NE, W A
,P Y.
-n550
~ •.~C?
f ~ ~ ; ~ _ ~ • r ~ r ~ ~ A c , .
~i- 141 41
o r,^ y ~C
49 1 . _
zz s r : . ? 2 r~ ~ , JA N ~ ~j ~•k 1
t ,y ~~~~~i' ~ ~
30
~ -..i
~
0 ~ THA I
~YJr~j • 1
~
AF ~iv
A p p,
~ `JJ
46
A K
.09"`
L
< t 1`
~ . p,M
~104 •~~y~{,J ~ R a
ol/
0 3
' p Ay
~
~ ~ a3 1
;"~ta o 1~ i. _ ' ,
1 ,h S ~ ~ ' _ ,h • _ -
LF
1 ~
f/--
~ ~ ~ la..- _r, G '~I.~l ~1• ~ ~ ~ t CT~~ ~
1 1 ~ a
~
D
`17`1 Q S V l
~ ti ' ~4 1~~• S
tr Al J v BL LJ~B! M
Fr
Iq~~~ L
r~~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~t acl1C~ L1171L' ~ill[j p~~IC~E~ tiny intE'C('.5rccl ~ersc~~n ni iy ~~p~ar fnr, or against, the granting of
t}1i$ ~p~licatian,
AGEN~~,, JULY Z1, 1'~7~i `~~LEPH~NE Na.: 455~2274
SPaKANE C4UNI'Y ~'I.I~NNING GUM vI`SSION ~
Tima: ~'r}c~ay, July 21 ~ 1978 , 1:30 P, M. -
~lac~: I~rc~ac~way C~ntr~ Building, S~can~ I'loor
tr ` Nnrth ~21 J~ff~rson Street, Spakane Z~N~ RECLA S ~'IC.~TI0~1
~ 10 , Z E-~5-7 $ . ~1~~..~~i~l
Location: Section 22,Township 25 1V,,Range 44,~,W,M,
Thi East ~30 feet of kh~ NW 1/4 of th~ NE 1/4
north of C.M.SI.f', & P, R,R, riyht af way, except th~ V~fc:st laU' of the East 330'
of the Nprth 150' in S~ctian 22.
b. Applic~nt: Dc~minic~ Taulouse
EasC 1~418 5prague ~venue
Sp~kane, WA 99~16
c. Sit~ Size: 4 1/~ Acres
d, Existing ZQninc~: l~gricultural, estab~ished M~~rch 27, 1942
e, Propos~d Zoning: Cammercial
f, Prop~sed Use ~f Property: Retail l3usiness
g, Applicat~on o~ Zoni~~g Prov~sion; C~apter 4.21, Section 4,~1,04Q
h. ~nvironment~l Im~act: A kopic af discussion at this hearing m~y b~
whether or not this prnposal w~ll h~ve ~ significant adverse enviranm~nt~l fmpact,
T ~ a s~ ^ ~ ~ ll ~ ~ f` f~
r~ ~k x Q ~
~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ W h ~ K~ QYE y wis q.~~
J 1 _ ~L ~ ~ ~ Q ~
• ~ ~ 2 ~ ~p ~ . . x
~ uh~ L~Y~M1{( ~ VALL~Y ~ry/Ay ~ .
` r~
' ~ ~ Y~ .
• i.l/' ~ ; ~ O
~ - ~ T W M~iN ~ M. ~ ti,.. N ~
q cri ,~lY~ IH , ~ 7 _ - + Q~ ~ • _ • W
~ I~IVE~t~jIDEr W R~lp ~ r Y ~ ~e~ ~ ~ x , z
~ r PA GUE~ vf. ~ W ~
, , , . ~ ,
_ ~'iCE ~0 23,
4 ' "
a ~ J ~ _ - . , . _ , ~ , i ~ - ~ 11 ~ 1
. - . - - - ~ y _ - _ ` Av.~ I = l o~b
, , ti ~ f 1
p 4 r H A v E ~
! ~n ~ ,r , r__ . n V a cwsP a~'' d y
l ~ ~ ~ , s-?e~~,, TH
`S`, N i ` p e'~~"" . . . , ` ~
~ v ~ ~ . ~ ~~i,l,f+ , ~ , v C ` ~ : ~ ; '`y`r ~ , ~
~c 1 ~ p~' T~ a J~ 7 T►, ~o ~ ~ ~ r .
a a ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ T ri ,Av ~ ~ ' ~
72 ~ _ : ~ :
-14-
FOiiM 844 PLNG.
~
?;IST OF OWNERS AND PER~ONS YING TAXES ON PROPERTY Spokane County Code Number: ZE-35-78 Qwners and Persons within 400 feeto
Application is for a Zone Reclassification from Aqrtcultural to Commerclal
Certification of Title Compan,y: I hereby certify that the following list of names and
addresses consisting of this and the following pages has been prepared from the
latest available records and i the best of my knowledge correct. `
~ •
Signed by For
Title Company)
Date :~~SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFICn
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ? OF TITLE (0) AND ADDRES~TE: ~ ~ i~s A,DIlITION BLK ae-Z PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T) BY:
J L Grassman 0 VER.A Pt of B 1k Be
! g
• Pt 50 ftN&2 S ftE
T~ Pac Nat Bk of Wash 3069788 ~ e of SW cor th N~par with
ti1L 328 ft th par with
o sL t
1 298.7 ft W of L when
T! ~ meas at R/ N
L
of RR th W to OB Exc
0 I W 70 ft of S
~ f (Parcel No. 15 44-1909)
T ~
pl Joseph D Evans I E 6719 9th Ave ~ VERA Pt of B 129
50
v I Jos e h D Evans . ~ S1 cornth 2N5 13 ~ o f
Tr P t E 70
i%~~ ft th S 130 ft th W 70
0, ft to FOB
Ti + (Parcel No. 15 44-1911)
~
plFred C Byers I E,,-1~511 Spr e Ave I VERA Pt of B la9 Beg on
- T Fred C Byers ,,e NL of RR R/W 5 ft N
and 155 ft E o SW cor
~
OI ~~t th2N512S iht th3~328 ft
T
( I ~ (PaW 70 Nt to OB _ ~
I )
0 L Gillespie 6263 Tillamook VER.A P
,
S 205 ft of E 35 ft of
Jerry W Kimbrou~h l, W 1~5 f
(Parcel No. 15 4-1905)
0,
~ I
Ti ~
~ r--~--~ ~
;l liJ, a o
Gene R Achz i er ~
I .ch p
~ ~,6f t
f 170 . 5
~of S~ 344 Zipage
T~ Seafi.rst Mtg Corp I RF 107546 4 I 'ft of W
' (Coritinued on nex, (Parcel No. 15544-1906)
~ ~
LIST OF Oy1i"1ERS AND FERSGPIS FAYIIdG Ttt~ES GN PkOFEkTY
LAST GRANTEE IP1 CHA IN ' ADDITION
Or TITLE (G) AND ADDRESS ~ LOTS BLK
PERSOTIS PAYING TAXES (T) ,
~0 James S Black 500 Columbia Rld ~ VERA McCABES -HOME TR.S
/ o( Ptn of Lot 16 B 1 DAF:
~'T James S Black & Co. , _M B eg at SE cor of sd lot
~ th N alg E ln 213 ft th
0 ar with S ln sd Lot
67.46 ft th S par with
T E ln sd Let 33 th tisT par
~ with S ln of sd Lot 35 ft
0 th S par with W ln of sd
Lot 16 180 ft to South
T ln th E 102.45 ft to POB
(Parcel No. 15544-2525)
0
T
✓'p Ron L Mason ~10912~20th Ave VERA McCABE NM TR L 17 B 1
~ arce rto. 1 5 - 517
j'T Ronald L Mason
75
0
T
~~a
%p Hannah Becker E 13417 Sprague Ave RA McCABE I-~M TR L 18 B 1
arce o . 15544-2518)
T Van Valkinburgh G E `N
; 0
~
V p B R Harden N 102 McCabe Rd ERA 1"IcCABE HM TR L 12 B 1
/ (Parcel No. 15544-2512)
` T B R Harden
0
T ~t/~~ s2..~~ _ _
p J Naccarato E 10804 Main Ave ERA McCABE HM TR L 14
B 1
✓ Parcel No. 15544-2514)
T Jay Naccarato
0
I .
T
4
'Continucd on nexf- r,i,-s;o
- - _ . _ ' ~~~1-
LIST OF 0VlNERS AND PLTSGPIS FAYING TAXE;; GN FROPERTY
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ~
OF TITLE (0) AKD j ADDITION
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T) ADi~RESS LOTS BLK
R G Berg N 110 Blake Rd VERA Pt of B 129 N 89 ft
of S 433 ft of E 170.5 ft
~fi Russell G and Anna V Berg of W 190.5 ft
(Parcel No. 15544-1907)
_J
T 0 L H Stecker N 105 Blake Rd VERA McCABE HM TR 1 21 B 1
' (No. 15544-2521)
Louis H Stecker j
0 ,l_;/`u't
T
,,,p Jamison Et al E 11123 30th Ave VERA McCABE HOME TRS
Lot 16 B 1 Exc Beg at SF,
/T W S Jamison
~ ln 213 f t th TrT par to S
o -
~ ln 67.46 ft th S par to
E ln 33 f t th W par to S
T _ ln 35 f t h S wi W
ln of Lot 16 180 ft to S
0 ln of Lot 16 th F 102.45 _
-f t to POB
T Parcel No. 15544-2524
. .
~ p R W Kiser ~ VERA McCARE HM TR L 20 B 1
• (parce Jo. 15544-272.7
""'T Fid Mut Sav Bk 3 1 13909 ,
0
T
,rp Doro thy P Hough N 19 Ii 1 ake Rd. Mc CABE HM TR L 19 B 1
- -
T D P Hou h f' ~rcel No. 15544-2519)
,
o i- ~ ✓
T ~
0
T
(Continued on next page)
- - - - - - - - - - ~l
LIST OF 04JNERS AND PERSONS PAYING TAXE~ GN PROPERiY
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN
OI' TITLE (0) AND ADDITION
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T) AD~RESS LOTS BLK
~ r
0
C G She rwin 2 2 25 44 j~l 1
38 ft of N
1
X Jr~- 195 ft of E
1078 ft of
~ Fid Mut Sav/Bk 1 1 31294 1 r1E 1/4 nf T1F. 1 44 FXr ro .
Rd (Parcel No. 22541-9159)
0 .
. i
T I
~
o Fred Voliva ' y~-(Dyp~,g' ~ 22 25 44 t~T 99 ft of NEl/4
~ -
~ of NE 1/4 lyg N of RR
6f' Fid Mut Sav Bk I 3 1 30383 3 I R./W F~
~ 380 ft& Ex~ Co Rd (~~Parcel
0 I No. 22541-914Q)
T
✓ ~
U Roger E Grenz rala, ~ LEATNA LAI1E ADD L 1 B 1
~T Col 042772 (Parcel No. 22541-1501)
0
i
T I
~ ~
p Ron 1`2 Sommar s ~,golv ~ ~~~%u.~.,~ LEATHA LANE ADD L 1 B 1
~ (Parcel No. 22541-1601)
T Spo Mtg 0005950 .
o ~
T ► I
~ Dickens LFATHA LANE ADD L 2 B Z
TCol Mtg I 146 8092 0 9 (Parcel No. 22541-1602)
0 I I
T I
0 ~avid Asbury LEATH
~ A LANE ADD L 9 R 2
I ! . I(Parcel No. 22541-1609)
T Bancshares Mtg 08 4
o l I
T i !
( Continued on next page )
LIST OF 0WNERS AND PEI2SGI'JS PAYING TAX~; Oid PuOF'EF:^iY
LAST GRAPITEE IN CHAIN ADDITION
OT' TITLE (0) AND ADi~RESS ~ LOTS BLK
PERSOPIS PAYING TAXES (T) ,
✓ !VERA 0 J Naccarato F 108J4 Main Ave McCABE HM TR
T Jay Naccarato L 15 B 1
~ l(Parcel No.1_5544-2515)
~ _
0
7 - A
T
0 Tony J Destito N 7 McCabe Rd VFRA McCABE HM TR Exc
i
T 13
T'~'ony Destito j r(Pa~cei No121554~-2
2613)
,
T ,
0✓A I Willcocks N 11 McCabe Rd VER.A McCABE HM TR N 80 ft
L1T _ 13 B 2
li~ A Irene Willcocks (Parcel No. 15544- 2612
.
O ~ r,~~ ~~i 1f1~.~~-fjR%-~ I •'/J ~`l c.`,Cc/ .L_ G~
r
T
✓ -C 71~
p Margo J Rayburn E 422 38th Ave ER.A McCABE HM TR L 11 B 2
- arce o. 55 .-26 1
T Margo J Rayburn
T 4'
✓ ~
' 0 P &''R ompariy E 2720 Sinto Ave 2 25 44 Be on SL of St
~Grant Tombari / ~'NE9~/~ttg Efl~ ~t ~ 1/4
125 ft th ti.1 110 ft th
- .1.25~t-ri ROB
Parcel No. 22541-9024)
m
1
~ pPAR Realty Co F 2720 Sinto Ave 2 25 44 Beg at Dt on SL
f St Hwy 495 ftE of T1TL of
T Grant Tombari -NIJ ll4 th S 125 ft- t-o firue
~ OB th E 110 ft th S 125 ft
~ ~ , Tj 110 f t- t-h N 129 f r, to
~rue POB (Parcel No. 22541
(Continued on next pagt )
itj~a
LIST OF OWNERS AND PFaZSGNS PAYING TAXES ON PROPERTY
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ' ADDITION
OT' TITLE (0) AND pDDRESS ~ LOTS BLK
PERSOPIS PAYING TAXES (T) ,
~ 'Shaw ' LEATHA LANE ADD L 8 B 2
T`1", Bancshares Mtg 15 00893 i(Parcel No. 22541-1608)
~
0 ~
~r,• ~ ~.l2.[dr'
T
0- S R " ~ E 13215 4th Ave 22 25 44 W 175 ft of E
495 ft oft of ptn of NG7
T Charles J p I 1 4 of NF 1 4 5 of CMSTP&P
'RY Co R W (Parcel No.
o - 22541-9107
T -l
0
T
0
T 0
T
0 '
T
0
T
0
T
0
T
0
T I
- r
(Continued on next page) I I
LIST OF 0W►VERS aND PERSGI'1S PAYING TAXES GPJ PROFF RTY
LAST GI7ANTEE IN CHAIN ' ADDITION
OF TITLE (0) AND ~
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T) ~Di~RESS LOTS BLK
,
~e o PAR Realty Co ~ E 27S nto Ave ~ 22 25 44 E 495 ft of W 990 t o tn o o f
T Grant Tombari INE 1/4 of CM STP&P RY R/W Exc Beg on SL of St Hwy 495
, NE ~ 1/4 th E 110 ft th S 250 ft
T t-h W 110.. f t- t h rT 2.50 f t- t o
POB & Exc E 270 ft of N 250
° ' f t.s o f ...LUE
! (Parcel No. 22541-9023)
T
pPAR Realty Corp E 2720 Sinto Ave 22 25 44 Beg at Pt on SL
. of Hwy 990 ft E of NW cor
T'Grant Tombari of Nj,T 1/4 of TIE 1/4 th S
~ 1250 ft th W 270 ft th N
o .~11 50 ft th E lOQ ft th N 200
~ t t. E 170 t to POB
T (Parcel No. 22541-9021)
0
T
~ t o PAR Realty Co E 2720 Sinto Ave 22 25 44 W 100 ft of E
270 t o N 200 t o
T°"'Grant Tombari W 990 ft of Ptn of NW 1/4
~ S o Hwy
oJ , ,~C ,(Parcel No. 22541-9022)
T
~ ,
o~Charles Jaap E 13215 4th Ave 2 25 44 W 175 ft of E 495
T~F
t o W 990 t o tn of
To"Charles H Jaap FT~ 1/4 of T1F 1/4 S of CMSTP&P
. R~ arce o . 22541-
207)
0 T
p`~D G Hundeb
y ~ ~ o - 2 25 44 W 220 ft of E 320
I
T~ancshares Mt A 1500828 t of W 990 ft of Ptn of N~.J
g C M
T P & P RY Co R/ W Exc
0 XC
~t (Parcel No. 22541-9122)
'r • ,
(Continued on nex ~pa N,o).~
L I S T O F 0 4l i V~, t tS aND PERSOPIS PAYING TAXES GN PkOPERTY
LAST GRANTEE IN CHA IN ' ADDITION
OF TITLE (0) AND 4
PERS ONS PA Y ING TAXES (T) ADDRESS LOTS BLK
~ p Eursel Metcalf 22 25 44 Pt of NW 1/4 of NE
11/4;_ Beg 79 ft S of NF.
2iel"Pac lst Fed S &L Sp 13 120964 cor th 11 330 ft th N to SL
ofCM S TP&P RY R W th E 330
. 0 ft th S to POB Parcel No.
22541-9045)
T ~v
0E Metcalf ; S 206 Blake Rd 22 25 44 Pt of W 1/4 of
NE 1/4; S 132 ft of N 924
T~Eursel rsetcalf
' No.
22541-9084)
0
T
~
0 D D Bilbrey .222 25 44 Pt of NW 1/4 of
NE 1/4; s 132 ft of r~ 1056
~Comm Mtg 00004953 ft-of E 310 ft (~Parrpl RTo .
22541-9085)
0
T .
✓
p H D Douglass E 815 Rosewood Ave 2 25 44 V 143 ft of E
~ 221 ft of NE 1/4 of NE 1/4
T Harlan D Douglass
T cel
o • o. 22541-9009)
T
p✓D J Clelland 2 25 44 W 99 ft o.f N 8$0
' t of NE 1/4 0f NE 1/4 0f
T/Bancshares Mtg 500850_r T- p~Rv rn ~2 /T-T (U~rr+el
o. 22541-9011)
0
T
~ 4140 Martin A Holley ~5 44 ~J 125 f t of E
221 ft of 11E 1/4 of NF 1/~
~Bancshares Mtg 15 01136 r, 0 3rd Ave & S1 0
R W Parcel No. 2 5 1-9147
0
T I
n,,,,1
(Continued on next pagc-)
1
. ~
LIST OF 04JNF~tS AND PERSOP~S PAYING TAXE ; ON PROPERTY
LAST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ' ADDITION
OI' TITLE (0) AND ~ ~
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T} ADliRESS LOTS BLK
~ ~
0 Fr ank Ho 11 en ._____w 2 2 2 5 44 T~~ $ .f
E 1096 ft o f NE 1/ 4 o f N E
~Maria P Tobias i 35~3 ~ r~-~ ~1~4 of I`d,~,~~~~ Nt~ o-f 3rd
~ ~ ~ ve & Sly of RiW (Parcel
. p o. 225 -
T
✓
p A Van Nguyen ' 2 25 44 ti~T 85. 5 ft of E
. 010.5 ft of NE 1/4 of NE 1/4
~Bancshares Mtg ~ j1707300 v~ Nlv of A~e & Slv of
~
./W (Parcel No . 22541-9125)
o
T .
p Spo Co 2 25 44 S 6~ ft of 99 ft
~ ~ f NE 1/4 of NE 1/4 lgy N of
T S okane Count 1 R/T xc~ ('n P~ (ParrP1
No. 22541-9141)
T
- - , . - i~
p~appen & Rudeen 22 2
.f - ii 3~0 ft of i1El/4 of ~1E 1/4
T Banc s har e s Mt .,~,Q 0,f t
. (Parcel No . 22541(~9151)
o
T _
y,~ 7_3Yo
0 C G Sherwin E 2 S
' . 1078 ft of rd 1 2 of ?VE iJ4
T 1 i f f or d G Sh ,in . f rIF 1.14--~=~s j~ ~ ~t -^-f
~ 375 ~t F: Exc E 85 ft of
~ ~ - _ _~Q ffi ~~~xr~ RR R/~,T EXC
o Rd (Parcel No. 22541-
T _ -]-~5-~- -
0
- ~ .
T
i
' ~G She i , 3 7 5
0 rw n ~Y
~ t of j~T 138 ft of E 1J78 ft
T`~Fid Mut Sav Bk 1 1 31807 0 cel
(Continued on next paae}
No . 22541-9164)
LI.~T OF. OWNERS AND PhRSON~, ..►YING TAXES ON FROPERTY
Spokane County Code Number: ZE-35-78 Owners and Persons within 400 feeto
Application is for a Zone Reclassiftcatton from AQrlcultural to Commercial -
Certification of Title Compan,y: I hereby certify that the following list of names ar_
addresses consisting of this and the following pages has been prepared from th!_
latest available records and is to the best of my knowledge correct.
Signed by For
(Title Company)
Date:
LAIST GRANTEE IN CHAIN ADDITION ~
OF TITLE (0) AND ADDRESS LOTS BLK
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T)
~
0; J L Grassman VERA Pt of B 1 9 Be
g
Pt 50ftN&25 ftE
Ti Pac Nat Bk of Wash 3069788 of SW cor th N par with
~ tiJL 328 f t th par wit: :
o~ SL 142.7 t
~ 298.7 ft W of L when
meas at R/A NL
( of RR th W to OB Exc
C ~ W 70 ft of S 1 o Lr_
(Parcel No. 15 44-1909)
~
~
pl Joseph D Evans E 6719 9th Ave VERA Pt of B 1Z9 R" 50
i ft N and 225 fi E of
Tj Joseph D Evans S~] cor th N 13 ft E 70
ft th S 130 ft th W 70
o, ft to POB
(Parcel No. 15 1 44-1911)
T
0,Fred C Byers E 13511 Sprague Ave VER.A Pt of B J9 Beg on
NL of RR R/W 5 f t N
T Fred C Byers and 155 ft E o SW cor
o ~t th2N512S ~t th3S328 ft
th W 70 ft to OB
T (Parc N 4- 0)
0 L Gillespie 6263 Tillamook VERA Pfi
T Jerry W Kimbrou~h S 205 ft of E 35 ft of
• W 155 ft N
(Parcel No. 155 4-1905)
0
I
T;
0 Gene R Achzipr VER.A Pt of ft
; of S 344 ft of 170.5
T~ Seafirst Mtg Corp RF 107546 4 ~ft of W
(Coritinued on next page
(Parcel No. 15544-1906)
,
LIS'i CF G~J~I~.?S tiD F~li ~GTl- r;►YI11G___Tr. ;i•~:; GN PRGFE~~~'i I
LAST G'' PdTEE IN CHAIN '
OF' TITLE (0) AND ADDITION
PERSOr1S PAYING TAXES (T) ADi~RESS LOTS BLK
,
0 R G Berg N 110 Blake Rd IVERA Pt of B 129 1`I 89 ft
of S 433 ft of E 170.5 ft
~
Russell G and Anna V, Berg__M_ of. 14 190 . 5 ft
4 (Parcel No. 15544-1907)
0
T
~
0 L H Stecker ~ N 105 Blake Rd iVERA McCABE HM TR 1 21 B 1
--T
!
T Louis H Stecker I(Parcel No. 15544-2521)
j
~
°
rr
o Jamison Et al E 11123 30th Ave VFR.A NicCABF HOrT TRS
Lo t 16 Ii 1 Exc Beg at SF.
TW S Jamison qr of sd ~lot th N alg
ln 213 f t th. 1-1 nar to S
0 ~ ln 67.46 f t th S par Q
!C E ln 33 ft th 1•7 par to ~
1 ln 35 ft th S pa wit 1-1
_ - ~
ln of Lot 16 180 ft to S
0 ln of Lot 16 th F 102.45
-ft to POR
"i PNo. 15544-2524)
p R W Kiser iVERA McCARE HM TR L 20 B 1
~ (parceI 14o. 5544-~527)7
T Fid 1`Tut Sav Bk 3 1 13909
0
,
T
o Dorothy P Hough N 19 Iilake Rd R11 1`1cCABE HM TR L 19 B 1
T D P Hou~h (Parcel No. 15544-2519)
0
i
T I
i.1~7nt1C1'.lt'l7 011 :1E?}:t ;~a:'" 1
LIST 0F O~r';J:1RS t1N?D FIEII~GPIS FAYIiIG Gi'1 PnOF~;FtiY
LkST GRANTEE IP1 CHA IN ' ADDITION
OF TITLE (0) AND ►
PERSOt1S PAYIPIG TAX.ES (T) A~~RESS LOTS BLK
~ 0 James S Black I 500 Columbia ]31dR !VERA McCABES HONE TR.S
Ptn of Lot 16 B 1 DAF:
1 James S Black & Co. ~Beg at SE cor of sd lot
~ th N alg E ln 213 ft th
o . 14 par with S ln sd Lot
67.46 ft th S par with
T E ln sd Lot 33 th W par
' !with S ln of sd Lot 35 ft
0 I
Ith S par with W ln of sd
i Lot 16 180 ft to South
T I ln th E 102.45 ft to POB
I (Parcel No. 15544-2525)
0 T
~
0 Ron L Ilason E 10912 20th Ave VEP.A McCABE l~M TR L 17 B 1
(Yarcel r1o. 15544-2517)
l~ Ronald L Mason
0
T
0 Hannah Becker E 13417 Sprague Ave 'VERA McCABE ILM TR L 18 B 1
- (Yarcel No. 15544-1518)
T Van Valkinburgh G E
o T
~ B R Harden r1 102 McCabe Rd VERA McCABE HM TR L 12 B 1
(Parcel No. 15544-2512)
T B R Harden ,
0
7'
0 J Naccarato E 10804 Main Ave 'IERA McCABE HM TR L 14 B 1
T Jay Naccarato ;Parcel No. 15544-2514)
0
T
i ~~ltlrllli_f~ GIl :lc;tif T`,?rr'''`
LIST OF 0WNL;~;A'i;P F~l: ~GI;S FAYING iA'1,r,:~ +:~11 PkOF'FF,i Y
I,4',ST GKAP1'iEE Iid CHAIN ' ADliITION
OT' TI`rLE (0) APID ►
Pr~R SOI1S PAYIPJG TAXES (T) ADliRESS LOTS BLK
~
o J Naccarato F 10804 Main Ave !VER.A McCABE HM TR
L 15 B 1
1~ Jay Naccarato , LParcel No. 15544-2515)
0
T
i
0 Tony J Destito ~ N 7 McCabe Rd VFRA McCARE HM TR Exc
i
N 80 .f L 12 -l3 R 2
1 Tony Destito ~ (Parce1
No. 1554Z-2613)
~
o I
.r
~
0 A I Tnlillcocks N 11 McCabe Rd VER.A McCABE HM TR -N 80 ft
L 12 - 13 B 2
i A Irene 14illcocks (Parcel No. 15544-2612)
0
1'
0 Margo J Rayburn E 422 38th Ave ~,ERA McCABE HM TR L 11 B 2
(!'arcel No. 15544-2611)
T Margo J Rayburn
o T
~
0 P& R Company E 2720 Sinto Ave ~2 25 44 Beg on SL of St
T Grant Tombari WY 49S ft E of ~~TL of N~1 1/4
~f NE 1/4 th E 110 ft t~
125 ft th 1.1 110 ft th
0 t_j 25 f t tn. PC)
• ;Parcel No. 22541-9024)
T
p PAR Realty Co E 2720 Sinto Ave ?2 25 44 Beg at pt on SL
tl~T St Hwy495 ft E of WL of
T Grant Tombari 114 th S 125 ft t-o t-rue
tOB th E 110 f t th S 125 f t
° ~ h~W 1.].Q f t rh. N a 29--ft. . t o
~rue POB (Parcel No. 22541
r 9Q25)
(Continucd on next page)
LI ST OF G`•.1N:;R S AIND I'-E1;SGT.S F.~YIPIC PkQFEFtTY
LAST GRArITEi; Ii1 CHAI.N ' ADDITIOPI
OI' T ITLE (0) AND 1
ADliRESS LOTS BLK
PA'f silG TAXES (T) ,
,
0 PAR Realty Co ~ E 2720 Sinto Ave !22 25 44 E 495 ft of W
1990 tt ot Ntn ot NW 1/4 of
T Grant Tombari II`1E 1/4 of CM STP&P ??Y R/W
Exc Beg on SL of St Hwy 495
0 -f L_F.~.n f tTT - a f ML1 114.rzf NE
1/4 th E 110 ft th S 250 ft
T rh W, 11 Q f r th Nt25 0 ft to
i 1P0B & Exc F 270 f_t of N 250
° ' ~t~.S Q.f HbTy
! (Parcel No. 22541-9023)
T ~
0 PAR Realty Corp j E 2720 Sinto Ave 22 25 44 Beg at Pt on SL
o f Hwy 990 f t E o f NW co r
T Grant Tormbari of N14 1/4 of ZTE 1/4 th S
1250 ft th 1.7 270 ft th N
0 50 ft th E 100 ft th N 200
ft th E 170 ft to POB
1 (Parcel rTo. 22541-9021)
c
o PAR Realtv Co E 2720 Sinto Ave 22 25 44 W 100 ft of E
~/U tt of N200 ft of
2, Grant Tombari ~q 990 ft of Ptn of 1Vtia 1/4
. ot NE 1/4 s of liwy
o (Parcel No. 22541-9022)
T
o Charles 11 Jaap E 13215 4th Ave 22 25 44 W 175 ft of E 495
~ t ot tiJ 990 ft of Ptn of
T Charles H Jaap ~V[4 1/4 of rdF 1/4 S of CMSTP&P
o . R7TF (parcel No . ZL.~41-
w-- ~107)
0 T
p D G Hundeby ~Z2 25 44 W 220 ft of E 320
1t of W 990 ft of Ptn of N14
T Bancshares Mtg 150082$ /4 of NE 114 lg,v S of,C M
8T P& P RY Co R/W Exc
~ 0 tj- nf w~ n S ft..& E xc
~t (Parcel No. 22541-9122)
P .
(Gontinued on nex'-.
,•~-1
LI ST OF ~A„D F E'R13GI,:S FAYIi1G TI.iC`r::_; U: PKFElt`1'1
LI1ST GFZI,PdTEE 114 CHAIN ADDITION
OF T ITLE (0) AP1D ADi~hESS ~ LOTS BLK
PLRSOi`1S PAYING TAX.ES (T) ~
; Eursel Metcalf ! 122 25 44 Pt of NW 1/4 of NE
1/4; Beg 792 ft S of NF
T Pac lst Fed S& L Spo 13 120964 ~cor th ta 330 ft th N to SL
+ o~CM STP&P RY R/W th E 330
0 ~ ft th S to POB (Parcel No.
22541-9045)
7 ,
i
o E Metcalf ~ S 206 Blake Rd 22 25 44 Pt of 1V14 1/4 of
~ NE 1/4; S 132 ft of N 924
~r Eursel I`ietcalf ~ I fr nf F. ~'ln £t (Rar..re1 No .
~ 22541-9084)
~ I
T
~
p D D Bilbrey 22 25 44 Pt of NW 1/4 of
Comm Mt 00004953 NF 1/4; S 132 ft of rI 1056
T g f._L__Q.f F 332 ffi (.P.arLeLso .
22541-9085)
0
T ,
0 H D Douglass E 815 Rosewood Ave 22 25 44 17 143 ft of E
Z, Harlan D nou lass 11221 ft of NE 1/4 of NE 1/4
g STP&P RY P.11,7 (parcel
• io. 22541-9009)
0
T
0 D J Clelland ~22 25 44 Trl 99 ft o.f N 880
t of NE 1/4 of NE 1/4 of
T Bancshares r1tg ..5.00850 T B&P- R--v rn R!T•1 (pa,-„el
'.io. 22541-9011)
c~
T
o Martin A HolleY ~2 25 44 W 125 ft of E
T Bancshares rTt 15 01136 typ,lrlly of 3rd1Aveo& Slylof
~ ~R F,/W (Parcel No. 22541-9147;;
o I
r
( Conti nued on next paF;c)
LIST OF 0W;IF.RS AND PERSOPdS PAYING T~`,XE; GI'1 PHOPFRTY
LAsT GRnrJTEL zr1 CHAIN ' ADDITION
OF TITLE (0) kND pDi~RESS ~ LOTS BLK
PERSOI~IS PAYING TAY.ES (T) ~
o Frank Hollen E 13523 2rd Ave ,22 25 44 W 85.5 ft of
E 1096 ft of NE 1/4 of NE
T Maria P Tobias 114_ of r1E_-1/4 1gy Nly of 3rd
ve & Sly of R/W (Parcel
0 . 10 . 22541-9135)
T
I ~
0 A Van Nguyen ' 22 25 44 ti,T 85. 5 f.r- of E
~ 010.5 ft of NE 1/4 of NE 1/4
T Bancshares Mt 1 1707300 ~ g Nlv of .
~ 3.,;:d A v e & S1, y o f
J i'~W (Parcel No. 22541-9125)
o ~
T
l
U Spo Co 12 25 44 S 60 ft of j•1 q9 ft
tf NE 1/4 of NE 1J4 lgy N of
T Spokane County RR A
.lW E x c rn pH (P.n-r.c.el
No. 22541-9141)
0
T ,
o Kappen & Rudeen 22 25 4A S 150 fr nf,..rT
380 ft of NE1/4 of NE 1/4
T Bancshares MtR 'Exr F1,9.9i f+- R~~~ 141.20 ft
. (Parcel No. 22541(49151)
0
T
o C G S h e rw i n E 13524 Spr a,.,_,gy,P ~ ~ ? ~_j;T ~
t 1078 ft of rI 1/2 of ?1E 1/4
T lifford G ~herwin f r1F lL4 ,,M(_ [a 118 ft af
r V 375 ft 6: Exc E 85 ft of
0 _2n0._.ft._F• ~ 1RIR u, Exc
o Rd (Parcel No. 22541-
.
1
0
Z' .
o C G S h e rw i n 42 9~-~ S 1 R 0 f+- o,i N 3 7 5
t of 14 138 ft of E 1078 ft
`I' F i d 14u t S a v Bk 1 1 318 0 7'0 1f_NE__1.j4,nf UP 1,,/_4 r.~c e 1
( Gontinuc,d on r.ex t pai*r, )
No. 2?541 -9J 64)
. 1_ i t _ ..71 .il OI' TITLE (0) AND ADDRESS '
PERSONS PAYING TAXES (T) ~
o C G Sh e na in 22 25 44 1-4 138 f t o f 1-1
1~ Fid Mut Sav Bk ~-95 ft of E 1078 ft of
, 1 1 31294 1 -UE 1Z4of-11E,-1%4 FxrSo.
Rd (Parcel No. 22541-9159)
0
70 Fred Voliva 22 25 44 ta 99 ft of NE1/4
i of NE 1/4 lyg N of RR
T Fid Mut Sav Bk I 3 1 30383 3 R/W Fxc. S 60 ft & Fxr- N
~ 380 ft & Exc Co Rd (Parcel
o I No. 2254]-914Q)
T
~
U Roger E Grenz LFATFIA LAI1E ADD L 1 B 1
1-I1 Col Mtg 042772 (Parcel No. 22541-1501)
0
T
C) Ron M Sommars LEATHA LANE ADD L 1 B 1
(Parcel No. 22541-1601)
T Spo Mtg 0005950
0 ~
m
1
p Dickens LF.ATHA LANE ADD L 2 B 2
T Col Mtg 146 809240 9 (Parcel No. 22541-1602)
0
7 .
0 David Asbury LEATHA LANE ADD L 9 B 2
(Parcel No. 22541-1609)
T Bancshares 14tg 1708044
I
0 I .
,r
(Continued on next page)
i
_ : . . . . . . _ : . . . _
. . .
• 1 _ . A L1Jfl'1Gi~
Ol' TITLE (0) AND ~
- 1'I:RSONS PAYIi1G TAXES (1') ADDRESS LOTS
0 Shaw j LEATHA LANE ADD L 8 B?
~
T Bancshares Mtg 15 00893 (Parcel No. 22541-1608)
;
,
0
T
0 S H Jaap E 13215 4th Ave 22 25 44 ja 175 ft of E
~ 495 ft o.ft of ptn of Tn-1
T Charles H Jaap j 114 of NF 114 5 of CMSTP~uP
' R~ Co R/W (Parcel No.
o , 22541-9107)
T
I
U
T
0
1
• ) 1 .
~ i
T
0
T
0
I f
T ,
0
T
0 -
I
T
I
0
`r I
(Continued on neat pago) J
✓ !~~r i i
o -1"~„_ ~:J
t ~ ~ . r1 ~a j, t
J ~
~ :
~ ~ , ~ _.i- s- ~ ~ c 3 0 " , c ~t
70.
1 p 1ts22 - 4,
0 4-~ ~ ~ ~ =~+~r • 'c
~ ~Ys ~ ~3 r ; r ~
~ „~'4 ~~,~•.+-"`r ~4 1 L~1q ~~./~A„~~Y~
~ ~l Y~ ~ ` ~'p {"~f' ✓ ~I 0. Y t
t,~ iz 1~ • / O . 9
,T- t • ~i ~ ~1 ~$1}z Zi. ; ~09. , t ~ J L vo ~ ~s.
,
iz.'o
2 ~C'~~ r j~; ~r r.,. .r"' "'~~+1 ~ I ' p~~• ~ ~ ~ ~
~
LP ~
j~ g +i 1C1
r
T
10
1919 4
1 ~
! ~ ~ ,g.•:
5 ) ra s
-X , • _
,
~ `
~ ~2 ~~RA~L:Y►'A
• ~~J_ t 9 ~ . , r ~ 1 ~
- ~ - • - . r4-~''~- T ~ l ~ L'
r~~~~ ,~F,• ~
~~'d''~~w r ~^T ~r4• ~ e
o C.A
. .
l~~0~ ~•Y I ~:J ~ i ~ I ~:J
IL?
ID
~
► ~ , ~ ' 1 ti
?r I ~ s~ y ~ " ~
- - - 1 7 Af (.~~i`'1 ~A A , , ►
%
4' CJ
~ ~ ~ `,V • ~ /_~;1 ` ~I~ ~ i ~
;15
~ U ~J V `4 U'~ C4~ ♦
~ ~ 1 ~ ~ q, , : ~ c►~ ~ ~
~ ..._-1 i~ , `s• . . . ~----~-.''r',~" • I J
~ 1 l blkj
~ ; ~ Af l ~ ~ ~ ~~4 ~~1.-Y~3 R ' ~ ~1
.
«OFFxCE OF THE
SPOKAN'E C(JUNTY PLAN~1'~NG COMMISSION
LA T E Niarch 11 1978
To Title Company
From Z Spokane Gounty Pl.anning Department
Subject ZQne Reclassification ZE-35-78, Agricul.tural to Commercial
Please furnish a list of the owners and taxpa,Yers of record of a!1 prrflE ctY lac;ated
wit!An 400 feet and thal flve nearest property owners vf the p:^operty de. crired
beInw:
A1so, please 1nclude ail mc:~t-ige. and lvan numbers V'Ifth aded'eSS@a , when possible,
In orf-ler tha} propeAr rotffice.i! ar ma;T be mac3c.If there are no more tr.an ffcre owners
within the 400 f['►C?t botirldcirr'r piease 1ur:~~Sh a list of the owners and V.xQayers of
recorcl for the f.ivc cioc-ost owr,crsLiips. Incomplete or ilieg:ble t[tle carnpay llsts
wili not be accepted by thls department. T hank you.
(Prcperty Descriptton)
Sectian 22, Tawnship 25 N.~ Range 44, East 330 feet of the NW I/4 of the 1VE I/4
North of CMSTP & P R.R. r/w except the W 100 feet af the E 330 feet of the N150
feet.Spokane County, Vti a sh tngton
Donimick Toulouse
East 13418 Sprague
Spakane, WA 99216
926-5426
R E C E I V E
.t~ ~ . i i . SPDKANE CDUNTY
P1ANNlNG DEPARTMENT
.
.J~rl~~S'1~_- - , ~ . - ~ ~'_u3y~ . - _ - - - _ . . .r - ; ' I~t,l~ ,r.f~'r!~ i ~ I~`- ~ /II.Y1v f~~ 1
~ ' C~ i 7 ~ ' I'` ~ y ~ ~ r~~ ~ !.J # l~ ~r ` 0 ~ ~ ~ , r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~r ! 9 ~ ~~a~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~a h ~ E~ ~ra ~ ~ ~
~ ' ~ ~ r r. s f~ . . . i 1 ~ ~ ~ , 1 ~ , ~ ~ f,_r' aI ~ ~ ~ ~ e + - ~ ,
. f _ ~ ' r-~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~
~e. z~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ► ~ 1 ~ ~ ' _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ,
. ; ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . G3B.Lfit. ~ ~ a • 3 ~ ..y.~ .r _ . ,i^ ~ !a ~ ~ 7' ' ~ a) ~ 2
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~D ~9 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 5~a
~ . _ T_ _ ~ ~ ~
~ry I ~ ~ I ~ Q~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n~ ~ . ~ l.~ f~~IVtXGWAYE z ~ ~ ~ 1.. ~ ~ G~ 9 ~ ~ ~1 3~
. ~ ~N p ~ 5 ~ N ~ , T ~ ~ ' ~ ~ r r ~0' 7~ F~ ~ j~ ~ !_.~~s',~~~~_~..~..~.~. ~ ~ Y~ ~ ,~r _
. ~ ~ . ' _ ~ ~ ( ~ ~
' ~ ~ r o, ~v - ~ , . , p ~"~J ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ 4 1~~ ~ - , t~ ~ h ~ ~ a ~ ~ ..,.1 . r~ r t' R _ f r~ll, ~ ~ ~ ~ .
w .s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ MAI N A~'~
~ . , ' ~ ~ .i ~ rf ~ . ~ ~ ~ L4i/ 'I'~,fb ~.f1~ a'~ ~ ~ L f 1 ~rrr- ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~N. , , -
' , ~ `b l ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ' ° ~ ~ + ~ f 2 ~~4.
~ ~ 4. ~ ~ ~P.. ~ ~ z ~ . t~c ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~M , ~ ~ ~ . 3 ~
$ °~sa~W a~~, 4s' >~s' ~.qL►~.`"~ ~ ~ sd t~ 9t~y #e~ / . ~ ~ _ ~o`~`~~ ° ~ ,
~ ~ ~ 1: ~~Iq ,r, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ /
l ~ ~ _ _ . ~ , ~ ` f~i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t L. i'~ ~ 3' ~ ~ ~i oiti ~ `L 4 ~ ~ 114~1
~ ~I ( ~ v ~ i~ ~ ~ "i ~ ~ ~ " • Jl ~ `V IU 7 ~ ~ ~i, ` ' ~~j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a;~o ~ ! ~r,v~AS,~D~' N Rrr~RS~~E , AYL~
'4 „ ~ - Y~ ~ ~ ~Wi ~.;~E~~= y ~ ~ ' ~ ~ I _ ~q • io8. ; ~ io .
~ ~ ~ = 1 , ` ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , i ~ . ~r,►,~ ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ t r ~ ~'ry ~"t~ fi +d tt ~ ~,i t. 7 ~ ) ~ J7 1
; ~ • t ` " ! ~ I _ ~ ~ - , ~ / ~
~ ~ f~ ~ U g I~ ~ ~ .3a ~ _ ~ _ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ fYl~lO Y ~ ~ h fi~~~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ 1 r, ,
! / ( s ~ a s m ~ , , ~ o I ~I ~ ` ~ , 9Z ~ , ~ -F- ~ + fi' ~ ~
~ r~~ ~ f~'~~ . S ~ ~B ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~i ~ ~ I
~ . ~ v ' ~ ~f' ° . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 E 5 1 ~ ~ ; C, ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ . . ,~4~
~ ~ ; ~ ~ ` ; ( ~ ~i ~ ' ; ~ ~ . ~ ,e,
~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ I I ~ . ~ ' ~ o r..~..~w J ~1~ L~? ~.~.,.~z ~ y~' __I ..~!_L1~.. ` ~ C~.t~.. _~.,~..,.__E~.,~.,..►~_r...~__-,,.__~___ ~
~ S ~ . , i~~~fl~- - J9A/~1r1' Y ~ ' At . ' ~ r.. ...R_ i _
' +~.s,+•~ -..~.~t~e-~-~-•~r~ -~~r~~~l~'r=, ~~'~.~...~f-~.~~ ~ .w ~ r~ w.,.. F l ~ ~ . ~ 7t : i~ -n~ ',Y ..~r ~ ~ Y~, ~ r~ ' r.~. . 0 0 ~ f d.~' '
~ ~ A
' ~w ~ i ~ NH C~A ~ ! r ~ rI ~ j~` E . ~ I ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ I I K ~
, ~ # ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r~ ~ K~
~ ~ ~ ► I . ( ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ I ~ i I ~ , ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ I . . _ ~,•w ~ t I . ~ ~ ~ i
, . ~ ~ ~~d ~ ~ I ~ i p ~ ~ ~
~ I~~ 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I
~ ~ ~ ~ C~ ~ ~ i + ~ ~ ~
' ~ ~ i ~ ~ i r ~ ~ I I ~ I. ~ ~ z
~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
. , , ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~
~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ . ~ i r- _
~ , i ~ , i ~ ~ ~i r: ~ ~
~~,r,s ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~
~ ! ~ . ' _ I. _ ~ _ -I f 1 ~
- - t. _ _ _e ~ ,;I ~ _ _ _ _ . _ _ ~ ~ r _ _ _ _ ~ w o ~ ~ ~ _ - - - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ ~ _ . . _ ~ _ _
~ ~ _ ~r,~, ~ ..e~ _ _ . ~~T _ _ .'~_~t a
~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ f~ 4~ ( ~ I ~ - ~ r~r- ~1f e: r ~'-g~. r~ ~u• s~ _ ~ , . ~ ~ ~ ~....~.~~~r~.... ~ ~ ~ ~ r I ~ !i
I ~ ~ ~ , ! I ,qA ~ ,~B ~ 1~11'~ ~ A ~ ( ~ ~ , ~ ,
r ~ i ; ~ r ~ ~_~;~.....~_~s.~. ' ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ Il ~ ~ ( y~TR ~Vr f;~vd- _ •Irb ( ~ I
I 7 r.~ ~ # ~ ~ , ~,4. ~ ? ~ . , C► 7 ~ r!~ ~ I
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O,,Q~p~. ~ ~ ~1 4 i e ~ ~ I a I ~J ~ ~ I
f ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~Q 140. ~ G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `j~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ' - 1; ~ P- - ~ ~ a ks ~ ~ ~ ~ I _
~ t ' ~ ` ~ ~ ~ . 4.1 2~' r ~ ~
, , ~ I r ~ ~ I ' -a, '~41 r ~J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ` r ~ I ~ I ( f
' ~ ~ I I JV ~ ~ ~ r ~ 7~j ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ - I ~ +I i ' 1 ~ I 3~ I I
~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~J ( . a,a,~ ~.o ~ g , ~ ~ ~ I
~ , ~ ~ ~ ~'I ~ r~ „t i U ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I r~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¢ . C1° ~ I ~
~i ~ ~ ( ' ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ;,~w. n I j ~ (
+ I ~ ~ ~ L r ~ ~ ~ .L 1_ ~ a... .~J .1 4~._ ~ - ~ F %,~.d~ _ ~ ~ ~r~Y~Q ~ - _l~, l. _ ~ _ ~ ~
~ ~ : rn,~r,,-.. , .1~.r~