VE-91-89
~
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
APPEAL OF THE ZONING ADJUSTOR'S )
MAY 4, 1990 DECISION TO DENY TWO )
VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR AN ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
EXISTING ILLEGAL CONTRACTORS ) CONCLUSIONS,
STORAGE YARD AND REPAIR ) AND DECISION
PROCESSING BUILDING. )
[VE-91-89] TOM STONE )
COMPANION FILES: CV-24-89 )
ADDRESS: N. 1112 Mamer Road PARCEL NUMBER: 15541-1214
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks two variances to continue
operation of an existing contractor's maintenance, repair and processing building and storage
yard on 1.785 acres of land with a partial, sight obscuring 6 foot fence; whereas, Secrion
4.04.110 (b) of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of 4.5 acres and a
sight obscuring fence. Authority to consider such a request exists pursuant to Secrion
4.25.010 and 4.25.030 b of the Spokane County Zoning Ord.inance.
PROJECT LOCATION: The applicant's residential property at N. 1112 Mamer, Spokane,
Washington, 99216; real property described as: Vera, W. 322 71 ft of the N 1/2 of B 104 and
. S 1/2 of ST N and Adj Exc the S. 90.43 ft. thereof.
OPPONENTS OF RECORD:
1. Richard Adams 2. Ray Ankerson 3. W. L. Jud
4. Lorena Hanson 5. Douglas Metcalfe 6. R. Cecil Whipple
- 7. Richard and Joan Malone 8. V. and E. Bodinger
~
SPECIAL INFORMATION: .
Based upon file documents, public tesamony under oath and a reading of Section 4.04.110 and ,
4.04.110 b. of the Spokane Zoning Ordinance, the following addition standards are likely
violated by the present operation and were not the subject of this or companion variance
. applications:
1. Contractor's yard area must be greater than 200 feet from a dwelling other than the owner's
dwelling (no data presented to clarify one way or another).
2. Contractor's yard area must be greater than 50 feet from any property line (site plan shows
violation).
3. No more than one person outside applicant's immediate family may be employed to work
on the premises (applicant's testimony indicated 10 - 11 employees at one time and 3 at the
present time; no data presented to clarify one way or another whether all employees are
immediate family members). '
4. Contractor's yard area, including structures, may not exceed 12,000 square feet (6.1% of a
4.5 acre site). Present fenced area is about 33,300 square feet (17% of d 4.5 acre site and
42.8% of the applicant's present actual ownership).
FINDINGS OF FACT
•
.
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTNiENT PAGE 2
• ~-T---- -
1. Complaint File No. CV-24-89 is hereby adopted by reference, except the identity of
complainants.
2. The proposal is described above and other possible violations which were not the
subject of the application are noted.
3. The adopted Spokane County Comprehensive Plan designates the area of the
proposa] as Urban. The Comprehensive Plan clearly supports a variety of development which
is compatible with residential areas and d.iscourages uses that are not or cannot be made
compatible with residential uses. At the dme the applicant began the unauthorized operation,
the Comprehensive Plan was Urban.
4. The site is zoned Agricultural, which would allow the existing use to remain upon
the granting of these two variances and several others not herein applied for.
5. The existing land uses in the area are predominantly residential, with very limited
neighborhood businesses nearby on properly zoned land or existing as lawful nonconfonming
uses.
6. The application is exempt from the provisions of the Washington State
Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21 C RCW pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
7. T'he proper legal requirements for advertising of the hearing before the Board of
Adjustment of Spokane County have been met.
8. Adverse testimony or written comments were received regarding the proposal.
Chief concerns were many and voiced by a number of nearby owners, but all concerned the -
incompatible nature of the contractor's business at this locadon. .
9. No evidence was presented and no observations were made by the Board of
~ Adjustment of any similar uses in the same vicinity and zone.
10. The property in question without the contractor's yard on it could be reasonably
used for a small acreage tract single family residence and such use would not be in any way
incumbered by any characterisrics of the lot. The predominant exisring land use in the area is
small acreage tract residential uses.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Continuance of the existing use would neither be consistent nor compatible with the
Spokane County Comprehensive Plan. ,
2. The intent of the Zoning Ordinance was clearly that a sizable portion (4.5 acres) of
land be allocated for this type of use, in conjunction with the owner's residence. The drafters
of the Zoning Ordinance were apparently so concerned about this type of business not
becoming incompatible with adjacent land uses that the Ordinance contained the several
standards which are both the subject of this variance application and the four additional ones
listed under Special Information. The intent was clearly that the contractor's business be
located a reasonable distance from other residences, that it be set back from the property line
r
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 3
,--r--
for purposes of a buffer, that there not be numerous employees coming and going, that the unsightliness of such an operation be obscured by a sight-obscuring fence, that the actual yard
area and buildings comprise only a small percentage of the site, etc. Clearly the applicant's
operadon violates most if not all of these considerations. To grant the two variances in
question and to overlook or not deal with the other variances which may be needed would be to
virtually establish a defacto zone reclassification to Light Industrial or Heavy Industrial, which
zones allow a contractor's yard outright.
3. To grant the variance application would: a) constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with limitations on other properties in the vicinity and similar zone; b) not ensure
that the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is achieved with regard to compatibility of
uses; and c) not protect the public interest and general welfare.
4. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property which, when
, combined with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, create practical difficulties for the use of
the properry and/or deprive the property of rights and privileges common to other properties in
the vicinity and similar zone classifications. That is, the property can be perfectly well used for
small acreage residential tracts as well as other uses listed in the ordinance for the zone for
parcels of this size.
5. Granting the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare and
injurious to property or improvements in the viciniry and zone.
6. Strict application of the zoning standards (4.5 acres and sight obscuring fence) does
. not create an unreasonable burden in light of the purpose to be served by the standards. The
~ purpose intended by the Zoning Standards was to create the greatest opportunity for compatible
adjacent land uses while still recognizing a contractor's storage yard may be acceptable under -
certain circumstances. ,
7. A broader, public need or interest would not be served by granting verses denying
the variance.
8. Granting the variances will adversely affect the overall zoning design, plan or
concept for both the immediate area and possibly the entire County, insofar as the precedent
established could contribute to the deterioration of the enare Zoning Ordinance as a device
designed to maintain compatible land uses in any given area.
9. The practical difficulty (too small of a parcel) which gives rise to the variance
. request did not exist before the applicant began to use the property for a contractor's storage
area.
DECISION '
From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Board of Adjustment DENIES the
appeal of the denial of the variance applicaaons but, to delay enforcement of the denied
variance for six months from the date of this acaon. Further, the staff is directed to inspect the
subject property within 21 days of this action to deternune what steps have been taken to
remove sight obscuring fencing and otherwise conform with this action and again six months
from the date of this action to determine that the nonconforming use has been removed from the
~ CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 4
n m I
property. If, after six months, any poraon of the use which was the subject, of this variance
request remains, the staff is directed to initiate zoning enforcement. Finally, the time for
mitigation of the nonconforming use is granted to the present property owner and is not
transferred to future property owners.
Vote 40 Unanimous
DATED this 18th day of July, 1990.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
QFMYOKANE COUNTY WASHINGTON
. A.
.
Dwight Ome, auman
. ~
Paul Eichin
,
E. B. Hamblin -
uzan lakeley
FILED: ~
1) Applicant (Certified/Return Receipt Mail)
. 2) Opponents of Record
3) Spokane County Engineer's Office
4) Spokane County Health District
5) Spokane County Utilities Department
6) Spokane County Department of Building & Safety
7) Planning Department Cross-reference File and/or Electronic File ,
* Additional Opponents of Record
Patricia J. Wickham, Patricia L. Sitton, Betty Jud, Colleen Smith,Jul Sitter,
Faye Strickland, George Matthews
~
~ a
ZONING ADJUSTQR
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF CONSIDERATION )
OF TWO VARIANCES: A) LESS THAN )
THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE NEEDED FOR )
A CONTRACTOR'S MAINTENANCE, )
REPAIR, AND PROCESSING BUILDING ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
AND STORAGE YARD; AND B) LESS ) CONCLUSIONS,
THAN FULL STORAGE YARD FENCING ) DECISION AND ORDER
WITH SIGHT-OBSCURING MATERIAL )
[VE-91-$9] TOM STONE )
COMPANION FTLES: CV-24-89 )
ADDRESS: N. 1112 Mamer Road PARCEL NUMBER: 15541-1214
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks two variances to continue
operation of an existing contractor's maintenance, repair and processing building and storage
yard on 1.785 acres of land with a partial, sight obscuring 6 foot fence; whereas, Section
4.04.110 (b) of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance requires a mi.nimum of 4.5 acres and a
sight obscuring fence. Authority to consider such a request exists pursuant to Section
4.25.010 and 4.25.030 b of the Spokane County Zoning Qrdinance.
PROJECT LOCATION: The applicant's residential property at N. 1112 Mamer, Spokane,
Washington, 992116; real property described as: Vera, W. 322 71 ft of the N 1/2 of B 104 and
S 1/2 of ST N and Adj Exc the S. 90.43 ft. thereof.
OPPONENTS OF RECORD:
1. Richard Adams 2. Ray Ankerson 3. W. L. Jud
4. Lorena Hanson 5. Douglas Metcalfe 6. R. Cecil Whipple ,
7. Richard and Joan Malone 8. V. and E. Bodinger
SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Based upon file documents, public testimony under oath and a reading of Section 4.04.110 and
4.04.110 b. of the Spokane Zoning Ordinance, the following addition standards are likely
violated by the present operation and were not the subject of this or companion variance
applications:
1. Contractor's yard area must be greater than 200 feet from a dwelling other than the owner's
dwelling (no data presented to clarify one way or another).
2. Contractor's yard area must be greater than 50 feet from any property line (site plan shows
violation). .
3. No more than one person outside applicant's immediate family may be employed to work
on the premises (applicant's testimony indicated 10 - 11 employees at one time and 3 at the
present time; no data presented to clarify one way or another whether all employees are
immediate family members).
c ~
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZOIVING ADJUSTOR PAGE 2
4. Contractor's yard area, including swctures, may not exceed 12,000 square feet (6.1% of a
4.5 acre site). Present fenced area is about 33,300 square feet (17% of a 4.5 acre site and
42.8°Io of the applicant's present actual ownership).
DECISION SUMMARY:
After consideration of all available information on file, exhibits submitted and testimony
received during the course of the public hearing held on Apri125, 1990 and the Zoning
Adjustor rendered a written decision on May 4, 1990, to DENY the variance applicadons.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Complaint File No. CV-24-89 is hereby adopted by reference, except the identity of
complainants.
2. The proposal is described above and other possible violations which were not the
subject of the application are noted.
3. The adopted Spokane County Comprehensive Plan designates the area of the
proposal as Urban. The Comprehensive Plan clearly supports a variety of development which
is compatible with residential areas and discourages uses that are not or cannot be made
compatible with residential uses. At the time the applicant began the unauthorized operation,
the Comprehensive Plan was Urban.
4. The site is zoned Agricultural, which would allow the existing use to remain upon
the granting of these two variances and several others not herein applied for.
5. The existing land uses in the area are predominantly residential, with very limited
neighborhood businesses nearby on properly zoned land or existing as lawful nonconfonning
uses. .
6. The application is exempt from the provisions of the Washington State
Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
7. The proper legal requirements for advertisi.ng of the hearing before the Zoning
Adjustor of Spokane County have been met.
8. Adverse testimony or written comments were received regarding the proposal.
Chief concerns were many and voiced by a number of nearby owners, but all concerned the
incompatible nature of the contractor's business at this location.
9. No evidence was presented and no observations were made by the Zoning Adjustor
of any similar uses in the same vicinity and zone. '
10. The property in question without the contractor's yard on it could be reasonably
used for a small acreage tract single family residence and such use would not be in any way
incumbered by any characteristics of the lot. The predominant existing land use in the area is
small acreage tract residential uses.
t •
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJLJSTOR PAGE 3
NESCMEems~ - -
CONCLUSIONS
1. Continuance of the existing use would neither be consistent nor compatible with the
Spokane County Comprehensive Plan.
2. The intent of the Zoning Ordinance was clearly that a sizable portion (4.5 acres) of
land be allocated for this type of use, in conjunction with the owner's residence. The drafters
of the Zoning Ordinance were apparently so concerned about this type of business not
becoming incompatible with adjacent land uses that the Ordinance contained the several
standards which are both the subject of this variance application and the four additional ones
listed under Special Infornzarion. The intent was clearly that the contractor's business be
located a reasonable distance from other residences, that it be set back from the property line
for purposes of a buffer, that there not be numerous employees coming and going, that the
unsightliness of such an operation be obscured by a sight-obscuring fence, that the actual yard
area and buildings comprise only a small percentage of the site, etc. Clearly the applicant's
operation violates most if not all of these considerations. To grant the two variances in
question and to overlook or not deal with the other variances which may be needed would be to
virtually establish a defacto zone reclassification to Light Industrial or Heavy Industrial, which
zones allow a contractor's yard outright.
3. To grant the variance application would: a) constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with limitations on other properties in the vicinity and similar zone; b) not ensure
that tne intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is achieved with regard to compatibility of
uses; and c) not protect the public interest and general welfare.
~ 4. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property which, when
combined with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, create practical difficulries for the use of
the property and/or deprive the property of rights and privileges common to other properties in
the vicinity and similar zone classifications. That is, the property can be perfectly well used for .
small acreage residential tracts as well as other uses listed in the ordinance for the zone for
parcels of this size.
5. Granting the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare and
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and zone.
6. Strict application of the zoning standards (4.5 acres and sight obscuring fence) does
not create an unreasonable burden in light of the purpose to be served by the standards. The
purpose intended by the Zoning Standards was to create the greatest opportunity for compatible
adjacent land uses while still recognizing a contractor's storage yard may be acceptable under
certain circumstances.
7. A broader, public need or interest would not be served by granting verses denying •
the variance.
8. Granting the variances will adversely affect the overall zoning design, plan or
concept for both the immediate area and possibly the entire County, insofar as the precedent
established could contribute to the deterioration of the entire Zoning Ordinance as a device
designed to maintain compatible land uses in any given area.
~ . ~
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZOIVING ADJUSTOR PAGE 4
o ~
9. The practical difficulty (too small of a parcel) which gives rise to the variance
request did not exist before the applicant began to use the property for a contractor's storage
area. Not wishing to install sight obscuring fencing is a practical difficulty specific to the
applicant's desire to not comply with the fencing standard.
DECISION
From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Zoning Adjustor DENIES the
variances.
DATED this 4th day of May, 1990.
THOMA~G. OSHER, AICP,
Senior lanner
Zonin djustor
- Spokane County, Washington
FILED:
1) Applicant (Certi.fiedJReturn Receipt Mail)
- 2) Opponents of Record
3) Spokane County Engineer's Office
4) Spokane County Health District
S) Spokane County Utilities Department
6) Spokane County Department of Building & Safety .
7) Planning Department Cross-reference File and/or Elecmonic File
NOTE: ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FILE AN
APPEAL WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF TBE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNING.
APPEAL MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A$100.00 FEE. A,PPEALS MAY BE FILED AT
THE SPOKANE COUNTY PLANr1ING DEPARTMENT, BROADWAY CENTRE
BUILDING, NORTH 721 JEFFERSON STREET, SPQKANE, WA 99260 (Sections
4.25.090 and 4.25.100 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance).
ZONING ADJUSTOR
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF CONSIDERATION )
OF TWO VARIANCES: A) LESS THAN )
THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE NEEDED FOR )
A CONTRACTOR'S MAINTENANCE, )
REPAIR, AND PROCESSING BUILDING ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
AND STORAGE YARD; AND B) LESS ) CONCLUSIONS,
THAN FULL STORAGE YARD FENCING ) DECISION AND ORDER
WITH SIGHT-QBSCURING MATERIAL )
jVE-91-891 TOM STONE )
COMPANION FILES: CV-24-89 )
ADDRESS: N. 1112 Mamer Road PARCEL NUMBER: 15541-1214
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks two variances to conanue
operation of an existing contractor's maintenance, repair and processing building and storage
yar-d on 1.785 acres of land with a partial, sight obscuring 6 foot fence; whereas, Section
4.04.110 (b) of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of 4.5 acres and a
sight obscuring fence. Authority to consider such a request exists pursuant to Section
4.25.010 and 4.25.030 b of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.
PIRQJEC'I' LGCA'I'ION: The appl:car;t's resiuential property at N. 1112 Mamer, Spokare,
Washington, 99216; real property described as: Vera, W. 322 71 ft of the N 1/2 of B 104 and
S 1/2 of ST N and Adj Exc the S. 90.43 ft. thereof.
OPPONENTS OF RECORD:
1. Richard Adams 2. Ray Ankerson 3. W. L. Jud .
4. Lorena Hanson 5. Douglas Metcalfe 6. R. Cecil Whipple
7. Richard and Joan Malone 8. V. and E. Bodinger SPECIAL INFORMATION:
Based upon file documents, public testimony under oath and a reading of Section 4.04.110 and
4.04.110 b. of the Spokane Zoning Ordinance, the following addition standards are likely
violated by the present operation and were not the subject of this or companion variance
applicarions:
1. Contractor's yard area must be greater than 200 feet from a dwelling other than the owner's
dwelling (no data presented to clarify one way or another).
2. Contractor's yard area must be greater than 50 feet from any property line (site plan shows violation).
3. No more than one person outside applicant's immediate family may be employed to work
on the premises (applicant's testimony indicated 10 - 11 employees at one time and 3 at the
present time; no data presented to clarify one way or another whether all employees are
immediate family members).
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 2
4. Contractor's yard area, including structures, may not exceed 12,0()0 square feet (6. l% of a
4.5 acre site). Fresent fenced area is about 33,300 square feet (17% of a 4.5 acre site and
42.8°l0 of the applicant's present actual ownership).
DECISION SUMMARY:
After consideration of all available information on file, exhibits submitted and tesamony
received during the coursc of the public hearing held on Apri125, 1990 and the Zoning
Adjustor rendered a written decision on May 4, 1990, to DENY the variance applications.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Complaint File No. CV-24-89 is hereby adopted by neference, except the identity of
complainants.
2. The proposal is described above and other possible violations which were not the
subject of the application are noted.
3. The adopted Spokane County Comprehensive Plan designates the area of the
proposal.as Urban. The Comprehensive Plan clearly supports a variety of development which
is cornpatible with residential areas and discourages uses that are not or cannot be made
compatible with residential uses. At the time the applicant began the unauthorized operation,
the Comprehensive Plan was Urban.
4. The site is zoned Agricultural, which would allow the existing use to remain upon
the granting of these two variances and several others not herein applied for.
5. The existing land uses in the area are predorrunantly residential, with very limited
neighborhood businesses nearby on properly zoned land or existing as lawful nonconfornung uses. .
6. The application is exempt from the provisions of the Washington State
Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
7. The proper legal requirements for advertising of the hearing before the Zoning
Adjustor of Spokane County have been met
8. Adverse testimony or written comments were neceived regarding the proposal.
Chief concerns were many and voiced by a number of nearby owners, but all concerned the
incompatible nature of the contractor's business at this location.
9. No evidence was presented and no observaaons were made by the Zoning Adjustor •
of any similar uses in the same vicinity and zone.
10. The property in question without the contractor's yard on it could be reasonably
used for a small aereage tract single family residence and such use would not be in any way
incumbered by any characteristics of the lot. The predominant existing land use in the area is
small acreage tract residential uses.
.
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 3
CONCLUSIONS
1. Continuance of the existing use would neither be consistent nor compatible with the
Spokane County Comprehensive Plan.
2. Ile intent of the Zoning Ordinance was clearly that a sizable portion (4.5 acres) of
land be allocatcd for this type of use, in conjunction with the owner's residence. The drafters
of the Zoning Ordinance were apparenily so concerned about this type of business not
becoming incompatible with adjacent land uses that the Ordinance contained the several
standards which are both the subject of this variance application and the four additional ones
listed under Special Information. The intent was clearly that the contractor's business be
located a reasonable d.istance from other residences, that it be set back from the property line
for purposes of a buffer, that there not be numerous employees coming and going, that the
unsightliness of such an operation be obscured by a sight-obscuring fence, that the actual yard
area and buildings comprise only a small percentage of the site, etc. Clearly the applicant's
operation violates most if not all of these considerations. To grant the two variances in
question and to overlook or not deal with the other variances which may be needed would be to
virtually establish a defacto zone reclassificarion to Light Industrial ar Heavy Industrial, which
zones allow a contractor's yard outright.
3. To grant the variance application would: a) constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with limitations on other properties in the vicinity and similar zane; b) noi ensure
that the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is a,chieved with regard to compatibility of
uses; and c) not protect the public interest and general welfare.
4. nere are no special circumstances applicable to the property which, when
combined with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, create practical difficulties for the use of
the property and/or deprive the property of rights and privileges conmon to other properties in .
the vicinity and similar zone classifications. That is, the property can be perfectly well used for .
small acreage residential tracts as well as other uses listed in the ordinance for the zone for
parcels of this size.
5. Granting the variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare and
injurious to property or improvements in the viciniry and zone.
6. Strict application of the zoning standards (4.5 acres and sight obscuring fence) does
not create an unreasonable burden in light of the purpose to be served by the standards. The
purpose intended by the Zoning Standards was to create the greatest opportunity for compatible
adjacent land uses while still recognizing a contractor's storage yard may be acceptable under
cercain circumstances.
7. A bnoader, public need or interest would not be served by granting verses denying
the variance.
8. Granting the variances will adversely affect the overall zoning design, plan or
concept for both the immediate area and possibly the entire County, insofar as the precedent
established could contribute to the deteriorarion of the entire Zoning Ordinance as a device
designed to maintain compatible land uses in any given area.
f .
CASE NO.VE-91-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 4
9. The practical d.ifficulty (too small of a parcel) which gives rise to the variance
request did not exist before the applicant began to use the property for a contractor's storage
area. Not wishing to install sight obscuring fencing is a practical difficulty specific to the
applicant's desire to not comply with the fencing standard.
DECISION
From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Zoning Adjustor DENIES the
variances.
DATED this 4th day of May, 1990.
THOMA~'G. OSHER, AICP,
Senior lanner
Zoniri djustor
Spokane County, Washington
FILED:
1) Applicant (Certified/Return Receipt Mail)
2) Opponents of Record
) Spoke County Engineer's Office
4) po e County Health Distnct
5) Spokane County Utilities Department 6) Spokane County Department of Building & Safety
7) Planning Department Cross-reference File and/or Electronic File
NOTE: ONLY TBE APPLICANT OR AN OPPOrfENT OF RECORD MAY FILE AN
APPEAI- WITHN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNIlVG.
APPEAL MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A$100.00 FEE. APPEALS MAY BE FII.ED AT
'IHE SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPART1V4ENT, BROADWAY CENTRE
BUII.DING, NORTH 721 JEFFERSON STREET, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Sections
4.25.090 and 4.25.100 of the Spokane County Zoning Qrdinance).
t
V'
~tld g. Pe rm i. t F-e e N c.. F j. ] ~ No.
. ~
,
f~' i~ ] t N A_ m e
Adti r - ~ > > r c e N
b. c.
S[l -:<<n5 -:-1' Ia Nr3 mL Phc_,ne
F;n iri e p r~ /S u r ~r r,~~/ A~ hi.t p ~
~ y s Na m ~
Te1 eph on e- #
F'1 arin i ng Cont act F'erstiit~i
Da~~ SLtbmitted ~~sc rip t ic-n initxals
~
• ' _
i
y7•~~►~]~[7
, •'~N J ~ '1]~~~~~~ , ' '~~611' `~~II4~~~~ 1~. a7
4. IIir'~ R' ~w ro
I . Q , ~
PLANNING DEPARTMEN't----.ft_'V' ?b" ;
8R0A0'+YkY CENTRE BUILDING N. 721 JEFFERSON STREET
FHONE 456-2205
SpaKA:IE. wkSHiNGYOk 99260
gHOKAr-C Z9Wt+tt GQllnd hOUSt
hVO`II'IICIE (DtF SIPOKA.r'~1E COtIJRI'1I'I`I 7LOFIIIfiFQII ADJiUS'TOIiR P'ri.JIBILHC IHIEAU'RIING
DATE: April 25, 1990
TI1V1E: 9:45 a.m, or as soon thereafter as possibie
PLACE: Spokane County PXanning Department
2nd Floar Hearing Room, Brvadway Centtz Building
North 721 7efferson Street
Spokane, WA 99260
AGENDA ITEM 4
EiLe_ VE-91-89
VARIANCE FItOM MIN Mt1M O'C SiZIE RE(3 At7'S FQR CQl'dTRACTOR'.S
STORAGE YARD ANS? FFNCE REO TIREMN'I'Ss
LOCAfilQN: Generally located east of and adjaceQt to Mamer Road anri approxima!ely 1/4
mile monli of Broadway Avenue Road in !he NE I/4 of Scction 15, Township 25N, Range
44EW1Vi Spokane County, Washington.
P R Q POS A I.. : Tbe appl.icant proposes to al low a coiltraccor's storage yard on a parcel of
land of approximately 1.9 acres and a nou-sight obscuring fence. Section 4.04.110 of the
Spokane Coti.nty 2oning Ordinance requires a parcel which is of a minimum of 4 1/2
acres and (b) that any storAge area is sccut•ely fenced with sigbt obscu.ring fence.
EXISTINQ ZQNTPIG: Agricultural C0ll11!RLHEN5IVE PI..AN: Urban
SI'ft"L SIZE: Approximatcly 1.9 acre
APPI.ICANT: Tom Stone
N. 1112 Mamer Road
Spokane WA 99216
ITEMS CARRIED OVL-R FROM FREVIOUS HEA.R.INGS MAY I3E HEARD FIl2ST, POSSTBLY
GAUSING DELAYS. LEGAL DESCRIP'Y'IONS aT'o(D FRO7ECT DETATLS FOR THESE PRqJECTS
ARE AVATLAI3LE XN THE PLANNING DEPARTNTENT I=1LES. APPEALS OF 7°NE I3EC.ISION ON
TBE ABOVE LIS'T'ED GASE MAY ONLY BE F1L.ED BYTHE APPLICANT OR AN OPPQNENT OF
RECORD ACCOMPANIED BY A$100.(10 iFEE. (Sections 4.25.090 arid 4_25 lUfl of the
Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.)
. • '
. ~
• j ti ~~?'t ,,;'l. •t`~,e ,,t .
~ ~i ♦ ~S~y~~ ~ ~ ~ y
.r .11 4,~~• r, ~ ~ il
` ,r~~^~~~1!~ ,~1~~ ~ i~~ 'r iK.v °S r ~
. ^ ~ , 4 , ~•t
~ ,y,~fi ~ ~ ~ ~,~]j~1~ a - ~ I~~
1 { `~,y „ t ~ Z~l(' y~ •~y~~ ~at
I~'M . . c ~ ~ ~~M~~ • ~ ~ ~ • A'~.~•~ ~ .
44 ' r ~ • ~r
4 ~ rf:~ • l ~ 'IC J ~ v1 ~ S" i~(( ^ • I 'r
1 r11' "At}' ~ ~
r,if , , ~ y ` r t~.' ! '~r~ •
~ • ~ ~ i ; ~.y ~ y ^ ~ j yI jaj~k;;~ } B, r ~
4e
r
~~Asw
-4
1 Y 1 • \ ~`AK~ .y . r •
i ~
•t , ' ~ ~ .
F~ ~ Q Q~►~
~MIM•K ~ M~, ~
< _ aRE~. 4j! ~ 6
r , „
~
~ A d
~ .~za
µ 1
M~ 4h'
. ~
. T 8 q M~VA if
3
~ Q-
q
1VAR
1
I r t
W : ~ANM~~ fkQA
~
8OLIVAp
~ nt T r ca ~
E ~ ' ►
4
~Q ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ ,
' ` , - ~u ~ v~ • "t 1;. .A ~ '
lkl t
k~~7 ~y . • . ~ ~ ~ •
t °
..Ks 9 y cµ WA ~
~
~
!
ry 1
~ SPOKANE COVNTY PieAN17ii1L
Certificate of Exemption Na.: A~pplication No.:~E ~
h
NB,rne Of AppllCant: Agent; Y N.,,,
Staect Address: e- 0 - L-
Zip Phone Hoine:_C,~;p~= 7 7 r~]
5tate; t_LI~40- Code; ~"/Z Wark.
. Agents No.
; J "
~iame of ArOperty OwnCr(s): ~I'~l~l ~ M ~~a•-r~~
r ~
Street Address: c~Z,0Lv---4L-
~ , . 2ap . Phone - Hame:
City: Statc: ' Code: Work:
REQUE,STED AMON(S) (Circlc appropniate - action):
Con+ditivnal. Us,e Per'mit ?WkcoOorm,ing I.vt/Use
aiver o Violation Tempofary ; Use/4zru6t'~rc' othd~:
~
S FQR sCAM LISE o= " CODE: QRDWANCE i~,,X
Cite ReguI ation$ S cction (s) ; ~J
~•1/. f~~~ me/ ~Q
~'roperty Viol tian/
Section: Tov'mship; ~ 5- Range: ~ V 5ize: - ~"~AcEnforccment: ~ N
~ . ~ k o 1. 4 r ' i
Existing Zone: J mF. Ptan' Des.: lIrAcm Cxosaovor„~k..?+
,
' f I.~iAL
~SA~ ~ i F' VIAa~'"f 1 i / ~ ~AGN_ F#R_ _ + J.I#ST.T ya+E1r~D ~.+Y■
• r F, # !
. r y It ~ ~ t } c
Hcaring Datc. ~T"acing in Applicatioa:
xlsi.i~i.ig ~JsL of i ■V~~yr
♦
~ S
escribe ~teaded Proposal in ''cru}s of I~~IJES'TED ACTI~C}~+IS a~~rt: Vrla~ ~l~ itrrc
~
Z P Car ~ ~ t+rC~C~ r~ ~ ~P-e Gt ft ~ G~~~'aCAP ~S~
~ ' ~ ~ ' ~
~f~
9L~
~ Yra~G~
r~ Lr 'r ~ ~
Stre~ ress ~f Praperty:~ ~ Z2~1. -
Legal Descn'ptivn of Property (include easement,, if ap,plicable):i,.~~ ~ A ~ LAJ. -7j 4
~ rl-
~ • a ~ e _ v ~ ~ i . 5
' I
i Y
Farcel T►ia(s): f'5~„~1Source, Vf iUg'al;i
I
Total amauat vf adjaining land controlled by this owner/sponsar:
What interest do yau hold in the property? / AuLic',
~
~
Pleasc lxst, prev s P1anAing Department 'actioras invvlving this praperty: '
srA wAsHINCraN ~ ss
CovrrrY oF sPoKANa ~
ISVVEAR, UNDE,R PF-NALTY OF FE&T[JRY, THAT; (1) I A.M THE OWNIER OP RECORD OR ALTHC3RIZED
AGEV'I' FC3R THE PItOFOSED STI7; EF NOT 'I'BS OWNER, MM'I'EN PERbiISSION F'ROA+i 5AID
OWNER AtTTHQRIZa►,fiG MY ACMQNS ON WS/#3SR SEHAL.F I5 ATTACHEx.D: A1YD (3) ALL OF THE
A►.BQYE RESPONSE5 AND THO58 QN SLTPPC]RTII~ 7S ARE E'TR YANND T4 THE
BF.S'I` Ofi MY KNOWLEDGE,
Sigaed:
~
Addr
,
Pho~t~ I~o.:,~ ~ ~ ? Date:
~,iOTAR~t' SFAI..;
otsry ublic in ari or the state of Washington,
- residing at
- f.p
My appointxnent expires: l1 ,.27
" - - ' a ~
.ti• . ~ ' '4 ~ ~"y. _ ' _
Pag2 3 of 4
• f •l_ 'it~~~ • ~r,4i 5
r - ~
ti ~~~~r' •
„ , .
v
~ • i
Y
P V A.\BURDEN OF PROOF
It is necessary for the applicant or his/her representative to establish the reasons
why thc REQUESTED ACTION should bc approvcd and to litorally put forth thc basic
case. Accordingly, you should havc been given 4 form for your requcstcd action
(variance, conditioDal use, etc.) designcd to help you' present your case in a way
which addresses tbe criteria which the Zoning Adjustor must consider. Pleaso fill
thc form out and return it with your application. If you did not get a form, ask the
Planning Departmeot personnel for advice on how to proceod.
B. SICN-QFF BY GOUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER ACENCIES
.
1 COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
a) Proposed method of water supply:
` v~
b) Proposed method of sewage disposal f _
~
A prcliminary consultation has bccn held to discuss the proposal. The applicant
as bocn ' cd. o requircmant a.nd d r . '
~ C'
(Signatur Data) (Sign-o_f VYaived)
2. COUNTY EN *I ERRiNDEPARTMF~ • :
A prcliaiinary ' consultatioa has beea"held to discuss the proposal. "'T.he applicant
n~ i o 7 cd o' rcquircmcnts and standards. '
o~ / - , .r•
(S i ture) (Date) (Siga-off Waivod)
3. ('OLJNTY UTILI'TIES DEPARTM .NT (Waive if outside WMAB)
- - .
A preliminqry consultation has bccn hcld to discuss the proposal. The
plicant bas b on formcd of rcquiromonts and standards.
. _
f5 2 --9 v .
' (Signature) (Date) (Sign-off , Waived) dj
- ~ v~ ~d
[~~Thc applicant, is,rcquircd tq discuss the proposal with
e , to bacomc informed of water system
requirements and standards.
t ~ . . . , . .
[J"_ Thc applicant is required to discuss the proposal with -to bccome infonued of sewage dlsposal
requirements ' and standards. . .
• ' ' ' (Waiti_e i,_f outside CWSSA)
a) The proposal ' ocated within the boundary ' pf our future service area.
b) The propo'sal 'ysfign-nek located within the boundary''of our current
district.
c) We able to serve this site with adequate water.
d) Satisfactory arrangements haye6bMftRjWt been made to serve this
ro s
,
~ g~g~ ,
( ignature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived)
5. SEWERA GE P 1RVEViR:
(If other than Spokane County)
A preliminary; consultation has been held to discuss the proposal.
The applicant has becn informed of requirements and aadards.
(Signature) (Date) (Sign-o f Waived)
Page 4 of 4
i
' i w
' • ` . f~ `J ~
. ; ~
_ '
, " • .
.rl~ ~
:
. +
: .
.r
, ..r... •
1
. -.a
.
• ~ ~
I , y z , •
~ ~ ~ 1 . ~ ~ . . ~ ~ . ` ' •r~~f tt . .
T •,a ~ ~ ~ ~ , a • , 1 ' ,A j ' d~~"`..~..'~'.F N . . ,
APPLICAN7' S f ORM
, .
~ _ ~
MAME : ~ -~it n ~ `■i • S f~
fIlE:
- . . . , ~ ~ - ~ • ~ - ,
1. YARIIWCES
s .
A. Wi 11 the vari ance authori ze a use otherwi se prohi i te4 ~Y1rt:.-thi s,zone?
hou J~
Yes • No • Comnent: ~
♦ ` . , . ` / ~ . . ` '°,t`.Yd-~r.I~G% ; . , . ~ , .
- ~ ~ ' ~ ^ ♦ ~,t t ' 'Ki. ~ r ~ ~ ' ~ , j -
~ ' •a' ~ ` ~ s-J
~ F Zi ~ ~ ~ '~F `A`~{ i 1-~d(r• ~ ~~~~3.•~S: ~y~ >9 t
V ` ~,o ' ~ • ' ~ r . ~ _ 'i ° ~
t ~ . ~ ~ ' r f • ' . ~ ~ I ~ .
8. Wi 11 ~speci al ci rcurnstances a 11cab1 e to the ro ert 't such as si ze.
shape, topography, surround ngs when combined,with he standards of
the Zoning Ordinances create practical difflculties for use of the ,
property and/or deprive the proaerty of r1 ghts, and pri vi 1 eges conmon
to other properti es i n the vi c1 ni ty and simi1 i ar, ;zone ,cl a ssi f i cati on?
Yes - ; No . ~ ; Comment :
C. Wi 11 the ranting of the variance bf materially dotrimental to the,
publlc weltare or iourious to property or improvements in ,,the
~
vicintty and zone? Yes ~ • ~ ;,No Comments:, ' •=<r `r -
. ~ . Y • ~ ~ ,
;U , ~ _ ~ ' ° ' ' ,r„ ` a;- ~ ~ - ~ - yS "r f .
. t~~t ~rJ • ~ ~ , • ' ti v . ~ `
• ~ ~ , ` .r'{ t: . - . , '
0. Does stri ct appl i cati on of_ ~ the ioni ngK standard create ' an 'unreoson0l e ,
burden in 1 fght of purpoie toy be servy
NO ed by the atandsrd? YQ:
Y ~L.;4„. ~~3~ /~:Y~~Yy v: " + 1 s~ ~I,1
.~I~~ ° r~ fl y
. ~•i.r.+C+ ~ ~ ~ , ++rJv~;~: t ~ st ~ YN~,~ • ~ - ` "4' t '
_ . r. r~ri,~`N'~~1'•' ~'Si.wi~~ "t » . 1~~•
~ t s'tir'<4,4"'~~~~~... ~ i ~ i~:.;r~~ ~ rl ~ l~~xl • ~ , ~ ~J'17 ,Q'~~ - ~
~ ~Y ~ ! ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ ...I . xN' 1. , r • ~ 1 ~ •
. . . x5 - y ~r, ~ • . t~~' , p,~ ~ y.. ' r .
✓ '
E. Would relaxation of the soning standard-make a more envlronmentally*
sensitive or energy-conserving project, or encourage continued or new•
use of an hi storic property? Yes No Comment:
.
F. Will a broader, publlc need or interest be served by granting verse
denyi ng the vari ance? Yes ; No Carn+ent:
,
G. I s the case for a vari ance supported'by other 1 i ke or s1mi1 ar ~
° si tuati ons i n the vt cin1 ty and i n sim11 ar zones? Yes, No ,
Comnent: - • ' ' .
. . • • •
_ . .
. A ~
_ - ~ ~ ' r` ~ ~ t • ,
(continued on reverse side) ' ~ .
' • ~ , , • d
✓ 5 _ . ♦
. • •~~e, ~ r..j 1 ~ . r. • ' .
4
' ~ • - -
1
H. wi 11 granti ng the variance adversely affect the overal l zoni ng desi gn,
plan or concept for either the irtmediate area or the entire County?
Yes ; No Comnent:
1. Is the case for a variance substantially based upon a lack of '
reasonable economic return or a claim that the existing structure is
too sma 11 ? yes ; No Cortment :
Lr ~ • ~ ' ~ -
J. Wi 11 granti ng the Variance ~be i nconsi stent wi th the gener_a1 purpase
and intent of. the Comprehensjv,e Plan? - Yes ; No Cortment: '
- • • ' ~ ` ' ' •
. . . ~
~ ~ ~ . - . ; ~ - ' - • - ~ . . _ ' r d ' _ - . . . . . . ~ ,
; ' ~ _ ' ~s r : ' ~ ; ~
~ " 'y ~y~. • , ' ,1 «;~`r~.'~~-~c~-'~`~''.. ~e~+~ ~ •1' _','y~i.:; ~
- • ° a . ' . 4 ~ ~
. r
K. Did the practical ',difficultjr whi ch "'gives 'rise to the varidnce request
exi st before the property was.acqul red by the present owner?. Yes ;
'No Coament: ~ o f
. t , ~ ,
• , ~ _ . . ~
L. Will the granting of the' variance result in defactozone reclassifica- ,
ti on; that-i s, the establ i shi ng of nearly al l the pri vi1 eges comnon to
a-different zone Classlftcation? Yes ; No ~ Comment:
n ~a ~ ~ ~ ° • • ' ~ • ~ ~ '
~ ~ , " ` . - ~ •
e ~ , . , : > . . ~ , ' ' ~ : t 1 ~ ~ •,1~_ . ~ F.
, . . . • e . ~ _ . r' ~~Y~ r t , < . .
:T• n,
M. Ooes the requested var1 ance resul t i n the ci rcumventi on 'of dens1 ty
regul ati ons desl9nedr to, protect the Aqui fer? Yes . ; No
Coament:
- . _ , .
. . ' , ' • , , n,r: • '
+ y • , j r.: ' u,9.~i{.:r -
• , - f , . , . s " +~S' "'b -
0046Z1Arch. 0002t
.
. ' ~
~
• ~ .
,.~•r ;i
~ ~ , ~ _ ~ - ~x, - , 'K .r- `~.r~. * +r
• ~ ~ ~ ~ " ~z. x
' SPOK:ANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPAR'I`MENT
1. -F
Certificate of Exemption No.: Applicafio~ No.:'~~~~~:'_
' rt J~ j ~ c~ ~,~ri ;y ~ a~,r,` I ~j ~ v t~r
- loo" ~~r~ . ri ~ . v - p • ~
Name of Applicant: 7 0 ~ -Agent: '-Y N + - ' f' ` ;~y ~ ' '
< ~ •j , . .f'
,
Street Address: • ~ i~~~~~~'" ~ ~ ~ ~ YY' , ~
Zip - ' Phone - Home: .
City: ~ State: ' Code: ~ Work: ~ ' .
Agents No. - - ,
, Name of Property Owner(s):
~ ~ ( A~ , ♦ + ♦
Street Address:
, Zip , Phone - Home:
City: State: - 'Code: ' Work:
REQUESTED ACTION(S) (Circle 'appropriate action):
<--Va ri an c e( s)~ ~ . Conditional 'Use Permit Nohconforining ~ Lot/Use '
, ''VVaiver of Violation Temporary Use/Structure Other:
FOR STAFF [,~5E ONI..Y , CODE: ORDINANCE
i Cite Regulations Section(s):
t~ Property Violation/
' Section:` /5 Township: Range: y 7 Size: ~I~~Enforcement:_~ N ~ .
Existing Zone: 1 omp. Plan Des.: Crossover'~~ - ~ ~
Aq r.aJ&WJ 4&610
'LaEVI'1L °a +Si.~. ` • F'~~;h ,~~<'i~ ~
Ny`
PSSA: N UTA: Y NASA Y N FTRE DIST.;'~/ CHECKED BY:
~ 04,
. ~
i.. , ~ ~ - • + ' t ,dM
Hearing Date: Personnel Taking in,r Application:
~ ~ xisting Use of Property: ,~~V ~
~l~
- v~ ' - ~
Frr~ Z~
escribe Intended Proposal in Terms of REQUESTED ACTIONS above• . ~/~rlQ K.-p acr c
/!Z (~k rr'0.ChDr ~S S6 /~/Q!h!'ehQ Y~ Gt ~/"l~OC~S~
p p . D~ S P ~ ~ ~ ~ l~ .
CA ~Q ' fri i~P A . . / ~ c7 HQ~ ~oy» S / qA f O c
N re Gc rr ~►~Q~-
Stre Address of Property:
~ Legal -'Description of Property (include easement, . if applicable). .
Parcel No(s): ~ Source of Legal:
,
Total amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner/sponsor:
What interest do you hold , in the' property?
. . • f ~^'c > ~ !^1,. ^ ~ ~_r ~
a r ~ ' ~ ~ , _
~ Please ~ list previous ' Planning Department actions involving ~this _property:.'
j ~ ` . ~ ,ar~: ' '~2-~`. '
STATE OF WASHINGTON ~ S S - '
COUNTY OF SPOKANE
~ .
I SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM T'HE OWNER OF RECORD OR AUTHORIZED ~
AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED SITE; (2) IF NOT THE OWNER, WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM SAID
,
OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF IS ATTACHED: AND (3) ALL'OF THE
. ABOVE RESPONSES AND THOSE ON SUPPURTIING DOCUNiENTS ARE MADE TRLrUULLY'AND TO THE
~ - BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. • . ' . , , ~ - -
: Signed: - _ ~ ' ~ " _ ~ •
Address:- ~ ~ -
t
,
~ Phone No.: Date: t. .
NOTARY SEAL: '
r~ .
Notary Public In and for the state of Washington,
.
residing at
. My appointment expires: ~ . ,
~ R r ~ • ' ~•a
~ • t'.~ .~'„lt,~`~ `
_ Page 3 of 4
~ ~-1tj • ~ y , i~ _J~H'j
}ari 0
~ . ^ , .
~ ~ • ~~1~(~~~ 1 ~ ~ 1 J - .
Yf ~ r
~ ~J- '
• 1 ' ' ~
l r
. ;
r e • , ; i_ ,
~A BC1RD .N QF PRQOF , : _ i; ,
It is necessary ~or the applicant -or his/her representative to- establish ,'the reasons
why the REQUESTED ACTION should be approved and to literally put forth the basic _
case. Accordingly, you should have been given a form, ~ for your requested action
(variance, conditional use, etc.) designed to help you present your case in' a.way-' .
which addresses • the criteria which the Zoning Adjustor must consider. Please fi11
che form out and return it with your application. If you did not get a foim, ask' the
Pla.nning Department personnel for advice on how to proceed.
B. SIrN OFF BY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER A tENCIES
, • 1. ('OUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT • a) Proposed method of water supply: .
b) Proposed method of sewage disposal:
. A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. ".The applicant
has been iaformedk- of requirements and standards.
:
(Signature). - (Date) (Sign-off. Waived)
,
,ri,niU~NTV ENCINE.RINC DEPARTMENT_ A preliminary coasultation has 'been ; held to discuss the proposal. The applicant :
n i formed 'o requirements and • standards. • ~
(S i ture,), (Date) (Sign-off Waived) . , u `t _ '.r - , , ~o ^ ,`1
' 3. COL1,n,TY UTILI'TIES DEPARTMENT (Waive if outside WMAB)
ri. , r, ✓ • - r
r„he..`.; _,;r,
A preliminjry' consultation has been held . to discuss the proposal,~T
applicant has beep informed of Irequirements I and standards. . ~
1 • * C-s (Signature~ - r (Date) k. (Sign-off Waived) L rs -
.*N
The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with T' , - ' " to 'become informed 'of water.. Msystem • ~requirements and standards. ~W.,~
The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with
• to become informed of sewage , disposal,;. °
requirements and standards.
~ . , , _ , ~ . .
„ x
, f• . (Waive if outside GWSSA)
, . ,
a) The propos,al is/is not located within the boundary pf our future _
service area. , - , - ,
b) The pro'p`osal is/is not located within the boundary of our current
district.
c) We are/arenot able to serve this site with adequate water.
d) Satisfactory arraagements hayetbayp been made to serve this
_
proposa,l;`;N
• ` 1 ~ 2 t .'+c~•, Ri" L
. _ ' , , .n :X : i ja . .r S.~,yl1'ki.. > F '
(Signature) ; r(Date) (Sign•off_Waived)
.
5. S~F- .WE,$.AC E PURVEYOR •
(If other than Spokane County)
[ J A prelimina"ry;$consultation has been held to ' discuss the proposaL . , ' The applicant has been informed of requirements and standards.,
- s .
(Signature(Date) (Sign-off Waived) `
~ YH_ i It , 1 ' I ' »
, .i ' . 'j , V . r . • L a.
• V rJ• 4r s "
Page 4 of 4 . ' - ' ° • ,
z' -
, r
. . ,
. '
, ,
.
RECEIPT Dafe 190955
Received From /v&v f~/ ~7•c~~
Ad d ress ~
.~'v.
°
Do!lars $
For ' c-e ~ ~~~z- ~
ACCOUNT ~ HOW PAtD ; ~ r• -•-,r(' ; - ~
-
AMT Of
ACCOUNT I I CASH ! , •t~. CS!„ J=:.r'i'~:'i
, AMT PAIO p
~ CHKK
~ BA UECE OR MONE ERY I 1 BY •JE- wr-'G , i .
~ 8K808 REDIFORM
'~C'~a~'ffi~LII~+rs~•,6.~.=Ll~G.`~• y as~. .~~NL~1~
~ 03622
TOM STONE EXCAVATlNG ~
•u LICENSED & BONDED TOMSTE 141 KM
N. 1112 MAMER PH 509-928-7710 FAAMERS d MEACHANTS BANK
~ OPPORTUNITY, WA 99216 vauey oitice
P O Bax 14588
Opportunlty, Washington 89214
98-574/1251
, 8017oS-OS
~ PAY
" OATE AMOUNT
~p
TO ~ ' ~!r _ ~~'Tn/ ~--~t ~t.~ `~X~J~' 4-G-C~~ ~ ~~•~`F"' ~ Q~ d O
THE ORDER
OF ~ ~ .
i~
i
ii'00362211' 1:L-25b05?t,L': 434 006 311'
qocfcy Mmonnin BanM tble ^
a
~
-~~r~7 r+rL ti~,: , l_I~ ~t 4 a . r°'~~_v"=`~
.I
p:.~~h P~~
s'-
1 CJ ~ 3 r r ~ r r ~ r- A~~-~ - e
Q A 19 F CC~jl IrE `t T
L 4; (
tr~t o c ~ a
- R0;1r, l ~ J a~ 1•1 s1Yi'~ ! N 'i" 1 t T ~ E M YE EM•rL 5" ' P'1
A _ ~..,~71~L~ r_ :
S 3„ -B`~ f al~~;~r~ia
r ei,
L ~
Il t s ,`r n t -1 n g 1n C-y e 1' 1 r1 Li D t' t t 11 C r it i.~. ujtf.., l{ i, L; in ci F" T El 1' Ei- (1 c e r~
.=l'~} ~ ~ T_ e ~~l a. E i t~ Ii ~ I i % t', 'F r ' ~WI ~ ! l°' f i. ' i 1 r ' i 1 "a 'f
r
3_~ i' r=
3. f I a +1C~ ^ r i E f- - ~1 i
(-1 F 1 ~ E
C.~ 1_! t s~.~ ~.°1 1.) Y' :,i
r'1 r.J i .1 l. c..=~ i i ~ S LI ra c! ! C. c~ t t.-:? .J ^ f IE-1 t i. .3 r~ 1 d. Y' tW ~ Y C .1. cj !-t t e~. 1
w a'~ R
E -1 f'1 1~_ C i~:., t Ir I_I 'f f!e rw..Zk(jWa y .l t 11 p f ttF, F--1 % ca d E I~ti lr t~ 1. I'1 ~ th: l~
Okp~ ~ . ~ 1 ~ t.. ant (Tl V j lal i~.f 1 ! I t~' C H~ i " t I 1 ( ~ L v 1:. n gI. rl e -0 1 r7
i Cl ~ C~I b Ea W Y. 1 I .I. n L i. ! . p ti~ ~ l. ~ 1 ~ ~ ri =a I"1 ~f p ly t. .L l, ..i. , rI 'L a. 1T1 F I
WE'y T Ch F, ltr~l--,`a t} T. s lr rl e fcJ f 1mat. Ic.rI P'_~ '9 e, I i f tP 1' ID i i . i=: i~. s R~. 1 Z L l
( R I D ) ~.::.1' sc_a 1 U i! I}p r" ci'l/ t=' r, e1"'j t p1 1rti!_E a nt G.--I t't l., W ..`.ryi G w918 y P ---A M t.~ Fl l.l c- ! i o
7 p) o I c=i f 1 e ~ i_t n t y w 1 1 fl a Y F, Z. c Z p c`1 te' I, fl L E t k= c r-I' : -D f t 1-I e s ~
1. ,71 p1 fc. t/ P 17i E' n t s
F1 7 A:-, a fl = . 1 t e Y (l a r i. V e ill C' t h d ci f C izi f I 5 t l a _-c. t i t i tz-, t` ci =i i E 1 ffl p Y i+ V !Tl i:? !'1 f Sr
~ j.' _a t r (..1 h e 1'' E' a. f1 y t f"i e- <-a P P J. I t:. .D i l m i i h L.? ta p r- - V a i t iC~
ccluCl ty E rl gt r't r' Y' p ,.=1 C Ccimpl7L sh ti te 1'Clct d
h C? ? I l E?t/ ~ jc-I j f 11 !-1 g ~ a f lCj al~ a_ C .1. t i q ~ ,t.!°1r ]L! ; Wl Cci_(
I1'1ty Ri__ict_d ir l` -,iI_fu t~ N
r i~RPI i - the E-EXt-f~'I ft i`hP Y~Pqull''e~i : znpr-- , i_r:`eine~a„ l~'~.,F)~ ~_iE.-~ -a
~-t~.
cl i i.! I itS` w.Ll 1 r? ,R t1 r Z pate 1n t-1 e Cclst i_-f ; l1eca e I
E'-18 1- 1"Ie t'ei iC`j~. ~'y'f_I f't t iD I'1 'D f FflC' 1°I WI rld w cly lITlp1''civF=.'fYie-Clts 5tiatet1 hF7r-e1n
sl t cl 1 k be al. c-c-I(Ti pl.1. shel..i cl s cl ppf c-v r' -.J by i he Spcd aI I e t -untN`
F_Ii~~1i~~'Fa'Y'n
EI_J CT f I r~ Cr,1 11 n t, U E r1 g .7i. rl E, t_' 7 1 f c~ = r J f_1 '=s L 1-1 c-1 FI 1 1'r I .l. C c.•t ~,•i;,-l y C N(, F,'
h~ ~~(Tl i i ~✓~1 ~-i l~. l~ ~s `ar r~ ~-~i ~ I'"IiI _1 Y° fj I1-1 f- t 1 I I I, ~P 1 ~1 t il 1-1 ~ ~1 i
M + pl c~ Y' ~ R,+ d 41 1"i 7 C 1-I 1 t tl d j a C C-? 1-1 t r- L l! t--z (:1 t° l'i -t ns r rj
~ L t f M' f.~ ~..t ~ f l, iLf t:.~ c~l ~~f ! ~ j. r t ~ I ~ r~-1 i 1..,,` I!~~ ~ L t ! ° - L
a h 'D I i. .9 1 ._1 E"I rl i. 1'1 f YID n t F-1 g i? i t_' t I R_ V F:' 1,rt hn E', i i F L~ 7 i 1~_E ~ri
~i 1 - a l ( ffl 1_1 s t c~ L ~=t t:} l~ ! ~ ~~l ('1 s t i ~
!
, r •
.-t 7 h . s_ I t ~ ..t ~
_ ~ i ; + .i L ` i i_l iL311 I a i'~ rJ 1 ~ ,1 ~ .L
ti
~°'"j Tl i I I t':= C~ ~..i 1! + i t u= 1 j 1 i.., C-I i_l F, -L y 1'AE2 t- J t 1'1 ~ 1 j.. C i, c::t ! !
l j . it (t b -i ! iad o ri E_...w ~D ge l = ! f f p .i. ~ ( i + r c1 a . . -Z) I
, ~
P L Yl ( I f -D f h e i'l t I tE: ID I` a~E C t t D f j l t i i 11 1, E. 1_i ' m' r 121E~ "F .f
~..I e v e p m ~ ~ a s E. dl n
F_4 ~t A p a 1'- ~.x. f t le~ p f.4 r I ~a n d, t r c~ L c ~ v c ~o t I,--, f 1 1 I'I 1°} r-1 ry~ b 6'~ t~.. r ~ i 1I's Z. y!~_ i
fl fl ~ 3~ ~.7 Y~ ~ ~ ~ ~I f~~ S,'~ ~i r r.~ r~l e G.. 3 tC t l., y+ E;" j g ,ry;, f..? f= ;r 4 ~ ?`F " G ! r-`, .1
e
I C+ : c~- t Cl a- fl d aY rafl gE.' mC 4`I t pc-+ I' [ :L f i i-i -sta.~1 1F:, t:. ha a 6
t= C; I" tl i---i n i_ e -4 1 F h :t . i I E d a f' d F? n g J:. fl e N r L fl (a rR i. i.L C. i; i4 s~ = i-
s 1_R Y f : a c i f"t C! ~ r-)"' T -~d'~' f i t7 F"1 --[I_ll'1 r !"1L~.fl
~ e~~ r tn1 1 da
F Y , a _ r I!-f a( iy r1 c~ r%. ..l c,1 i p1' @ Ct wh.1_ ch iCa ls'. o i! 1..=~'
411-r -9vE-~lpd Ly :ae-hir
EC{} A p p 1 1~~ ~ s h c=l I i. `°s '1 fl n :4 C! r.~ ti f ~t ~ i E r if,'t ~r j t.' v~/ ~i ~t.I r C=~` l, i I~ti
T i»l lb I 1c i V!~ o 6 w i i l l' I I `a'. , e C a -f ae s t 1-t i= f -W~ I 1 t71 w i Eri
TI i-E W i` itp r` ( Ei~ c, I I t f~s r, i"i Y f c- ) !
- - ►°1 ! i i e
i.: )I t a C e t Fi t.? ! P n = (T} e ( s; > C1 p t 1'
the ir--YtYlat1Gn c~ Rot:t1 Impr-Dvemcn t T.1.1.st Yl c'jJ (Pi 1) Y ~,i~~ t j~e
'~1 e"~' 7 ti n I-TI e~. f I ! ~~I pll lr sf„i rTIaptet' ^ G. u 8 9 i-e r I~ 5 la~i c ' lp S t, i 7
? ri r~ ~_~1~C~ ~ile i iWFiE't'~ ( t~ ) p,r p~._t~t4~o I~ a F.CD .~s -~rm~~~I t~~; i,-~er
t h ' p p- t j- t iC- n ~.`-i r ea o1 ut1. c-ifl (`i"1 L? th-=IC'3 9 1:)1' ,W.V .L dt--t~ foi'' .A. i'1 L: 11°1ct je) l e t"
3!CS.88 RC: V1 y t F~ e ow nertsf 110~ Esut- cossor(s ) f i_ir tt-ier ---kcire e.- t 1~
th: }t thi=.' 1 fll pii'" r-t V t= meI-1 t ci1'" Ccjfl Sl! YuCt1_ c-lrl C._--I'1 ~:e_(11 p1ia L-k? Ci 1 w?th.L n the
pr ~ ~ ~ SEK! R I D is i easX. bAley t hat th e be n e f i t s be dY~ r.LvFry d
frc-m i : i-, e i-jf t he R I D by the pro_ -pert y i n c lu~ed
r he1'' F' jI°1' tc-geth I e1'' ',w' 1. t f1 tfi 1 e afTl c-u("1 t -:-f af 1 y -.-juI°t ty p~l 1'" f .1. r ir1 at.d. -_6 I"1 r
~-~xr_eerJs the cclst a-nd expense of -fc-Irmat.~iDn of {11°ie RI'D„ e.nd c ^ 1
t_h~.~-L• tht-~ 'prc-perty within thie propc-~~ed RIL as sitff-Lr.lent1y
dC-? V F? 1~~~ ped. P1'' r-o:' i d e d, fur, t her y tri E? cob.' ('1 E i'' ) r-oY'
sf i a.? r- et ain iF ie rigt itq a=: aut!-f,_--r i. -zer1 1_in ci e i- R C l~J ^ 6,, R 8N 090q ti=,
obJ(.~ t:. t t,°, afl y --i<° cW+ E? ss-i(Tl F? Il t .°.n t hh7 pl'' i°i ~r..7. eYt'/ as c..~ Y' r:7 sf_t l f i'i f tht-:'
! (p F? 1'' .-_1V fTl f:ti fl tT, C' c.t llr_-l'~ fcl1' 1 fl c in1+_mc i,e-(l W 1. ti-I the the R I D U Y either pE? l, itZ on lr rla so1 i i F .1. cin 1rni=3 thcz, d 0_1 n i--.~i l.~ Y (7, 1°1 a 1.) i e- r
^6. 88 RGW o
F G ~ ~ ~ ~ e a p I j t z c ri t s t ~ , u l cl b r a d v i s E- d t a n ~ p p r o a- c 1-i F) E, r mi fe rfi 11
be -:Ibtcl .l. I-1 E' d f YoITI tl"I i? C+~ -ufl ty Efl g1 n r? er pr1 iwi r to F I"I e ccF I, s-ti' it tt1. cifl
i= if aI°1 y ne41 d1'' .L vE=' W ct y aF} pYoaC f'~ . th1..~'a mi_t S t be. doi 1 E? pY 7o1'' rimi
t h e r- e- 1e a -D f a ID u I 3 dj- ri r~ 1-i e r rn i 3:
C ~
. t .
\
EJ~ F r F.~- I.~J, I f~ f Y ~~I t \ 1a"1.°P
31"y1_4NE i~ i~~3 l~.B ~°t' t1l,a~--;•ti T!'~~J~~_E~~E
:
t "f i,.)i
1~ ' ~ I'1
1 4..~ F-' ! ! 3 _ `lr ..J ~ = i Y i " I._Fal tI~~ I~ ~
7 DC~ ry hh9 * T, : i j ! 1, f 1 c.r
li_I i~..t. I -3r y '
t,Q ! h 9_ =~e ~ • h ~ r f'~ f'~ ~ r~'~^ 1~ Y'" h[ T'
F~ P'1 ~W 1 ~.J 1~~_ ~''5
1~
rj i ~ tJ IW 1 e:, t u n e
_Grl
j I iq Dep1~ r, tment has r'e-! -i ('»]w-ed i_ F►e Y c-9Y°_,f`1 C ~
~4 z~°~ r~ o ~I fs 'I -'w 1. ! I g C ci n1! Il e fl t .a c~ fr E? c. f 1s e 1`' R d fr i f i{_ I _I 7i
1`1 r~ f~ I '1 r' ~ f i d _ 0 r' ~1;..~_ r+ s'~~ ~ i t 1 i i 41 _
_ E ri ~ i f° _ r i i~i . 4~. r i~~y _ ~ F~j F~ r'' ~ L~_1 r~ a e
r" u- i i '-i Ej t b e a p p r :i r :1 ~
in i .yi 1 r-:Dr.'- J:' t.~ ? Lc=i tl-_' ..5 .1 _ f C-~ E:' t ( t M a ('ll e r ~ F, InwA d f r, Y +
4d c=a y
t, ~~~~d hc e j- n~
pl i_ C ~ I~ r (Tl~ ~E , 4~: ~ ! tl-I e ~.7 F'J C~ r_.val ! F? C iri _I ~l tf {~1 l ri1~ h~ Y y i i 1 n
1. f-t c3 !-1 td l.1 e t+.' !ll3, fl g to pa1r tic7p:Dte i r-t r`► f! y pet i t ic-In-DY"
w h (-i ID s ; r p ~ s t h e: f -D r rri a t i c- ri ~ F-'• i~~ a -u' ? i f p r Iw' e i i i t . o ~i t D ? s u I- ! c 'a
~ p { Ll c s Ct j. L'i i m p r ~ ~ ~ ~ n t p u r C:- ! i ± G ci PCW 1.J G.J o 88, {d s CurnenLi Ll a
~ p e= ~ I r--t n f W' C -D 1_t il t'}' W X. 11 !l o t ps--) 1`' t j i~ jL p a j: t? i n t;"I e C ~ f L t'i Ys e
? e11p 1'-_I tl~-Io F2 r7t
E'-I A=i c.:•t I'l a lt e r n a t a ve tl'1 r' t f I t=,C'.~ ~ f c,=, f'1 s, L 1' 1_L fW t x. n r'i h e 3- C--- r E , ITl V E' fTl e Cl
Ltatp~~ ~~=~rein9 tl-io a pplic~t!~~t nt,i y i,=zti-: LI-~e -~~val ~~f ~;ile
T
~ ID i_t I-1 L y E. !°1 g1 fl ee1'' y .:l C t : CNi Ip I 1. 1-1 1, lic- i -ri aCj 1 fTl pY c-4r ei Yt e!'1 t iT ed
I"F 3'1 :e i si b ~c I a. n .i i c; a n d p a r t. -L c i aD za ti i-i g" i ri . r' I 1 1 _t n t g rI ,lM d P f~~~ r t
r 6 1e F? ti=a Fi t t 1-1 G~ i' ~-ti r j1_l .1 f f~ d ?(I ip f cI vemr' ( i G o ~pol at T"! e
C~~. u ri i_ I J p::_~ I. c .1. a t; e Jl. t h c- F s t f t h e e 1 ill ID Y l:'►°V ED fI l Cl i' 1
I= G ~ f-I i t ~I t' 1'' ~ ~,;.-t Ci ln1 c-1 ` (Tl p i~ oy 1T1 e t`l t :es i:, -t t F? l~. ~t -t_._'' Y' e ~l
r r-, 11 r) e: c c fri p I i r. h e ci ~ ~ a p p r c- L, y t h e S p c, ! 1- 1 r z I I n
F rig +_r"te IF- r .
F 5) C-I I f te CID i l f'1 t E r~ i.f z ne e r 1"I r:l T d c_ 7.. 1. I I' Iz-1 car-I Ty 10 1 L r=1 1 iZ' r-o a d W cl y c.i lY' c "t. .A ~--f i-'I
fil F` I` 4J C i- F? cq t=ti ¢ P gg: t -A I I' -1 c:a I'' d fi= i1'' thN I fTt 7 Ir vC?fTt~?!'i l.'si
._..._.._.s..,~_._...~_.---~__~._..___.....~........_.._......__.~ ~ °
~
M am p- Y rii ~ ~1 _1 i`! wI-i 1:. i°I j„ _i { 1 cC-~'1 1~~ t ~
j ~~=.~w ~~;.:~~TE~~ il L-, -('i"i ic°
°t~ ~ i r~~~i17 1'°►== I iaLiLli t1,--,n ~_I I :4 p p r CILli"I --A t ED I tI.r ¢t;
rD H (7 -_i 11 t VI ' I co ! 1': z.i go ~ f h f ' vi~-_,.l o -1, 1_11 yt =1 i"t
c: 1~~1 ~ lkt T1 11 m1_1 s=: z1 L i,~i h f~ i: , i rl `°a 1'' i_l t Ci -
. ~ ~
~
~ - • F i ~ _
, 1 'F' 1-. 1 - L
~ _ - f? ~ = ~ ~ ~ x ? e , ~ - s ~ 7 i .1 a '_t f ' t i ~ , I i" fi :r ~ ` . ' r W f t L J Y ~ , t
0 F_~ _
E, i i'.,i _ i i c- i s- i . r i t ! s : j ~ ! 1 t~1 L~ h~a cl
f_al"3'_:;.:. III OCan ct(ld Ck-I ~,.l~ 1:Z1 r'' f s.A.`.:r~.i~ iaal i
a +m~ 1r il i i I Y rn r t ~r i F = ;'1 1-I 1' t~~ i-e e_~
- - - _
L t
~ n
_l r ~ 1'~ F fl t:~ 1 ta r~ W~ w ; t° ' t" w :f fl !-1 i b ~ t i 1 f ~ ~
I l L3 %a'~1 ~.J f~ Im~ 'v t-:- ia LJ L_
~ f r i~ hA ~i E. I_, ~_l I! F~/ d_ I I r a 1. ~E ~ w' f ~ T f-I ~ l. l l~ 1 l~ } i s~
1 C 1 C c ` i l~.'. L t f i c`t f i d af 1 " ange1 ne ri t, of F} aY' L f°t f' stc~ l ls r s h 11 b 9 ! f t
'°IlCO9'd<; 1 I cFi w1~ h i, i f iij ia r (I e;'l g 7 ri e A-i`' 1n C; 1j f~ i L. ts tz o P -t v 3 ni~~
~ j_l r f r"_1 C 1 1 1 Cc~ t~ r'~ r1 }r F + ~ r } i ~-1, • j ~ 11 I 'f' ~ i T- r ~a i t = 1 ~ ~ e r- i~ r;~
_6 - f ~ e , _ n ~ r_ ~ ~.i ~ _ r a
,
i,~, i,el- t w i Ii c 1-l a::.. i. ~ 1 l.i? l' ri .1. t~ C4
i
p p 1 1 C a r1 t Fa rl a 1 W. -L ! i y P°13_ e co I` i ~ Sp,_ 4 ~_a i' 1 e cl ~ t f I 1; y 1\1 t c t=_' T I I r=ti
1'~ E l E..1 1 J.. c t V'~ F, W i 1 1 l I t e c i f 1e S r1-! S' ~ 1 Z g ~ p
T!"i e -_.I !r]e- e c.~ If r f"m s,r,I:'t- f _ ~ { fl 1.f'El,r- c ~ k_ ~ i
c:l : r3
9 1'1 o Y' 7 , ° lh (S F'.-i € I Pl
i!°'' -
! a c w a 1 ! r i 1. ~ (i i ' ' s 3 o~i I 1 a p h' F, .l. c~ I t
i - -
IL i'E~~ Y fTlc°1t 1c. f -:a Ri T(~p r cl 1,'e m e C'it D1.St Y1. Ct ~P, I D I biJ 1"iF?
c? t i t i 'D n IYl e t I ! d r1 r_. _ _ i f ~ " i°_s C ~'I ~ 7 ~ i'~ ~ f~ o.! ~t.1 t~ _r 1~ r ~ ~v, W (-I .1 C 1 I ~ i_ k
i' Y- l o y '"J.....
? .E +_E i~ s t W ('t Fj i' I-1 r t y „ T i ~ re I D 1 s f r ti i E=.-cI 17 y e? t h e r
fi I I c-, 1-l t:=' :.1. t 1---, n ci i" i1_z, :_zj c-I I i lI; cl f l (Tl L~ t 1"I cl d p c--1 i°a w 1'' cl V.!. d e d f.=I r 1. f"1 C h a p t e I'-
Orti ~ CIAI y t ~"I ~J I°t i-it'' sI I cr' sgi _i ( sl f~ t Y trl 1`' c~ Cli'2 ee ~ ~
EW 1 fTl `1 1-1 Vre- tl I fe Ii': C+ r c 1-1 ('1 s t 1'" 1_l Ct 1o I-i 11 f(.? lTl p ~a t E? d ^ k' a, t f"i J'.. n t I I e
p Sc_cl. R1I) j.~. ~~.~_~~axk~~ r~y ( t ti1<~ t~,F~~ ~:,erlefits t~~. b~~ r,~~.ar~. :~t~d
tr r-Im tE'ir-D .-t f i-~'I ~ RI r? I? yt !-i e - p r-,1 pe rt y x r't c ] i, d ed
t FE a YC-_' 1. 1-1 y '1~ ---I s( e- Fh c- Y 14 1- 11 1-1 a fTi C' i_l I-7 f cIi af 1y r o1 1 n't' i p%t 1'' t1ci. pcl t 1- ' n 7
• C E? ~ ~ t: N~ C~ C ~ ~ ~ :~E i1(' L. ' . I~ t~ 1°1 S ~ i f 4 l r rn i Win .~If i:. i'1 e RI~' 4 a f l C{ ( a ~
~ II a t i Fi c-L., p r._. pe 1- Ly w:1 ths n ti-,e pr--_-r~~ --;ecJ RID i.s sitffirz ently
Ci l~ V i ~ i p e fj o P Y' o:' i d ed $ ~ t_t r t 1-I E? f` y t h o ia.4ti' C1 e I' ( ~ ) c-I1" suC C ea so1'' (s)
= h.: E l i" eta1 f i the Y ? qhf y -;-1 auth-Dt" 1. : ed i-E rici eY PC~~ j l'3E'a ~ SE3a r I '=1 f ) q -F' i-i
i F, t o a fl y cT p F ~ fFt ! ; t°'t n e p lr 1`' t p a 5 d Y e t_i ~ ~ f t f 'i i~nl
! iTl p E'' ci l.' erp c-nts c:~~ ~ 1 ed f .WI 1` 1_ c c I k-1.1 i_l fl C ~ 1 o n ►nl l. t 1"I t h e f - fTl a t L i-1 -r- i
i, h~.~ R7 D by ei L he; pe-t a t i l--,r i cir, re5IrIl ! Itll-ji-l in (mthlM> >-1 +_t 1J1 i 4 C, r I p t e r
- r,-, r, V"2
0~ ~1I
r~.~ u~ a
r;( f~ a pI 1!. L t r?. I"1 f S~' ~f _i 1 r'i t') e CJ v 1 a e d t--1 t ca rl cc1 F1 p 1'' ~a Cp E:, Y fTl 1t m I 1
be- ? I-1 ed f 1`' 111!Tl 1° 1'i (W? Ci i u!7 t\ E11 gJ neer- pi° i---Ir- t!=~ f; l"i F? C.--,n ~ L r i_t c iJ 1c~ f 1
F a Cl v I-1 e W d i'' ? V Ea W si y _a p tci c°1 c f i e si> ~ th.I. s fTi !i5t be dcli ie pY 1~=.~ Y ti"i
the i'° elea:a t-' ---If -_4 E; 1_t i1d? i'l g per" tT] i:
4-1-'~f
~ ♦A~~ ~ . M..O ` ~ ~ _ J } - s _ y~ _ 1 ~ _ •
--r - i ~ ~ , . } ~ i ~ ~
< <
a
I ~ I . ~ a • . ~ ~ ~'^~"~,S te,~ ~ t..•
H,dn 9doe
3 i41~~l'-u,.. ► SC*wt , i . . ~
. •~•rk+w~ ~[LL[!l[t •vf • ~ ~ 1
. w x ~
• ..c.ucu-a. A~~~~~ ^ itx-
- . m • a.
~ a~ • .r r ~ m . ~ . ~i "~.`4+ • ' ~ ~ n a T. . . . .~~r
i L
1 I [ I ~ . • - ' * I N ~ .•l~titi- ~ .
I I ~.r.~ tp.~I~ , v : i4,.. ~I~~Cr ~I : • I .
~ ' I • F°~~ ' S ,r. w_•
.I Ow~.~ Ic ~tf' I ~ I 7 w.C•••~ •J•T - - • • , - • ' ' i
~ j . . . , I . ~ ~ ~1• r ~1J r~ r J,~ -r, f Jc r ~
,►,F
. ~~r'ti.`'~-•.
, t _ . un
• f ~t ° ' ~ ~ ~ ~ - s - - f~',':'"~'~ L~,:.~i.~~;:t: ^~R~• .
y • ' - - ~ Ce~.w~~~'!i•
/ _ . t • i y ~ ~ ,
' I ~ . r•.~ c,.r ~ „f f : € ~
rt'~•
. a~
AL SF-_ ~
~ r F r - ~ . ' P,t~LL//JG i~ItL ~ _ . . . •
V
•1 ' 1 . I • ~
` ' ' _ .ry I ` t~•y I ` ~ ~
. ~•4X: ~ • r1Y _ ~ _ - I oo
t I tJ I N~re[1
,t~
I'...~"
~ • ~ ~ _ ' IL ' - - -
• ~•~r•y Fa •~i! _r , ~ • ' ~v
r
IW!!~
/ , ~i 'K: _ ~ .
4 ~ .
Ak{ { I ~ 1 ~[IIQCA.. _
I
' •,L. 1VJ' ~ aF~Y• Miif~P~ Av[ .
• r w _r~s~ ~ ~ - O - -
w•:I I 1 • ~ 1/ 1 r
fOO~t ~
, ~ . . ' - p ..e. . ` . , L .
n ~ wfw • c~.~ r ~
~ • ~ . r ■
t 'y . .
M i ~ t F7P:
t ` i i _ ~ . . ~ .o.,o....
j
. ~ Ic 1 c~~.
MANM ~ j ~ ' S~°•~o^
• ~ I ' + .ti~ JYw~. j ~ ~ ` y •
,C, wl MR' Q ' ~ ~ ~C~•
1 y
i . o
r •
w uM • t . _ . ~ - ~
• a . • w~r i
i
~ •
1 ~ m rl
} I • w . • . . 1• -3 . / \ ~ ~
i ° 1.~_.,_" ~ ~ ~ _ • -P.s.o~
. • ,,(c,~►i~ -At..Hf~j ft (f E ~ f ri rt
....r
~
. •
S r• CDuNev RCwO 4v 2~12i j a •.-CC li ~
~ ~J . ..,.,~.e ~ _J 1~J J- 'l ~ - ~ . - 3., - _ -
kALL
„ ~
. . -
. . ~ . * -_~3
: ; : r» u. ~ ~~tty,••`~ i ~ - -
aGJ,y; r r ~v~ ~fj ~
' r~ ' " ; rsn ~ f ~.+d
{ ~ ' • - -
..t • .s..•r ~.e !c f,arr f ~ ; ..A e.. A•t ' ~ ~ •
~ ~ ~~t w ~ 4
_ •.1 Q ' ~ T ~ 1? 1M ~ ~ ~ f
• ~ -
~ _ ~ •n ~ ► ' I ~
~ s - , t .
i ~ " ~ ? ~ • a _ .
tIV ~ J ~ ~ O
. w • ~ t ~ ~ ' ~ , + ~
~ , _ ` ~ a
I ro`~•• '
J ~ - ~ r~~,. ~ 7 ~re.r•a ~ .vt =
~
' _ 1 i~' - ~1- - - ~ q I ti '1,
Si4.o9 - - - - ~x i i • I
t ~ @4 tl 5 ~ ------j ~
~ P
~
3J ~ •G4p 1B ~
" 14
- - '1
~ ~ •i
~ t0 23 ~ p 3 g
~ .
'r • ~Q ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
s+~
8
LT V W~ O Q/ , 04~ ~ ~o
°
IA'~ flYE • -----1----------
• » ~ . ~ . r A ~ ~ Q
i/ • ; l./ O ~ ~
4 r c J ~ z ~ ~9• ~ _ _ I ~
~ - - ~
UO
3 + ~
r `
L • ~ a i a , ~
E s f ~ C~ , W
I ~IO ,
~ r
. - - • . o. ~a~i ~o<
~ ~ DUNHAM~S ACRES
i ~ f ~ 16 . ~
16 0 ~
1 3os ir .~o~.ta
. ~ I
C~l 70il1 D 0 - - - - - - - ~ C'
~ 17l~/0~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
y • 6 •s ~9~ =3 ~ ~
- / /J.! 30 ~ ~ 154.6 150, ' ~i.td 7~.
R I~ Q - ~c a A
C SCHOOL I v,
ALL4N ~CD
4 150,
, a v7-
f2 5 .~3~ ~ I