ZE-139A-76
. ' n ~ ~J~ 1►, l
`l~ q~ ~u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,G ~ ~ ~ ti
~ ~ ~ C ~ f` , ~
~ " ~ ~ l~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ v
~ ~
G - f' . ` -r~ 1
~
► ~ - ~ , ~ 2~ ~ ~l ~ ~ ~
~ ~
, _
1
~c~~ -
A D~ By
~ , r ~~-fa~ ~t~~ , < <z~ ~ ~
, . 1~~~ ~ ;
p plicaaon Submiaed Sl~ R~view M~~"~ , p licaaon A~~ ,
ner: ~si~~ Plan ~ ~ ~ , ~ . : ~ 'a ~
k.~,~~,~~c: ~ R ~ _ _ ~ r ~ ~ ~ C , ~j ~ _ }
~
IN~~RMA~ItJI~ - AppLII;ATi
~
wCp~?
t' ~ + rl~r~tti{ ApPV~ ' So,~ r ~ 9 ~ I,,,,~G ~1, ~F~
~ ~..t~~=*' r r i, C r.
wn~~ ,
o
,
~
i ~ ~ ~ ,1 ,~,~.~,,~,a ~ , r~! -SurveY~~ r ~~2~ ~ y ~ ~r ( ~~<<~ , ~ s h~l; ~f,, h~ ~
~ ~ ~c5 - , ~
~~wat~T: ~~~~i,~~i ~ ~ ~ ~C~~~
F~ ~ist: ~ Ex~sting ~ne ~ ,
.~~5 I D ~ ~ ~ ~
Parcel proposed Subdi~ision , ~~~5~ ~ . ~
~~p Plan ~ pn,~sed ZA ~ ,
# of Lots ~ 1
ICATI~N ~TA~'~~ . '
A'PP~ ~ ,
I ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~n a~t~: ~ ~ ~ Hean ~ f ,1 ~
, g ~ ~ .
~ ~ Appli~ation a~~P~• H~arin~ B°dy ' i
earing ~tem # ~ ~ ❑ Oth~' i ~ r'"` .
H APP~OVe ~ ~ny ~ ~ ~ ~ No Q ~ 4 Hearir►g A~°n' ,
. ~es ~ ~~y ~
AP~~' , n ~Pp~OVe ~ ~ App~ ~ear~g Acuo ' No ~ ~ By ~ ~ ;
, Yes ❑ ~a ~ ~ ~
r ~ . Title Nonce(s) R No ~
Ye~
~~n~ Ma~~ ❑ Portio~~
~ Fina1 Plat ReGOrd~ A11
' ~Y' F~m ._r . y~ t . _ . ~
~ . _
a~yl~,~+ ~ ~
~
. L~.• . , . . '
, ~
:d . I /
~
~
~ ~ ~~L.~I : ~,~d-b
~ 1
~
FILE DOCUMENT LOG
FTLE NO. ZE-139A-76
APPLICANT DONWOOD, INC
APPEAL HEARING:
ID NO. DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION
,
1 PUBLIC NOTICE PACKET
2 APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE & DESIGN REVIEW
3 AGENDA ,
4 MEMO-JOHN PEDERSON 10/13/94
5 P ARY CONFERENCE FORM
6 ZONE RECLASSIFTCATION APPLICATION
7 MEMORANDUM-JOHN PEDERSON 11/14/94
8 AGENDA
9 ENVIRONfMENTAL CHECKLIST
10 DNS ,
11 STAFF REPORT ,
12 HEC FINDINGS ,
13 PARTY OF RECORD NOTICES
,
14 APPEAL APPLICATION ,
15 DESIGN REVIEW COAEVEENTS FROM CONSOLIDATED WATER
16 PLA►NNING DEPART. DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 10l19/94
17 STOR;MWATER DRAIlNAGE MEMO -10i25/94
18 COUNTY UTII..TTIES DESIGN REVIEW CMTS 10/26/95 ,
19 COUNTY HEALTH DIST DESIGN REVIEW CMTS 10/26/94
20 SCAPCA COM14ENTS
21 HEALTH DISTR CMTS FOR REZONE
22 ENGINEERS CMTS F(JR REZONE
23 UTILTTIES CMTS FOR REZONE
24 WSDOT MEMO TO W HUBBAR.D 12/2l94
25 WSDOT MEMO TO W HUBBARD 12/15/94
,
i
► 14
FILE DOCUMENT LOG
FILE NO ZE-139A-76
APPLICANT• DONWOOD, INC.
APPEAL HEARING:
ID NO. DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION ,
26 WSDOT LETTER 2/28/95
27 SLIDES (9)
28 NOTICE OF BOCC HEARING FOR 2/21/95
29 NZFMO TO BOCC FROM MIKE DEMPSEY 2/28/95
30 DONWOOD INC REPLY TO PROSECUTING ATTORNEY ,
31 BOCC DECISION ,
32 BOCC FINDINGS .
NIISC -DESIGN REVIEW NOTES, LEGAL DESC., ZONING MAP,
33 ASSESSOR MAP, STTE PLAN, ENGINEER MAP ,
34 ZONIlVG 1VIAP
35 ENGINEERS MAP .
36 ASSESSOR MAP 17-25-45
37 ASSESSOR MAP N 1/2 OF 17-25-45
38 SITE PLAN
39 SITE PLAN .
40 FILE COVER
,
i
RELEASE OF PUBI_,IC }ZI:CUIZDS
Spokane County Division of Building & Planning
Request to inspect public records
~ "Request for copies of public records
Name of Requester: r7 C?_Y,d, C
Title of Record: Z~
No. of Copies: ~ Total Fee:
File Provided By:
File Not Available: Lost Filt Already Ciieckcd Out Other
Reason:
StaffSi('tl:tiurt:
FltUM Dros.civil 45b lbll b4-Nl-45 bl:lll'M IU 8~ :i/4
r ° - p% r i
~
gbuvrrior Court ot tTn StAtr ot 19nobucgton
' RECEIVer) fot tfjQ ~'.enn'g ni OpokAut
Ma ~y..„t ti} 1L
i8toartetentAn 10
V M APR V 9X
, ~ ♦
J&tmttrb 2rm. Ikato
P E
~ $pbQg
A.
V lllb OroadvaV
sfoteNc eftuelv• eoouo, "ouac dppimnc. Wtt,sluiAl.uIL 993GU-0450
Aprii J. 1995 (549) 156 5792
pAL (.~i0A) 456.571 4
3Ldpher K. Lugstcr Michsel C. Dempsey
Attorriay at Law Oeputy Prosecutinq Attorney
423 W. F1=st Avd. W. 1115 8roadway
spokane, WA 99204-0206 Spokane, wA 99260
Rd: Donxood, Xr:c. v. Spokano County; No. 45-9-02516-6
nRar Counsel:
In Novemtar 1976, Uonwood, Inc:. , bpplied with the County to
rezOne land lucated nlorq the mouth eida of I-90 east of Aarker
Road. Tho land was zoned Agri rultur8l. uonwood souqht d L eZOne to
a frAaway Comme=cisl zond wlder t.he 3pokons County Zonfnq
ordinnix.e. The purposs of the rezono was to allow dave1 epment ot
a truak stop, motel, Are9 resteurant on the land e
on March il, 1977, tbe Spokane County plAnning Commission
adopted awri tten teconnnenflation that Lhe Soard of County
c:ommissiontsra appsove the rezons, dcvolopment and traffic contrnl
plan, and DNS suDject to a liRt nf conditions which ri8d to be mel.
nonwaoa aia not Qevelop the prvpetty.
In Docember 1980, .Spoksne County sdo8ted a new comptehensive
plan tor lanfl use developmeril. Yn the unincorporated ares of the
county. Gn octobcr 32, 1985, spokane county adop4:ad the SpoKane
County Zoning rculR and a Program to impiement the now ionf ng code,
effective January 1, 1986. Tha Proqriun to Implomont qovarris the
trnn3ition og zoning fsom the OrdinAnr.a to the COtie. .lt hSS e
c:ross-over schec3uie classiPYinq land La new zones under ¢.he Zoninq
CvtJe, based on the classiffeation of the land under the 2oninq
Ordinar►ce and thQ lancl ~ina c:ateqory ttndeZ which the propert~y was
designatecl in the comprehdsisive pian. The cross-over 3chcdulae had
nn effectfve dato of January 1, 1991.
=n 1991, Lhe Donwood lnnd became clasaificd as s Reqfonal
Bu3inocro (8-3) Zona pursuant to CrosF.-Avar Sc.hedule 11 of the
proqram to Implement. This eross-over to lfYd 5-3 Zone was based on
lL beinq the most similar to thc Freeway Commercial Zone of the
2oning Ordinance and thA dAr-iqnation or the land in the vrban
cateqory or the compretiertisivd plan.
NATURE SAVqi's FAX MEMO 01816 ~ 'pqa
~
To • %tom
Co./Deps. Co
rrtone f f'hnne •
fate '5,,q'41 5r V704ow ftx •
FROM pros.civil 458 3672 84-83-96 81:23PM TO 03243478 857 P.2/4
~ ~ .
On October S. 1994, Donwood, Inc' es lof 1 nd forh B 3OZone
Planning Depart~aent to develop some ao acr
uses. The Department processed the application as a chanqe of
conditiona withfn the B-3 Zone from the conditions imposed on the
land under the 1977 rezone. It ccnsidered the chanqe of conditions
request as seeking to allow a revfsed site plan and thosa uges
permitted in the existing B-3 zone, rather than those uses
specffically requested throuqh the orfqinal application and site
plan. See Proqram to implement, par. 7.
The Planning Depattment held an application and design review
meetinq on October 26, 1994. The Departiaent macle comments and
also recommended: "If the applicant chooses to submit the fees and
applications wfthout a specific, detailed site plan, the Planning
Department Will recommend denial of the chanqe of conditians
request, and if approved, that a condition of approval be included
to require a subsequent public hearing prior to development of the
site."
Donwood dfd submit a site plan for the land. It showed the
site divided into lots. The plan 81so showed the general location
of buildinqs and estimated square footaqe.
On November 16, 1994, the Planning Department issued a DNS for
the proposed chanqe of conditions. But the DNS further indicated
that Donwood would have to install road fmprovements requested by
the County Enqinear and the washington State Department og
Transportatfon (wsDoT). Since the site plan did not indfcate the
proposed uses for the buildfnqs nor other specifics, the Planning
Department noted on the environmental checklist that the reviewinq
official was unable to determine varicus impacts from the project,
includinq traffic and noise impacts, wfthout a specific site plan
or knowinq the specific uses intended for the site. The DNS wa6
circulated to public agencies for comment. Araonq others, wsDOT,
the county Enqineer, the Spokane county Air Pollution Control
Hoard, the Spokane County Health District, and County Utilitfes
submitted comments.
On December 15, 1994, the Spokane county xearinq Examiner
Comrnittee held a public hearing on Donwood's application and DNS.
The Planning Department also submitted astaff report which
analyzed the proposal, made a recommendation, and listed conditions
for approval submitted by the various public aqencies.
On December 16, 1994, the Hearing Examiner Committee adopted
written findings of fact, conclusions of law, and an order. It
approved the change of conditions with the site plan submitted by
Donwood, but was subject to the conditfons of approval listed in
the Planning Department's staff report with some modifications.
The ccmmittee's decision required Donwood to comply wfth all
conditions of approvai of the 1977 rezone and with 8-3 zone
2
FROM pros.civil 456 3672 04-83-96 01:24FM TG 93243478 857 P.3/4
~
:
standards. Donwood appealed to the Board of County Commissioners
on December 19.
The Board held s de novo public heai~missian of aaditfonal
A2-week continusnce was qranted to allow s
materiai. The Baasd oral ly denied Donwood's appeai on March 7. Or►
Apri 1 11, the Board adopted written f f ndings of t'act, conclusians,
and decf sion which app=oved the chanqe of conditions impvsed by the
Hearinq Ex$miner committee with some modifications.
t7n May 8, 1995 o Danwcod filed an application for writ of
certiorari and declaratory ju8gment, aeekinq sevarsal of the
Hoa=d' o deciBion, dama+qe$ r and attorney fees. sy stipulatianp a
writ of certiorari wss i:sued. On Novembe= 30 1995, Donwood
amended its aation to seek damages as well. A hearing was held on
Febrtta=y 7, 1996, to decide the Certiorarf claim. See Lutheran Day
Care v. Snohomfsh Cy. , 119 Wn. 2d 91 (1992 cert. den.ied, 506 U. s-
1Q?9 (1993).
Judicial review under a wrft of certiorari f s based on the
record of the administratfve tribunal. eay Indus•, znc• y-
Jefferson Cy., 33 Wn. App. 239 (1982). Tn vrder to qrant rel ief ,
the court must determine that $ judfcisl Q= quasi-judicial actfon
was one of a number of thinqs, fncludinq contrary to law and
unsugported by substantigl svidence. H13I top Tex'race Homeowner's
Ass'n v. Island Cy., 126 Wn.Zd 22, 29 (1995). "[Ilf there is room
gor two opinions, discretian exercised upon due consideration will
not be overturned." WenB tchee v. Houndary ltevf ew Bct., 39 Wn. App.
249 (1984).
Secause review gursuant to a writ of certiarari is based on
the administrative record, the trial court need net enter findings
of f act or conclusions of 1 aw . Grader v. Lynnwood, 4 5'Wn . App. 876
(1986). Judicial review is qoverned by RCW 7.16.120:
mhe questions involvinq the merits to be determined by
the court ugon the hearinq are:
(1) Whether the body or off icer had jurisd3.ction
of the sub ject matter of the determination under review.
(2) Whether the suthority, canferred upon the bady
or officer in relatfan to that subject matter, has been
pursued in the mode required by law, in order to authoriZe
it or to make the determination.
(3) whethero fn making the determination, any rule of
law affactinq ithe riqhts of the partiss thereto has been
vfolated to the prejudice of the relator.
(4) whether there was any competent provf of ali the
facts neceseary to be proved, fn order to authori2e the
3
FROM pros.civil 456 3672 04-03-96 01:25PM TO Q3243478 857 P.4/4
r~ w
• ✓
makinq of the determfnation.
(5) Whether the factual determfnations were supported
by substantf si evidence.
The first three subsections of the statute qovern jurisdiction and
the logality of the lower tribunal's decision. Concerned I.and
Owners v. King cy., 64 Wn. App. 768, 772 n.2, review denied, 119
Wn.2d 1008 (1992). The last two subsections qovern ths court's
review of factual matters and embody the substantial evidence
standa=d. 8f22tcp Terrace, supra.
The primary issue is whether ponwood must seek a chanqe of
conditions to devolop its property for s-3 uses without having to
compiy with the conditione of approval attendant to the 1977 reaone
and further conditfons imposed by tAe Hoard under SEPA and the
County's police power throuqh the change of conditfons process.
This relates to the leqality of the decision below.
For the reasons stated fn the Boa►rd's gindinqs and
conclusions, Donwood must comply with those conditions in order to
develop the sfte for 8-3 uses. The authority conferred on the
Board wagi pursued in the iaode required by law. in makinq its
detersainatfon, the Board violated no rules of law to the pre judice
of Donwood. See Program to Implement, pp. 3, 5; Zoning Code secs.
4.08A.040 and 14.504.0401 SCC 1.44.050 and .060; SCC 11.10.160 and
.170. The Board also had juris8iction over the subject matter.
Its clecision thus did not run afoul of any of the considerations in
Rcw 7.16.120(i)-(3).
Review of the administrative record further reveals there was
competent proof of the facts necessary to make the determination.
RCW 7.16.120(4). Thoss factual determinations were in turn
supported by substantial evidence. RCW 7.16.120(5).
Donwood has been requfred to underqo a process which inay
appesr to penalize it for not immediately actinq on its rights.
Indeed, Donwood has complfed with County requirements in qetting a
rezone in 1977 and applyfng for a chanqe of conditions for B-3 uses
in 1994. Althouqh seemfnqly unfafr, the change of conditions
procedure is nonetheless within the letter and spirit of the law.
The Bosrd's decision is afffrmed except for the scknowledqed
error on page 6, paragraph i, which shall be amended to provide:
"The spplicartt shall dedicate 60 feet from Broadway south to
Appleway fot riqht-of-way. " Donwood's complaint is dismissed.
Si cerely,
4 l.
Kenneth H. Kato
Judqe
4
-
RECEIVED
. . . •
' • ` a APR 141995
95 0422
No.
9POKANB COUNTY
PLANNIMO ORPA1l1MRNT
BEFORE THF BOARD OF COUNTY COMKISSIONERS
OF SPORANE CODN'1'Y, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTBR OF ZE-139A-76, )
C'HANGE OF CONDITIONS REQUEST ) FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
TO ALLOW A REVISED SITE PLAN ) AND DECISION
AND Z'IiE USES OF THS REGIONAL )
BUSINESS ZONE ) -
APPLICANT: DONWOOD, INC. )
TH=S MATTER, being the consideration by the Board of County
Commiasioners of Spakane County ("Board") of the de novo appeal of
the Spokane County Hearing Examiner Committee deciaion of December
16, 1994 approving an application for change of conditione in
Planning Department File No. ZE-139A-76, to allow a revised site
plan and those ugea allowed in the Regional Businesa zone on
approximately 20 acres of land (hereinafter referred to ae the
"proposal" and the Board having conducted a public hearing on the
proposal on February 21, 1995, and having fully considered the
testimony and documents aubmitted, and the public record filee
regarding the proposal; and the members of the Board having
individually visited or being familiar with the aite and vicinity
in question; and the Board having rendered an oral decision on
March 7, 1995, denying the appeal aubject to the entry of written
findings and decision, hereby enters the following findings of
fact, conclusions and deciaion:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLQSIONS
1. The proposal ia generally locatea south of and adjacent to
Interstate 90, approximately 800 feet east of Barker Road, in
the Weat 1/2 of Section 17, Township 25 North, Range 45 EWM,
Spokane County, Washington.
2. The proposal requests a change of conditions, in Planning
Department File No. ZS-139A-76, from the eite development plan
approved in Planning Department File No. ZE-139-76, to allow
a revised site development plan and those uaea allowed in the
Regional Buaineas (B-3) zone on approximately 20 acres of
land.
3. The Hearing Exami.ner Committee held a public hearing on the
propasal on December 16, 1994, after which the Committee
entered written findinga of fact, conclusions and decision
unanimously approving the proposal with new conditione.
4. On December 19, 1994, Donwood Inc. filed a timely written
appeal of ~the, Hearing £xaminer Committee' s decision with the
Board of County- Commiasionera, objecting to the conditions of
approval_ imposed by the Hearing Examiner Committee on the
proposal.
5. On February 21, 1995, the Board held a de novo public hearing
on the proposal, with additional written conunents aubmitted to
the Board by February 28, 1995 accept ed as part of the record.
6. On March 7, 1995, the Board entered an oral decision denying
the appeal, subject to the entry of written decision and
findings.
7. The legal requirements for the public hearing held by the
Board have been met.
iTUn #
FINDINGS, DECISIDN AND PAGE ~ OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 1
,
•
. .
, •
. •
8. The Board adopts Planning Department File Nos. ZF-139-76 and
ZB-139A-76 as part of the record, ZE-139A-76 being a
supplemental file to the original rezone file of ZE-139-76.
9. The oral teatimony presented to the Hearing Examiner Committee
on the propoeal was not submitted to the Board or considered
as part of the record. The Committee's written deciaion waa
considered by the Board only as a recommendation.
10. The Board takea official notice of the provisions of the
, Spokan.e County Comprehensive Plan; the Spokane County Zoning
Code; the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance; the Program to
Implement the Spokane County Zoning Code, as adopted pursuant
to Reaolution No. 85 0900 and as thereafter amended; and the
Spokane County Code.
11. On June 16, 1977, the Board of County Commieaioners of Spokane
County, in ZE-139-76, rezoned the aite (originally
encompassing approximately 27 acres) under the Spokane County
Zoning Ordinance from the Agricultural zone to the Freeway
Comnercial zone, for development of a truck stop, motel and
caf e in accordance with the development and traf f ic control
plan (date atamped March 7, 1977 by the Planning Department)
approved and the conditiona of approval adopted in the same
action.
12. At the time action wae taken in ZE-139-76, the Spokane County
Zoning Ordinance provided that property could not be rezoned
to the Freeway Conunercial zone unlese a apecific development
and traffic control plan waa approved for the aite, with a
further requirement that the site be developed and used
thereafter only in accord.ance with auch appraved plan.
13. In 1985, pursuant to Resolution No. 85 0900, the Board of
County Commiasioners adopted the Spokane County Zoning Code,
as well as the "Program to Implement" such code after a five
year transition period.
14. Effective January 1, 1991, pursuant to the croes-over schedule
included in the Program to Implement, the site was designated
under the Regional BueinesH (B- 3) zone of the Zaning Code, the
moet nearly equivalent zone to the Freeway Commercial zone of
the Zoning Ordinance.
15. Under the Program to Implement, the approved aite plan and
conditions of approval adopted in ZB-139-76 continued to bind
and restrict development and use of the site after the 1991
crossover unlees and until modified through approval of an
application for change of conditiona or a rezone of the aite.
Donwood Inc. was on notice of euch restrictions by the terms
of the Program to Implement, as the applicant at the time of
the 1977 rezone of the site, and by indication of the eymbol
11139-76C" on the official County zoning map of the site.
16. The conditional rezoning of property ia authorized under the
County's police power and does not require entry of an
agreement between the County and the landowner to be
enforceable. The Program to Implement doea not require
execution of 9uch an agreement for conditiona impoeed on
property rezoned under the Zoning Ordinance to continue in
effect after the 1991 crossover.
17. In June, 1994, in ZB-22-94, approximately five acrea in the
northeasterly portion of the site was rezoned at the request
of Tranco Induetries, Inc. for food product manufacturing,
retail sales and other uses allowed in the Regional Business
and Light Induetrial zones.
18. On October 5, 1994, Donwood Inc. submitted an application to
change the conditions imposed in the 1977 rezone in order to
FINDINGS, DFCIS ION AND ITDA # 3 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 2 pqGf 0 F ~ f
.
. . •
.
. ,
•
.
allow general B-3 uses on the rema.inder of the site. The
applicant propoaed a revised site plan in place of the eite
plan approved in ZFs-139-76.
19. Purauant to eection 14.504.040 of the Zoning Code and section
1.44.040 of the Spokane County Code, the applicant's requeet
for change of conditione required a public hearing by the
hearing examiner committee, and by the board of county
conanissioners on appeal, before approval could be granted.
20. Under chapter 1.44 of the Spokane County Code, the hearing
body ie authorized to place conditiona on the applicant's
request for change of conditiona to protect the public health,
safety and welfare, and to mitigate environmental impacte,
considering the standards of the underlying zone and other
adopted plans and regulations. Purauant to section 11.10.128
of the County Code (adopting WAC 197-11-535), the hearing
conducted by the hearing body is open to conaideration of the
environmental impact of the proposal and available
environmental documents.
21. The Program to Implement requires that changea to the site
plan or conditiona approved in Z$-139-76 proposed after the
1991 croes-over must minimally comply with the development
standards of the B-3 zone and be only for uses allowed in the
8-3 zone.
22. The Board finds erroneous Donwood Inc.'e contentiona that
the 1991 cross-over zoning entitled it to develop the aite
under the B-3 zone for any of the uses allowed in the B-3
zone, without regard to the site plan and conditions approved
for the 1977 rezone, or alternatively under conditiona no more
stringent than could be required under the etandarda of the B-
3 zone.
23. The reviaed site plan submitted by the applicant is general in
nature and does not illustrate proposed uses, landscaping,
setbacka, parking spacea, building height or other relevant
information that would indicate that the aite, upon
development, will comply with the development etandards of the
Regional Businese zone and applicable plans and regulations.
24. Land uses within the surrounding area include single family
reeidences on urban-sized and acreage lote, and ssome
commercial uses, located to the south; small busineeaea along
Barker Road and single family reaidencea to the west;
commercial uses along Appleway and some eingle family
residencea to the south; and the Interetate-90 freeway and
office uses located north of the proposal.
25. The propoeal is located within the Urban category of the
Comprehenaive Plan. The Urban category ie intended to provide
the opportunity for development of a"city-like" environment,
implemented by varioue residential zones, along with
neighborhood commercial, light induetrial, and public and
recreational facilities. The more intensive commercial usee,
including uses allowed under the Regional Busineae zone and
thoae associated with the more intensive commercial
clasaif ications are intended to implement the Maj or Conunercial
category of the Comprehensive Plan. The Urban category
providea that mining, ma j or coirunercial ueers, heavy industrial
uses and intensive farming would not be compatible within
Urban areas.
26. While the proposal is inconsistent with the Urban category of
the Comprehensive Plan, recent zoning and development trends
indicate that the area is transitioning from urban residential
to commercial and light industrial uses. The eite appears
appropriate far general B-3 usee, with site plan review
1TERl1 # FINDINGS, DECISION AND
CONDITIQNS OF APPROVAL - 3 gF
p~G~ 3
. . •
. • ,
neceseary to establish appropriate ini.tigating conditions and
conditions of approval.
27. A Determination of Noneignificance (DNS) was isssued by the
Planning Department for the proposal. In reviewing the
environmental checklist aubmitted by the applicant, the
reaponsible off icial for the Planning Department noted that
ma.ny impacts from the proposal, particularly traffic, could
not be determined without detailed eite plan review. Prior to
iaeuance of the DNS, the applicant was put on notice by the
Planning Department that a detailed site plan and other
conditiona of approval would probably be required for the
proj ect .
28. Within the DNS comoment period, the Waahington State Department
of Transportation (WSDOT), by letter dated December 2, 1994,
requeeted that the responeible official withdraw the DNS
iasued for the proposal, baeed on probable aignif icant adverse
environmental impacts from the development of B-3 uses on
traffic infrastructure and air quality, and require the
applicant to perform a traffic study. Theae concerne were
ampl if ied in another 1 etter f rom WSDOT to the Planning
Department dated December 15, 1994.
29. WSDOT, in its February 28, 1995 letter to the Board, indicated
that the DNS need not be withdrawn and a Determination of
Signif icance issued if the conditions of approval imposed by
the Hearing Bxaminer Committee on the proposal were
maintained. These conditiona included detailed review of site
development plans through a public hearing procesa, the
preparation of a full traffic analysig and the attachment of
mitigating measurea through SEPA once the potential vehicle
trip generation from development of the aite reached 1,600
vehicle trips per day.
30. The requirementa of a traffic study, additional SSPA review,
and public hearing on further development plana for the site,
upon reaching the threahold of 1,600 cumulative tripe per day,
are reasonable baaed on the impact analyeie contained in
correspondence from WSDOT and County Bngineer regarding
development of poasible B-3 usea; the need to assure ssafe,
convenient and efficient vehicular travel and acceas in
accordance with the objectivee, goals and standards expressed
in adopted County plans and regulations; the lack of a
detailed site plan; and the location of single family
residences south and west of the site.
31. The public hearing proceea providea greater flexibility and
opportunity for receipt of comment from public agencies and
members of the public on which to base conditiona of approval
and mitigation measurea. Administrative site plan review by
the Planning Department is appropriate for proposed site
develapment that cumulatively generatee less than 1,600
vehicle tripa per day.
32. The proposal, as conditioned, bears a substantial relation to
the public health, safety and welfare.
33. The iasuance of a DNS at this time is appropriate for the
proposal, as conditioned for phased environmental review.
DECISION
The Board hereby deniea the appeal by Donwood, Inc. (with
certain modifications) and approves the applicant'e request for
change of conditions request for general B-3 uses and a reviaed
aite plan, subject to the following conditions:
ITEM #
PAGE Af QF f I
FINDINGS, DECISION AND
CONDITI4NS OF APPROVAL - 4
. •
IN REFBRENCg TO TH£ ATTACHED FINDINGSr CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION,
THE BOARD OF COUNTY CONIlMISSIONERS ADUPTS THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL ATTACHED HERET4:
SPORANL COUNTY PLANNING DSPARTMSNT
1. The proposal shall comply with the Regional Bueineea (B-3) and
Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA) Overlay zones, as amended.
2. Detailed site plan review ie required prior to any development
ot the eite, in the manner provided by section 1.44.050 of the
Spokane County Code, to addresa concerna raised at the pulalic
hearing of the proposal and conditions of approval imposed by
the Board of County Commi.ssioners. This review shall be done
adminiatratively by the Planning Director/designee as
development occurs; provided, that once proposed development
of the site cumulatively has the potential of generating more
than 1,600 vehicular trips per day review shall be conducted
by the Hearing Body through the public hearing proceas.
3. Approval is required by the Planning Director/designee of a
apecific lighting and signing plan for the described property
prior to the release of any building permits.
4. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provieions
for maintenance acceptable to the Planning Director/designee
shall be submitted with a performance bond for the project
prior to release of building permits. Landecaping shall be
installed and maintained so that eight diatance at accesa
points is not obacured or impaired.
5. Direct light from any exterior area lighting fixture shall not
extend over the property boundary.
6. Landscaped areae of at leaet 100 equare feet shall be located
no more than 100 feet apart along building fronts facing
street right of waye. In addition, all maj or public entrances
to buildings shall be landecaped. The landacaping deacribed
above shall be Type III. Modifications to thi9 condition may
be allowed if approved by the Planning Department.
7. A fifteen foot wide strip of Type III Landscaping shall be
installed along both sides of the aite's Broadway Avenue
frontage.
8. Twenty (20) feet of Type I Landscaping ie required along all
property linea abutting a reaidential zone.
9. Free standing signs shall be limited to 250 aquare feet in
surface area and 35 feet in height. Free standing signs along
Broadway Avenue shall be located near accees points. Signs
along Interetate-90 shall be permitted as per the sign
standarde of the Zoning Code, provided that any free etanding
sign adjacent to Interatate-90 shall be limited to 350 aquare
feet and 40 feet in height.
10. The Planning Department shall prepare and record with the
Spoka.ne County Auditor a Title Notice noting that the property
in question is subject to a variety of apecial conditions
imposed as a result of approval of a land use action. Th3.s
Title Notice shall eerve as public notice of the cond3.tione of
approval affecting the property in question. The Title Notice
should be recorded within the same time frame as allowed for
an appeal and shall only be released, in full or in part, by
the Planning Department. The Title Notice shall generally
provide as follows:
The parcel of property legally described ae [
] ie the subject of a laad use
FINDINGSf DECISION AND ffEM #
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 5 PAGE GJ OF ~i
. •
. .
. •
actioa by a 3pokane Couaty Seariag Body or
Admiaiatrative Official on [
impoaiag a variety of special development
eonditions. File No. [ ] is
available for inspection and copyiag ia the
Spokaae Couaty Planaiag Departmeat.
11. Any aubdivision of the property shall conform to state and
county subdivision regulatione.
12. Prior to the isauance of building permit, the applicant shall
demonstrate to the satiafaction of the Planning Department
that the owner(s) or representative(s) has negotiated in good
faith with the Spokane County Tranait Authority to provide any
facilities needed to enhance public tranait.
SPOICANE COUNTY DIVISION OF ENGINEFRING AND ROADS
Prior to issuance of a building permit or at the requeet of the
County Engineer in conjunction with a County Road Project/Road
Improvement District, whichever action comes first:
1. The applicant shall dedicate 60 feet from Broadway south to
Sprague Avenue for right-of-way.
2. The applicant shall dedicate right of way to equal 60 feet on
Hodges Road south from Broadway Avenue to Appleway for right
of way purpoees.
Prior to release of a building permit or use of the property as
proposed:
3. Accees permits for approaches to the county road syatem shall
be obtained from the Spokane County Engineer.
4. The applicant shall submit road, drainage and accesa plana for
approval by the Spokane County Engineer.
5. The applicant ahall aubmit for approval by the Spokane County
Engineer and the Spokane County Health District a detailed
combined on-aite sewage system plan and aurface water disposal
plan for the entire project, or portion thereof if the
development ia to be phased.
6. A parking plan and traffic circulation plan shall be submitted
and approved by the Spokane County Engineer. The design,
location and arrangement of parking stalls shall be in
accordance with standard traffic engineering practices.
Paving or surfacing as approved by the County Fngineer shall
be required for any portion of the project which ia to be
occupied or traveled by vehicles.
7. To construct the roadway improvemente stated herein, the
applicant may, with the approval of the County Fngineer, join
in and participate in the formation of a Road In►provement
District (RID) for such improvements by the petition or
resolution methoda authorized under chapter 36.88 RCW, as
amended. Spokane County will not participate in the cost of
these improvementa. Thie ie applicable to that portion of
Broadway Avenue to be realigned to and including Barker Road.
8. As an alternative method of conatructing the raad improvements
stated herein, the applicant may, with the approval of the
County Engineer, accomplish the road improvemente stated
herein by joining and participating in a County Road Project
(CRP) to the extent of the required improvement. Spokane
County will not participate in the cost of these improvements-.
Thie is applicable to that portion of Broadway Avenue to be
realigned to and including Barker Road.
ITE!► #
FINDINGS, DFCISION AND PACE ~p OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 6
. •
.
.
9. The construction of the road improvements stated herein shall
be accomplished aa approved by the Spokane County Engineer.
10. The County Bngineer has deeignated Typical Roadway Section
Number One, Local Acceae standard for the improvement of
Hodgea Road, which ia adjacent to the proposed development.
This will require the addition of approximately 40 feet of
aephalt along the frontage of the development. The
construction of curbing and sidewalk is also required.
il. The County Bngineer hae designated Typical Roadway Section
Number One, Local Acceea standard for the improvement of
Broadway Avenue, which ie adjacent to the propoaed
development. This will require the addition of varying
amounts of asphalt along the frontage of the development. The
construction of curbing and aidewalk is also required.
12. All required improvements shall conform to the current State
of Washington Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge
Conatruction and other applicable County atandards and/or
adopted resolutions pertaining to Road Standarde and
Stormwater Management in effect at the date of construction,
unless otherwiae approved by the County Engineer.
13. Roadway etandards, typical roadway aections and drainage plan
requirements are found in Spokane Board of County
Commissioners Resolution No. 80-1592 as amended and are
applicable to this proposal.
14. No construction work ahall be performed within the existing or
proposed public right-of-way until a permit has been issued by
the County Engineer. All work within the public road
right-of-way is aubject to inspection and approval by the
County Engineer.
15. All required construction within the exieting or proposed
public right-of-way ie to be completed prior to the release of
a building permit, or a bond in an amount eatimated by the
County Engineer to cover the cost of construction of
improvements ehall be filed with the County Engineer.
16. Applicant 9ha11 sign and record Spokane County Notice to the
Public No. 6 which specifies the following:
The owner ( a) or auccessor ( s) in interest agree
to authorize the County to place their name (e)
on a petition for the formation of a Road
Improveament District (RID) by the petition
method pursuant to Chapter 36.88 RCW, which
petition includea the owner(s) property, and
further not to object, by the aigning of a
ballot, the formation of a RID by the
resolution method pureuant to Chapter 36.88
RCW, which resolution includes the owner(s)
property. If an RID ie formed by either the
petition or resolution method, as provided for
in Chapter 36.88 RCW, the owner(s) or
euccessor(s) further agree:
(a) that the improvement or construction
contemplated within the proposed RID is
feasible;
(b) that the benefita to be derived from the formation of the RID by the property
included therein, together with the
amount of any County participation,
exceeds the coat and expense of formation -
of the RID; and
ITEM # . ~Z
FINDINGS, DECISION AND PAGE ~ QF ~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 7
.
• • ~ .
• .
(c) that the property within the proposed RID
is sufficiently developed.
Provided further, that the owner ( s) or succesaor ( s)
ahall retain the right, aa authorized under RCW
36.88.090, to object to any aeaessment on the
property as a result of the improvemente called for
in conjunction with the formation of the RID by
either petition or resolution method under Chapter
36.88 RCW.
This requirement applies to that portion of
Broadway Avenue to be realigned to and
including Barker Road.
17. There may exist utilities, either underground or overhead,
affecting the subject property, including property to be
dedicated or aet aside for future acqufeition. Spokane County
aeaumes no financial obligation for adjuetmente or relocation
regarding these utilitfes. Applicant (s) ahould check with the
applicable utility purveyor and the Spokane County Engineer to
determine whether applicant(s) or the utility ie reaponsible
for adjuatment or relocation coata and to make arrangements
for any necessary work.
18. The applicant at the time of building permit application or
aubmittal of a detailed site plan for administrative review
ehall demonstrate through trip generation analysie that trip
generation from site development will not cumulatively exceed
1,600 vehicular trips per day, which is the baseline number of
trips estimated by the Waehington State Department of
Traneportation that would be generated by the original
proposal approved in ZE-139-76. Once the threshold of 1,600
tripe per day would be exceeded by proposed site development,
the applicant ahall provide a full traffic analysia, including
mitigating measures, prior to any future building permits
being issued. This analysis is to be done under the SFPA
review proceas, and implemented by either the Spokane County
Building Official or the Planning Department (ae deemed
appropriate by the Planning Department) and reviewed by the
Waahington State Department of Transportation and County
£ngineer.
19. If the Broadway realignment ia not completed through an RID
the applicant ie hereby put on notice that Broadway Avenue
acceas could be right in/right out only.
SPOKANL COVNTY DIVI3ION OF tJTILITIES
1. Any water service for this project shall be provided in
accordance with the Coordinated Water Syetem Plan for Spokane
County, as amended.
2. A covenant agreement shall be signed by the owner stating:
The owner ( e) or succesaor ( e) in interest agree
to authori ze the County to place their name ( s)
on a petition for the formation of a ULID by
the petition method pursuant to RCW 36.941
which petition includea the owner(s)'
property; and further not to object by the
signing of a proteat petftion against the
forma.tion of a ULID by reaolution method pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94 which includes
the owner(s)' property. PROVIDBD, thia
condition ehall not prohibit the owner(a) or
successor ( a) from obj ecting to any asaessment ( e) on the property as a reault of
improvementa called for in conjunction with
FINDINGS, DBCISION AND ITEM #
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 8 PAGE 00 pF ~l
.
.
.
the formation of a ULID by either petition or
resolution under RCW Chapter 36.94.
3. A wet (13ve) sewer connection to the existing area wide Public
Sewer System muHt be constructed. A eewer connection permit
ia required. (See No. 5)
4. The applicant ahall submit expressly to the Spokane County
Division of Utilities "under separate cover" only those plan
sheets showing sewer plans and apecifications for: public
eewer connection are to be reviewed and approved by the
Utilities Department prior to issuance of permit to connect.
5. Security shall be depoeited with County Utilitiea for
construction of the public facilitiea.
6. Note: the Board of County Commissionere is in the process of
evaluating whether Public Sewer should be extended outside the
15 year conetruction boundary and the terms of
connection/extension of public sewer if allowed.
3POKANE COIINTY HFALTH DISTRICT
1. Sewage dispoaal method shall be ae authorized by the Director
of Utilities, Spokane County.
2. Water service ahall be coordinated through the Director of
Utilities, Spokane County.
3. Water service shall be by an exieting public water supply when
approved by the Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department
of Health.
4. A public sewer system shall be made available for the project
and individual service ahall be provided to each lot prior to
sale. Use of individual on-site sewage disposal systema will
not be authorized.
5. Use of private wells and water systems ia prohibited.
SPOICANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BIIILDINGS
1. The applicant shall contact the Division of Buildings at the
earliest possible stage in order to be informed of code
requirementa administered/enforced as authorized by the State
Building Code Act. Deaign/development concerns include:
addreseing; fire apparatus access roads; fire hydrant/flow;
approved water systems; building acceeaibility; construction
type; occupancy classification; exiting; exterior wall
protection; and energy code regulations. (Note: The Diviaion
of Buildings reserves the right to confirm the actual address
at the time of building permit.)
SPOKAN'E COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AVTHORITY
1. All air pollution regulatione must be met.
2. Air pollution regulations require that dust emissions during
demolition, construction and excavation projecta be
controlled. This may require uae of water sprays, tarps,
sprinklers or auepenaion of activity during certain weather
conditions. Haul roade should be treated, and emisaions from
the transfer of earthen material must be controlled, as well
as emiasions from all other construction-related activities.
ITEM #
FINDINGS, DECISION AND PAGE ~ cF ~
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 9
n
• • •
^ , ' w
i w
3. SCAPCA etrongly recommends that all traveled surfaces (i.e.,
ingresa, egress, parking areas, accese roads) be paved and
kept clean to minimize dust emissions.
4. Meaeuree must be taken to avoid the depoeition of dirt and mud
from unpaved surfaces onto paved surfaces. If tracking or
spills occur on paved surfaces, measures must be taken
immediately to clean these eurfaces.
5. Debris generated ae a result of thie project must be disposed
of by meane other than burning (i.e., construction waste,
etc. ) .
6. All solid fuel burning devices (wood atoves, pellet stovea,
etc...) must comply with local, state, and federal rules and
regulations.
7. SGAPCA Regulation I, Article, V requiree that a Notice of
Construction and Application for Approval be aubmitted to and
approved by our Agency prior to the conatruction, installation
or establiahment of air pollution source. This includes any
fuel fired equipment rated at greater than 400,000 BTU/hour
(boilers, hot water heaters, ovens etc...). It alao includes
paint booths, and other eourcea of air contaminanta.
e. Chapter 173-491 WAC requires that all new gaeoline diepensing
facilitiea with total storage capacity of 10,000 gallons or
more must inatall and use State I vapor recovery equipment.
Prior to the installation of the storage tanks and vapor
control equipment a Notice of Construction must be filed with
and approved by SCAPCA.
BY THE ORDFR OF THE BOARD THIS /JADAY OF APRIL, 1995.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMKIS3IONSRS
OF SPO COUNTY, WASSINGTON
.E. Chil er Chairman
,
P i i D. Harrie
St e asaon
Vote of the Board of Spokane County Commiesioners aa follows:
Coaanieaioner D.E. Chilberg - aye
Commissioner Phillip D. Harris- aye
Commiasioner Steven Hasaon - aye,
ATTEST:
WILLIAM F. DONAHUE
Clerk of e Board
By • fiL. ,
osanne ntagu
Deputy C rk
i
♦ ~ v ~}7l
1TF.M #
a
FINDINGS, DECISION AND PAGE OF
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 10
1
1
7
N . + Q
~
, • h
OFFICIAL NOTICE FOR DATF AND PLACF FOR CONMNCING AN APPFAL
NOTE: Purauant to WAC 197-11-680(5), notice is hereby given
by the Board of County Commiseionera in conjunction
with the approval of the above-referenced matter that:
(1) Pursuant to Section 14.402.180 of the Spokane
County Zoning Code, the time limi.t for commencing
an appeal of the approval of the above-referenced
matter is thirty (30) calendar days from the Board
of County Conmisaioner' e execution of the above
Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Decision.
(2) The time frame for appealing any SEPA issues with
respect to the approval of the above-referenced
matter is thirty (30) calendar days after the
execution of the above Findings of Fact,
Conclueions and Decision. A notice of intent to
raise SEPA isauee by judicial appeal is required
and muet be filed with Wallis D. Hubbard, Director
of Planning, Weat 1026 Broadway, Spokane, WA
99260, within thirty (30) calendar days after
execution of the above Findings of Fact,
Conclusions and Decieion.
(3) The appeal of either the approval of the
above-referenced matter or any SBPA iseues muet be
filed in the Spokane County Superior Court or a
court of competent jurisdiction as provided by
law.
1TEM # 3 ~
FINDINGS, DECISION AND PAGf cF LI
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - 11
r , ,r
r
~
` -~EIVED
No 95 02M 14AR 0 81
995
sro~,,, c.DuMi-tr
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMISSIONERS '~~'MEA}T
OF SPOKANB COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTSR OF ZF-139A-76, )
CHANGE OF CONDITIONS TO ALLOW )
A REVISED SITE PLAN AND )
ADDITIONAL USES IN THE ) D$ C I S I 0 N
RBGIONAL BUSINSSS ZONS; )
APPLICANT: DONWOOD, INC. )
Mr. Chairman:
This evening is the date which the Board of County
Commissioners has aet to render ita decision in Planning Department
File No. Z$-139A-76, a request for a change of conditions to allow
a revised site plan and those usee permitted in the Regional
8uainess (B-3) zone. The site ie approximately 20 acrea in size
and is located along the south side of Interstate 90, about 800
feet east of Barker Road. Thia matter was heard by the Board at
its February 21, 1995 regular meeting.
The applicant, Donwood, Inc. requests a change of conditions
to allow any of the uses permitted in the B-3 zone, and has
aubmitted a general site plan that doea not show what uses would be
developed on the aite nor how the development standards of the 8-3
zone would be met.
The file reflecte that the Spokane County Hearing Bxaminer
Comomittee previously approved the change of conditione. The
applicant then appealed the Hearing Examiner Comvanittee'8 deciaion
to the Board, contending that the site plan and conditions imposed
in an earlier rezone of the property did not apply to the site, or
applied in only a very limited way.
After considering the public record in this matter, including
the memorandums filed by legal counsel, I hereby move to deny the
appeal filed by Donwood, Inc. and approve the change of conditions
request subject to the conditions imposed by the Hearing $xaminer
Committee. Under my motioa, the Board would be authorizing all the
uses of the B-3 zone, but requiring further hearing at the time of
aite development to assure proper environmental review and
conditioning of the proposal.
I would ask that staff prepare Findings of Fact and Decision
reflecting this motion, to be presented to the Board at a
subsequent public meeting.
DATED this 7th day of March, 199 ~
ITEM # 31
PAGE ~ OF 1j
~ .
op~ , -
, BOARD OF COUNTY CONMSSIONERS
OF SPO COUNTY, WASHINGTON
. . Chilb g
f
Phill . Harris ,
v - '
S. Haesoa
ATZ'E~ST : -
WILL . DONAHUE,
Cle io , the Boa
J ,
R ne ontague, eputy rk
n
.
ITEM #
- PAGE OF ~j
- ,
~ RECE►VEp
`r MAR 0 2 1995
SPOKqNe COUN?'Y
BEFORE THE BOARD OFpG~ ~~tER5, SPOKANE COUNTY
I
s ,
2
3 IN THE MATTER OF 1HE APPEAL OF No ZE-139A-76
4 DONWOOD, INC. REGARDING THE
5 DECISION OF TBE COLfNTY HEARING REP'LY OF DONWOOD, INC TO
6 E COMIVIITTEE MEMORANDUM OF SPQK;ANE
7 ZE-139A 76 COUN'I'Y PROSEC,UTING
S ATTORNEY
9 ,
10
I 1 I INTRODUCTION
12
13 This is the Appellant's Reply to the Memoradum of the Prosecuting Attorney in this
14 matter dated February 28, 1995
15
16 II FACTS
17
18 The essential facts of this matter are as follows
19
20 A. The property in question was subdivided prior to the application for
21 reclassification of the properiy to Freeway Commercial in 1977
22
23 B On March 11, 1977, the Planning Commission granted a zone change to appellant,
24 changing the zoning of the property from Agricultural to Freeway Commercial
25
26 C T'he decision was appealed and the Spokane County Board of Commissioners
27 approved of the Planning Comrnission's decision of March 11, 1977, together with
28 two "additional conditions " The date of this decision was 7une 16, 1977
29
30 At the time of the reclassification, the Spokane County zoning ordinance
31 provided for a Freeway Commercial Zone which essentially allowed for 32 certain commercial uses consisting of automobile and truck service station,
33 repair, restaurant, convenience store, motel, etc
34
35 D In 1985, pursuant to Resolution No 85-0900, the Board of County
.
36 Commissioners adopted the Spokane County Zoning Code and, in conjunction, the
37 "Program to Implement" the crossover matrix attached to the Resolution
38
39 E On 7anuary 1, 1991, the Program to Implement provided for redesignation of the
40 property in question from Freeway Commercial to Regional Business B-3
41
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC - 1 tTEM # ~
PAGE / QF $ .
.
r
1 F In June of 1994, under ZE-22-94, Lot 8 of the original reclassified area was
2 rezoned so as to include an Industrial Zone within a portioa of the area of Lot 8
3 for food product manufacturing and retail sates, and other uses
4
5 G In 1994, Donwood, Inc , was advised by the Plarmung Department that if it wanted
6 to use the property for anything other than the use which had been proposed at the
7 1977 reclassification, it would be necessary to make application for a change of
8 conditions and change of use to Regional Business B-3.
9
10 H The Spokane County Planning Departmem descrihed the proposal as a"change of
11 conditions to an existing Regional Business (B-3) zone to allow a re0ised site plan
12 and those uses permitted in the Regionai Business (B-3) zone "
13
14 L A Deterniination of Non-Significance was issued with regard to the application.
15 No one appealed the DNS.
16
17 J On December 16, 19942 the Spokane County Hearing Examiner Committee issued
18 its Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Order where rt approved the so-called
19 proposal, but added a multitude of conditions which were greater than the
20 conditions originally provided for the reclassification and gceater than the
21 condrtions provided for in the B-3 zone under the code and the B-3 zone
22
23 K Donwood, Inc. timely appealed the decision
24
25 III ISSUE
26
27 The issue is whether or not Donwood, Inc, is entitled to develop its property pursuant to
28 the provisions of the B-3 zone.
29
30 Or, if it is determined that it cannot, then the issue is to what extent the County can
31 establish conditions of approval for its development of the property or lots thereof which are more
32 stringent than those allowed under the development standards established for the B-3 zone or
33 more stringent than those originally provided for in the 1977 reclassification? "
34
35 TV ANALYSIS AND ARGUMENT
36
37 A. Summary of Argument .
38
,
39 It is appellant's position that it has a right to develop the property and each separate lot
40 therein pursuant to the provisions of the B-3 zone and that the Counfiy cannot i.mpose conditions
41 more stnngent than those imposed by the B-3 zone In the alternative, Donwood, Inc., contends
42 that it has a nght to develop the property and specific lots therein subject to the B-3 zone and the
43 conditions contained in the original reclassification and that certain of those conditions be changed
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC - 2 ITEM # 30
PAGf 7i 0 F 15
,
~
1 in a nunor fashion to allow for a more satisfactory and efficient method of complying with the
2 basic purpose of certain conditions contained in the original reclassification.
3
4 B A Landowner, Absent More, Can Use His Land as He Sees Fit
5
6 "The basic rule in land use law is still that, absent more, an individual should be able to
7 utilize his own land as he sees fit " Norco Corrst. Inc. v Kr»g Couniy, 97 Wn 2d 680, 685, 649
8 P 2d 103 (1982) (Norco), U S Const amends. S, 14
9
10 Although zoning is, in general, a proper exercise of police power which can permissibly
11 lirrut an individual's property rights, it goes without saying that the use of police po*er cannot be
12 unreasonable Norco, supra, State ex rel. Rarrdall v. Snohomish Cy,79 Wn 2d 619, 488 F 2d
13 511 (1971), In re Grrsh, 437 Pa 237, 263 A.2d 395 (1970)
14
15 While local governments exist to provide necessary public services to those living within
16 theu borders and to avoid harms in their protection of the public's health, safety, and general
17 welfare, exercise of this authority must be reasonable and rationally related to a legitimate purpose
18 of government such as avoiding harm or protecting heatth, safety and general, not Iocal or
19 paroctually conceived, welfare Norco, supra; Sarve a Yaluable Em't v. Bothell, 89 Wn.2d 862,
20 576 P 2d 401 (1978), Farrell v. Seattle, 75 Wn 2d 5409 452 P 2d 965 (1969), Southern
21 Burlrngton Cy. NAACP v, Mount Laured, 67 N J 1512 177-789 336 A.2d 713, cert. denied, 423
22 U S 808, 46 L Ed 2d 281 96 5 Ct 18 (1975)
23
24 Not only are local governments limited by due process protections in how they zone
25 commuruties, they are similarly liraited in the decisions they make under the adopted zoning plan
26 Zorung decisions must relate to legal requirements. Indicm Trcul Property Owrters v. Spokane, 76
27 Wn App 430, 439, p2d (1994) New considerations and sentiments cannot be used as
28 an opportunity to change the tegal requirements on an ad hoc, ex post facto basis Id
29
30 A zoning decision must relate to legal requirements See Maranathac Mirang, Inc. v.
31 Pierce Cy, 59 Wn App 795, 801 P 2d 985 (1990), Kertart &Assocs. v Skagtt Cy., 37 Wn App
32 2952 680 P 2d 439 (1984)
33 ~
34 C Landowners Have Certain Vested Rights Regarding the Use of Their Land.
35
36 Washington has adhered to the vested rights doctrine since the Supreme Court case of
37 State ex rel. Ogden v Bellevue, 45 Wn 2d 492, 275 P 2d 899 (1954). Frrends of the Law v. Ktng
38 County, 63 Wn App 650, 821 P 2d 539 (1991), 123 Wn.2d 518, 869 P 2d 1056 (1994). The
39 doctrine provides that developers who file a timely and complete building permit application
40 obtain a vested nght to have their application processed according to the zoning and building
41 ordinances in effect at the time of the application. Id, WestMain Assocs. v. Bellevue, 106 Wn.2d
42 473 720 P Zd 782 (1986), Hull v. Hunt, 53 Wn.2d 125, 331 P,2d 856 (1958) The doctrine is
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC - 3 ITEAA # 3D
PAGE ✓T' OF
1 applicable to building permits, conditional use permits, grading permits, and substantial
2 development permits, etc. lai
3
4 "Vesting" refers generally to the notion that a land use application, under the proper
5 conditions, will be considered only under the land use statutes and ordinances in effect at the time
6 of the application's submission WestMain Assocs. v. Bellevue, 106 Wn.2d 47, 50-51, 720 P 2d
7 782 (1986). The purpose of vesting is to provide a measure of certainty to developers, and to
8 protect their expectations against fluctuating laad use policy WestMa7n, at 51
9
10 Stated another way, the purpose of the vesting doctrine is to allow developers to
11 deternline, or "fix," the rutes that will govern their land development. See Comment;
12 Washington's Zomng Yested Rrghts Doctrine, 57 WASx L REV 1397 147-50 (198 1) The
13 doctnne is supported by notions of fundamental fairness As James Madison stressed, citizens
14 should be protected from the "fluctuating policy" of the legislature. The FederalrstNo 44, at 301
15 (J Madison) (J Cooke ed 1961) Persons should be able to plan their conduct with reasonable
16 certamty of the legal consequences Hochman, The Supreme Court and the Consiitutronalrty of
17 Retroactrve LegTSlaho», 73 HARV L REV 692 (1960) Society suffers if property owners cannot
18 plan developments with reasonable certainty, and cannot cany out the developments they begm
19
20 D The Law Applicabte to the Development of the Froperty is the Law
21 Applicable to the Regional Business B-3 Zone.
22
23 It is the posrtion of Appellant that the law applicable to the development of the property
24 and the vanous lots which make up the property is the Regional Business B-3 zone requirements
25 of the Spokane Zoning Code
26
27 When the property was rezoned from Freeway Commercial to Regional Busuiess 8-3 in
28 1985 wrth the actuat rezone taking effect in 1991, the County detennined that ttus property would
29 have attached to it the rights that a property owner would have under the B-3 zone The County
30 did not specifically impose a.ny ongoing restrictions regarding the use of the property, except
31 those restrictions as set forth in the B-3 zone
32
33 It is asserted that at the time of the reclassification, the old classification and the various
34 aspects of the reclassification decision, known as conditions, became unenforceable and were
35 superseded by the new B-3 zone There was nothing in the new zoning code that specifically
36 stated that the conditions continued on as land use restrictions superseding the nonnal conditions
37 in the B-3 zone
38
39 E Cross-Over Zone - KProgram to Lnplement" Does Not Apply.
40
41 The "Program to Implement" attempts to "describe a system of transition from the
42 existing zoning ordinance to the the new zoning code " Program to Implement 1(April l l,
43 1985)
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC - 4 tTEM #
PAGE 4- OF .
.
,
1 1 "Contractual" Conditions
2
3 To promote a more predictable and equitable transition from the old ordinance to
4 the "new" code, and the accompanying understanding of what an owner may
5 expect, Spokane County wishes to take steps to recognize the existence of
6 "contractual" conditions designed to protect adjacent owners of land and the
7 general public interest, all as imposed by the County during the lice,nsin^
8 pgrmtting 12rocess These conditions, or contracts, run with the land and were
9 imposed at a public hearing through careful deliberation and in the public interest
10
11 Parties who may have proposed, as well as those who may have opposed, a'
12 project, have expectations in this regard. Examples inctude buffering, fencing
13 andlor landscaping, site planning, parking and traffic c'vrculation plan, sevvage or
14 other waste disposal plan, and plat dedication language wluch limits uses more
15 than ordinarily allowed outright by the zone classifications To the extent that
16 th se conditions or stinulations are more strict th?n conta;n . wit in the
17 "cross_over" zong. t.,igv witl continue to exist even though the old zone
18 gbssification is redesignated to its "cross-over" zone• It is the County's position
19 tha.t the processes to be used for transition should be adequately explauied and
20 should foreworn a property owner of what will occur at the code's effective date
21 and, 5 years subsequently to that, at cross-over redesignation [Emphasis added ]
22
23 To understand the background regarding "contractual" conditions, one must look to State
24 ex rel. Myhre v. Spokane, 70 Wn 2d 207, 422 P 2d 790 (1967) In that case the court addressed
25 the validity of conditions made a part of a rezoning decision. It approved a rezone decision wluch
26 included a actual contract between the city and the parties requesting the rezone InMyhre there
27 was an actual contract
28
29 Here, there was no contract which was imposed "during the licensing or permitting
30 process " Since there was no contract, no condition wluch was reduced ta an agreement or
31 contract between the Iandowner and the county, it cannot be contended that the Program to
32 Implement carries with it a requirement that this property is subject to certain conditions which
33 continue subsequent to the cross-over in 1991 from Freeway Commercial under the 1975 Code to `
34 Regional Business B-3 under the 1981 Code
35
36 Additionally, this section does not apply in that in this instance a new zone was imposed
37 upon land next to a freeway and between two major freeway intersections The instance was not
38 a"pernut" or a license "
39
40
41
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC. - 5 ITEM # ~
PAGE J`' OF $
i
.
j
1 F If Enforceable, Any Change of Conditions Does Not Give the County
2 Authority to Impose Coaditioas More Restrictive than Those Imposed
3 Already or T6ose Required under the Regional Busiaess B-3 Zone.
4
5 Even the conditions are those which are the subject of the Program to Implement, and
6 assuming the Program to Implement is enforceable in this case, the Program does not allow the
7 Board to impose conditions which are greater or more restrictive than those imposed by the new
8 zone the B-3 zone Ths program provides
9
10 7 Chaage of Condition
11 f
12 If during the 5 year period of transition, the owner of a piece of Iand zoned prior
13 to the effective date of the new zone code wishes to change a condition imposed
14 upon It during the approval of that zone reclassification, the proposal or
15 development would then fall under the provisions and criteria of the old zone
16 classificauon On xhe other hand, after the 5 vear transition t~enod. anv chP-e of
17 QonditWn which was an "a1212rQVed condition" associated with n"old" z rq~
18 reclassificahon imposed nrior to or during the transition neriod, will n '
19 with the standards of the "cross-over" zone as internre e Zorung
20 Administrator [Emphasis added ]
21
22 Under this section, after the 5 year period bas passed, a change of condition that was a
23 condition which was part of the prior reclassification can be made so long as the change of that
24 condititon does not conflict with the standards of the new zone This section does not mean that
25 the Board can impose conditions which are more severe than those already imposed on the
26 reclassification.
27
28 The Board cannot use a change of conditions process related to condinons imposed as
29 part of the earlier reclassification as a basis to impose greater restrictions These greater
30 restrictions would be in conflict with the standards of the cross-over In addition, they would be
31 in violation of the vested rights of the owner See discussion above at page 3, et seq
32
33 Traffic Impact. The County, by attempting to look back at the land uses authorized
34 under the Freeway Commercial zone, has attempted to arrive at a trip generation condition which
35 supposedly is gomg to be violated by any change of condition or change of use to a B-3 zone
36 First, there was no such condition That is, there was no condition in the reclassification which
37 indicated that there was a certain vehicle trips per day standard being applied. Second, the traffic
38 generation aspect of the reclassification of the property from Freeway Commercial to Regional
39 Business B-3 was dealt with, of necessity, at the time the County rezoned the property to B-3
40 Had the County wanted to impose a trip generation standard in the reclassification, it should have
41 done so It cannot not do so after the fact
42
ITEM
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC - 6 PA ~a
GE ~ OF ~ -
~
v
.1 Finally, the imposition of greater restrictions would be without authority of any kind and
2 would be arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law See discussion above
3
4 G Reply to Prosecuting Attorney's Argument Regarding Process.
5
6 The Prosecuting Attorney asserts that the changes, if any, sought by Donwood, Inc, are
7 major changes which can only be approved by a public hearing by the hearing body pursuant to
8 SCC 14.504 040. This section does not give authority to the Hearing Ex~miner to place
9 additional conditions or make substantial chauges to conditions, or make changes to conditions
10 which are in excess of the restrictions or conditions provided in the regular B-3 zone A close
11 reading of that section indicates that it deals with "approved site development plans ' There was
12 no approved site development plan that was a condition of the reclassification Further, the
13 adjustments are minor adjustments.
14
15 H The Imposition of Conditions Vioiates EquaI Protection of the Laws.
16
17 The federal constitution provides that the states shall not "deny to any person withia its
18 junsdiction the equal protection of the laws." U.S Const amend. 14, § I.
19
20 The Washington Constitution furnishes a similar protection No law shall be
21 passed granting to any crtizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than
22 municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same tecros shall not equally
23 belong to all citizens, or corporations
24
ZS Wash Const art I, § 12
26
27 The requirements of this "privileges or immunities" clause are in most cases at least as
28 stnngent as those of the federal equal protection clause Ordinarily, inconsistency with one
29 necessarily implies inconsistency with the other Petersen v. State, 100 Wn 2d 421, 444, 671 P.2d
30 230 (I983)
31
32 When analyzing an equal protection claim, the first step is to determine the standard of
33 review Foley v Department ofFishenes, 119 Wn 2d 783, 789, 837 P 2d 14 (1992), Haberman ~
34 v WPPSS, 109 Wn 2d 1072 1392 744 P Zd I032, 750 P 2d 254 (1987), anneal dismissed_ 488
35 U S 8052 109 S Ct. 353,102 L Ed 2d 15 (1988) When examining legislation involving neither a
36 suspect classification nor a fundamental right, an appellate court employs minimal scruti:ny and
37 applies a rational basis test Foley, 119 Wn 2d at 789, 837 P 2ci 14, State v Coria, 120 Wn.2d
38 15630 169, 839 P 2d 890 (1992), Omega Nat'llns. Co. v. Marquardt, 115 Wn 2d 416, 431, 799
39 P 2d 235 (1990)
40
41 Under the rational basis test, "a statutory classification violates the equal protection clause
42 only if it fails to rationally further a legitimate state interest." Foley, 119 Wn.2d at 789, 837 P 2d
43 14, Burlmgton Northern RR v. Ford, 112 S.Ct 2184, 2186 (1992). The court will uphold a
REPLY OF DONWOOD, INC - 7
s r ~q # 4D
'~~~1 7 OF $ ,
1 legislarive classification so long as "the relationship of the classification to its [legislative purpose]
2 is not so attenuated as to render the distinction arbitrary or irrational " Nordlinger v. HarhM 112
3 S Ct 23262 2332 (1992)
4
5 To comply with Const. art. l, § 12, a legislative classification must meet three
6 requirements (1) the legislation must apply alike to all persons withia a designated class; (2) there
7 must be reasonable grounds for distinguishing between those who fall within the class and those
8 who do not, and (3) the disparity in treatment must be gerniane to the object of the laws in which
9 it appears Seattle v. Rogers Clothing, 114 Wn.Zd 213, 235-36, 787 P.2d 39 (1990)
10
11 Property owners whose property is classified as B-3 have a right to present an application
12 for a building permit to develop their property pursuant to the conditions imposed by the B-3
13 zone In this instance, the County of Spokane is irnposing substantial addirional conditioas
14 condrtions which exceed the conditions of the B-3 zone itself and eacceed the conditions of the
15 original reclassification There is absolutely no basis upon which this particular property should
16 be classified any differently from any other property holding a B-3 designation. To impose
17 additional condi'ons on the development of this property is and will be a violation of the equal
18 protection laws and the privileges and immunity $,uarantees of law in the state of Washington
19
20 V CONCLUSION
21
22 It is absolutely unfair and unlawful to require Appellant to do more than required under
23 the B-3 zone as a condition to the development of this property.
24
25 Respecttfully submitted,
26
27 EUGSTER HA -t j- P S C
28
29
30 ~ k
31 By
A;b
32 STEPFIM K. EUGSTER, WSBA,# 2003
33 Attorneys for Appellant, Donwood, Inc ~
34
35 Dated March 2, 1995
36
37 ,
38
REPLY OF DONWOOD,INC. - 8 lTE1tA # ~
PANCE $ OF $ ,
~ ~s
M E M 0 R A N D U M
To: Board of County Commissioners
From: Michael C. Dempsey, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
Date: February 28, 1995
Re: ZE-139A-76, Change of Conditions Request
This memo responds to the Board's request for legal advice on the
zoning requiremente applicable to the above change of conditions
request, which was heard by the Board at its regular public meeting
of February 21, 1995.
As you may recall, attorney Stephen Eugster contended at the
hearing that (i) the applicant, Donwood Inc., was entitled to
develop its property for any of the uses allowed in the B-3 zone,
and (2) that any conditions of approval imposed on the change of
conditions request could be no more stringent than those allowed
under the development standards established for the B-3 zone.
Procedural Historv of Site
In 1977, the site, originally encompassing 27 acres, was rezoned
under the County Zoning Ordinance from Agricultural to Freeway
Commercial, for a truck stop, motel and cafe. The file reflects
that the Planning Commission recommended approval of the aite
development and traffic control plan submitted by the applicant,
subject to compliance with various conditions of approval. After
a public hearing in which testimony was submitted in opposition to
the rezone request, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the
Planning Commission's reconmendation with two additional
conditions.
In 1985, pursuant to Reaolution No. 85 0900, the Board of County
Commissioners adopted both the Spokane County Zoning Code and the
"Program to Implement" the cross-over zone matrix attached to the
adopting resolution. A copy of the resolution and Program to
Implement are attached to thia memorandum and incorporated by
ref erence .
Effective January 1, 1991, for the urbanizing areas of the county,
the Program to Implement provided for redeaignation of the zone
ITEM # Zq
PAGE l OF 3
, • s
~ classifications of the old zoning ordinance to the most nearly
' equivalent zone classif ications contained in the new zoning code.
Accordingly, in 1991, the site of ZF-139A-76 was redesignated under
the Zoning Code as Regional Business (B-3).
In June, 1994, approximately five acres of the site was rezoned
(ZE-22-94) at the request of Tranco Industries Inc. under the
Zoning Code to the B-3 and Industrial zones, for food product
manufacturing, retail sales and other uses allowed in such zones.
The approval was conditioned to require development in general
accordance with the development concept proposed by the applicant
for a confectionery factory and sales, with variations to be
approved by the Planning Department and with f inal requirements for
traffic mitigation, parking, etc. to be determined prior to the
issuance of building permits.
This brings us to the current proposal, which would allow any and
all uses permitted in the B- 3 zone to be developed on the site, and
would replace the very defined site plan approved for the 1977
rezone with a new site plan which shows no uses or improvements,
and aimply shows the division of the site into lots for future
development.
Chancre of Conditions under Procxram to Implement
The Program to Implement makes clear that conditions imposed on
rezones approved prior to the adoption of the new zoning code or
before the effective date of the croas-over zoning remain in
effect, in recognition of the public hearing process that was
undertaken to approve the original rezone. This provision not only
maintains approved conditiona for parking, sewage disposal,
landscaping, etc. but also limita development to the uses and
location of improvements specified on the approved site development
plan for a property (unless otherwise indicated). See Program to
Implement, page 4, "Contractual Conditions".
The 1991 cros9over zoning for the site in ZE-139A-76 did not alter
or expand the perm.issible uses that could be developed on the site
from those specified and located on the approved site plan from the
1977 rezone, regardless of the fact that the old Freeway Commercial
zone allowed other uses or that the new B-3 zone perm.its other
uses. Through a change of conditions, the owner of the site may
seek to alter this aite plan to allow other uaea, provided that
such u9es are within the category of uses permitted in the B-3
zone. Further, the owner may seek to alter or add to the
conditions of approval imposed under the 1977 rezone, provided that
any new conditions must be con9istent with the development
standards of the B-3 zone. See Program to Implement, page 5,
"Change of Conditions".
Section 1.44.030 of the County Code (copy attached) states that an
application for change of conditiona shall be submitted to the
Planning Department. A changed condition request that involves
only minor alterations or additions to an approved site plan for a
ITEM # 2I
PAGE Z' OF ~
r ~
✓ previoua rezone may be granted administratively by the
~ Planning Department. Section 14.504.040, Zoning Code (copy
attached). This includes minor adjustments to buildings or
improvementa, and changes in use n... provided that documentation
is submitted that the impacts and intensity of the proposed use are
equal to or les9 in nature than the originally approved use or the
surrounding land use as determined by the Zoning Administrator".
Section 14.504.040, Zoning Code.
Any changes to approved site development plans that cannot be
regarded as minor in nature can only be approved after a public
hearing by the hearing body. Section 14.504.040, Zoning Code.
Authoritv of Hearinar Examiner Committee and Board
The hearing examiner committee may place conditions on an
application for change of conditions requiring a public hearing to
protect the public health, safety and welfare, or to mitigate
environmental impacts. Section 1.44.050, County Code (copy
attached).
What the applicant in the case of ZE-139A-76 is requesting is
similar to a"blanket" or "spec" rezone request that doee not
indicate what use the land will be put to upon being rezoned.
Because of the difficulty of imposing conditions or conducting SEPA
review in such inatances, the hearing examiner committee, or the
board of county comm.issioners in an appeal situation, would be
within its rights to deny such changed conditions request, with or
without prejudice. Alternatively, the hearing body could decide to
delay a decieion on what uaes will be allowed on the 9ite and the
m.itigating conditions to be imposed until site development. This
could be done by requiring a further public hearing before site
development by the hearing body, which is what the Hearing Examiner
Cominittee has required in ZE-139A-76, or by providing for
administrative review and approval by the planning department.
However, the Zoning Code certainly expresses an intent that changed
condition requests involving major alterationa of an approved site
plan and permitted uses should be resolved by the hearing body and
not administratively. See Section 1.44.050, County Code.
,
It further seems reasonable in thie case for the reviewing and
commenting agencies to assume a worst case scenario for SFsPA
review, given the speculative nature of the site plan submitted and
the breadth of uses allowed in the B-3 zone.
ITEM # ZA
PAGE 3 OF
J ~
w
~
No. 95 0032
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY,
WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER CONCERNING ZE-139A-76 )
CHANGE OF CONDITIONS TO EXISTING ) NOTICE OF
REGIONAL BUSINESS ZONE (B-3) ) PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT: DONWOOD INC. )
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Applicants Gordon Curry and Lyle Johnson, Donwood
Inc., have filed a Notice of Appeal of the decision by the Hearing Examiner Committee to
approve the Change of Conditions to an existing Regional Business zone to allow all
those uses permitted in the Regional Business zone wdh Conditons of Approval requiring
public hearing review of site pians.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
County, Washington, will conduct a public hearing
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21. 1995, AT 5:00 P M.
(or as soon as possible thereafter)
COMMISSIONERS' ASSEMBLY ROOM
SPOKANE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING
1026 W BROADWAY AVE
SPOKANE, WA 99260
to consider this application for a Change of Conddions to allow all uses in the Regional
Business zone on property
Generally located south of and adjacent to
Interstate 90, approximately 800 feet east of
Barker Road in Section 17, Township 25 North,
Range 45 EWM, Spokane County, Washington
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that a topic of discussion at this hearing will be any
environmental documents prepared in conjunction with the proposal.
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that any person interested may appear at said hearing and
present testimony verbally or in wrfting in support of or in opposition to this application.
The Board reserves the right to impose time limits on speakers, as deemed necessary. The Board's meetings and hearings are conducted in facilities which are accessible to
disabled individuals. For more particular information with respect to the accessibility of
the Public Works Building, Commissioners' Assembly Room, please contact Rosanne
Montague, Clerk of the Board, at (509) 456-2265.
BY ORDER OF THE BOARD this 3 day of January, 1995.
WILLIAM E. DONAHUE
CLERK OF E BOARD
B
RO A NE MOIVTAGUE, DEPUTY
J A N 4 1995
DI B I N• QUE rd
DEPT STATE EXAM PUBLJSH 1/6Jl~'~LE/NANCY ZE139ANOT 0103
ffEM # 2$
PAGE ~ _ _G F ~
FROM'OMNIFAX
TL =ap '-OUN-Y PLANti'yG ` DEC 19, 1994 10•29AM p
~ 02
y'►
,
.
TO TNE BOAFtD OF GOUNTY COMMtSS10NERS DEe 16 APPEAL FEE -$2 5 GdUNiY GUtAWSSf01tERS
NAME.~.,r~~•_- cTQDAY'S DATE la
AODAESS: ..&V c.;?- .4f ~..y► ZIP CODE ~~We-9
HOME PHONE: ~D ' PL-, r BUSINESS PHONE:229 - 4~~'.,cp C9
• HEqRtNG EXAMiNER ACTION BE1NG APPEAl.ER
PREIIMiNARY SUBDIV{SION NAiVfE
•
' PREI.tMINARY SUBDtV1510N NUMBER
ZONE RECLA5SlFICATiON NUMBER --,r ✓ ~ ~
' DATE OF HEARINQ EXAMiNE 41`TEE A N~Z -1,5-_ 9' -'7"
.
.
S1GNATURE OF APPELLA
,
M
Llor
~ 31GNA1"URE OF AUTHQRIZED REPRESENTAI'1VE
,
AaoREss ,
YC)UR REASONS FOR APPFAI.
~
~
~ -f~+r-.r ~P r ~ w
~~s r~~art►~•• ~R~1/s1rr'~Y~MNas/►ti~w~ Ma1
• FOR OFFlCE USE ONLY
Capies to: P!anning Engineers EnviranmentaZ Health
^,,,..~.r-r--
lo
Fee received Gheck Cas C~ Receipt Number
~
Hearing Date
mm # I~
.
PAGE ,4F c~ ,
1
~ - ;
PARTY OF RE,.
~ORD NOTICE
. Date: /a - % V
Application No.
Project/Applicant Name .~~72EZG,vu~c~ d
(Check one)
I would like to be on record in
0, FAVOR
❑ OPPOSITION
❑ NEUTRAL
Do you wish to TESTIFY at this hearing?
~ YES
~
❑ NO
~ ~
Your name:
~
(please print)
Address:
(street)
fN
r
(city/state/ZIP)
IrEM # I 0)
PAGE _ _ . ,pF ~
. •
.
PARTY OF REi:ORD NOTICE
Date: ~ Z -
Application No. 3`~h ZL
Project/Applicant Name D
(Check one)
I would like to be on record in
~AVOR
❑ OPPOSITION
❑ NEUTRAL
Do you wish to TESTIFY at this hearing?
~ YES
❑ NO
~
Your name. ~J
(please print)
TAQ,~
Address:
S (street) :::7( Z6 ~
(city/state/ZIP)
IrEM #
PAGE ~ OF
PARTY OF RECORD NOTICE .
Date:
Application No. _4i~ " 11
Projeci/Applicani Name
(Check one)
I would like to be on record in
QL FAVUR
❑ OPPOSITION
❑ NEUTRAL
Do you wish to TESTIFY at this hearing?
~ YES
❑ NO
Your name: : 'X
(please print)
~
Address:
(city/state/ZIP)
rTbw # j
PAGE ~ OF LI
PARTY OF RECORD NOTICE
Date: 12 - /4(0 - 9y
Apptication No. ~ L - 13 ~ )q -7 `
Project/Applicant Name
(Check one)
I would like to be on record in
FAVOR
❑ OPPOSITION
~ NEUTRAL
Do you wish to TESTIFY at this hearing?
~ YES
❑ NO -
Your name. v
(please print) ~
Address: (street) ,
(city/statelZIP)
i1'EM # l ~
PAGE OF ~I
~
Washington State Eastern Region
2714 N. Mayfair Street
Department of Transportation
Spokane, WA 99207-2090
Sid Morrison
Secretary of Trarsportation (509) 324-6000
February 28, 1995 RECEIVED
MAR 131995
Mr. Skip Chilberg, Chairman
Spokane County Commissioners SPOKANE COUNTY
West 1026 Broadway Avenue PLANTi1NG DEPARTMEtiT
Spokane, WA 99260-0240
Re: Donwood Barker Road Development
Dear Mr. Chilberg:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide written comment on the above proposed
development. As indicated to the board at the hearing last week and in our past
correspondence to your planning staff, the Washington State Department of Transportation is
extremely concerned about the impacts this development may have on the surrounding
transportation system. Development of this site.with any use consistent with those uses
allowed in B-3 zoning could have severe adverse impacts to the transportation system. We
base this comment on the fact that the applicant submitted a proposal which called for
199,000 square feet of unspecified B-3 uses. If this property was developed for a shopping
center (a reasonable use of B-3 property) the daily trip generation of the site would be
between 11,000 and 14,000 trips per day according to the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE)
Sth Trip Generation Manual. Additionally it should be noted that individual small uses such as
fast food, restaurants, convenience stores, drive in banks, discount stores, etc. could generate
trips in excess of this proposed shopping center. This would not be considered the highest
possible traffic generator, but would rather reflect a reasonable use for this property.
With Barker Road being a two lane facility and our I-90 Interchange only having one lane
ramps and un-signalized intersections, the ability of our facility to accommodate this increased
traffic simply does not exist, as the Level of Service would be driven to LOS "F" (see
attachment 1) at the Barker Road1I-90 ramp terminals. Additionally, Broadway Avenue east
of Barker is a very narrow sub-standard frontage road which WSDOT currently controls. The
ability of this road and the intersection of Barker Road to accommodate this traffic also does
not exist. The proposed Road Improvement District that was mentioned would improve the
sub-standard section of Broadway Avenue and re-align it with Barker Road, which, while it
may improve capacity on this short section of Broadway Avenue, does not provide for the
signalization or other capacity improvements necessary to accommodate large volumes of
traffic at the Barker RoadlBroadway Avenue intersection. The State infirastructure in this area
was constructed over 30 years ago and was designed to accommodate a limited traffic
volume, which the rural land uses in this area generated. The infrastructure was not designed
to accommodate the traffic volumes associated with a busy commercial urban area. To
rebuild this interchange to the same standard as Argonne Road or Sullivan Road would be
very costly and the State is unable to fund such improvements in the foreseeable future.
iTEnn # 2C~ _
PAGE / OF lT/
. .
j
Mr. Chilberg
February 28, 1995
Page 2
When we first where made aware of this project last year, we were very concerned with the
potential traffic impacts the development of this site would have. When Spokane County
Planning issued a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) based on the fact that insufficient
information was provided to adequately determine the exact impacts, we adamantly opposed
this DNS, realizing that adverse impacts where likely with build out of this project. Spokane
County Engineers shared our concern over the potential impacts this project could have on the
transportation system. In regard to these traffic issues, WSDOT and the County Engineers
met with the applicant to discuss potential impacts and ways to mitigate these impacts. It was
realized at this meeting that the property was previously zoned freeway-commercial for the
construction of a truck stop and would produce an increased level of traffic with this
development. County Engineers and Planning provided us with a copy of the original truck
stop site plan from which we equated building square footage, proposed parking, and land use
to a trip generation estimate based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Sth Edition
Trip Generation Manual. We equated the original development proposal, based on the above
assumptions to be approximately 1,600 trips per day. Both WSDOT and County Engineers -
indicated that this limitation would provide a workable traffic number without severely
overloading the existing transportation system, provided a full traffic analysis was undertaken
along with appropriate mitigation to develop beyond this point. At the Hearing Examiner
Committee meeting the applicant also agreed to this 1,600 trip limit based on prior approvals
for this property. At this time WSDOT dropped our objections to the DNS based on the
conditions the Hearing Examiner imposed on the development.
Based on the above 1,600 trips per day limit placed upon this development and the need to
undertake a full traffic analysis along with appropriate mitigation to develop the property
beyond this point, WSDOT is not opposed to this development. However, if for some reason
the conditions of the Hearing Examiner imposed on this development are found to be
inappropriate or unjust WSD4T would continue to ask that the DNS issued for this
project be withdrawn and the probable adverse environmental impacts this project
would have be addressed under SEPA. We base this request on our previous
correspondence (see attachment 2) and due to the fact that the original SEPA prepared for
this project clearly stated the intended use was to be a"Truck Stop, motel and restaurant"
which was prepared in 1977 (see attachment 3). This proposed change of use clearly was not
addressed in the original SEPA prepared for the Truck Stop nor were the potential adverse
impacts addressed. We must also question the use of an 18 year old checklist as the basis for
any development without being updated to account for changed conditions. Additionally,
impacts to air quality on the transportation system have not been addressed as they relate to
this development proposal. It should be noted that the Barker Road/I-90 Interchange is
within the Carbon Monoxide non-attainment area as identified by Spokane Regional
Transportation Council.
To allow this development to proceed without any limitations or additional environmental
review would not be consistent with what has been required of other developments in this
area. Riverway Villa and the proposed Turtle Creek developments, both of which access
Barker Road and are in this immediate area, have agreed to construct improvements to the
ITEM # AO
PAGE 2 10 F
,
Mr. Chilberg
February 28, 1995
Page 3
State Transportation System in addition to improvements to the County Road System to
ensure their potential impacts were mitigated. We would ask that this development be treated
in a similar manner.
WSDOT also reserves the right, if an operational or safety problem does occur at the
interchange ramp terminais or other areas under our control, to physically limit the area to
right turns only (no left turns would be allowed). Please be aware that it is not our desire to
rldertake such measures as it woutd impact all users of our facility. We prefer to work with
iie local agency and developers to find acceptable solutions to any problems. However we
nave always reserved the right to protect the safety of the motoring public and the operation
of our facility.
In conclusion, we would ask that conditions of the Hearing Examiner be upheld. If this is not
possible, we would ask that the DNS be withdrawn by Spokane County and the probable
adverse impacts of this development at a maximum intensity buildout be addressed under
SEPA. Tlvs would ensure that the transportation impacts from this development are
adequately addressed.
Thatik you again for providing us an opportunity to comment on this matter. If you have any
cluestions regarding the above please feel free to contact Leonard Cash in our District
Planning Office at 324-6199.
Sincerely,
J. C. LENZ I
Regional Administrator
By: L ONARD CASH, PE
Regional Planning Engineer
JCL
LCC/gjf
attachments:
cc: Steve Hasson, Spokane County Commissioners
Phil Harris, Spokane County Commissioners
Pat Harper, Spokane County Engineers
Stacey Bjordahl, Spokane County Planning
i I LA1
pACE 3 c'F
1985 HC14: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
*,~~t~r~c~r9ti;~c~t*~c*~r*~:~c7Y~k~c~c~r~c~:~c~t'~c*9t~~c9c~c*9r9c~c~k9t9t~t~t~k7t~t~k~c~t*~k~c*~c~r~~r~c~c*~r***~t*~Y~~t~k
IUENTIFYING INFORMATION
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .9
AREA POPULATION 150000
-~ME GF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... EB I-90 Ramps
AME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... Barker Road
.!r n'F TFr'F 7,?,,nLYST WSDOT Planning
D;,'1% c`;i- .",.1IALYSIS (mm/dd/YY) 12-14-1994
PLRIOD ANI?L,YIF~.D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PIf Pea}: IIour
G'i'iIL~~ 1;ii,~C>T'i,it~,l`-i~0i1. . . . tI cii_tions with Development
i_I~~'i'iF:1;`I E C'.I'10i1 `l'YP1-; AV11.i COI1Ti:OL
NTEi--:Sh-;i 1'10I1 `I"YPE: 4-1l;r; . .
MiAJvR STREET n1RECTION : NURTH/SDU`I'H
coNll'kOL r-"YPE EASTBOUNU : STOP SIGt•1
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOF SIGN
,'RArFIC VOLUriLS
FF, VIB Na SB
LEFT 22E 0 0 67
TI-iRU 1 0 395 259
RIGHT 463 1 290 0
NUMBER OF LANES ANll L71NE USAGE
EB WB NB SB
LANES 2 I 1 1-
ITtM
PAGE C%: ~
• ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
EASTBOUND 0.00 115 35 N
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 35 N
NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
17OUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
.1,HICLE COMPOSITIOid
SU TFUCKS % COMBINATION
AND RV'S VEHICLES o IrOTORCYCLES
11:/,.,:; r.i'~i!->ili:I) 7 2 0
WLSTBOUND 0 0 0
N0R`I'HF30UND 1 2 0
,SC)UTIir30UI'1D 2 U
CRITTCf-3I, GAP~
~l'A6LiLI1FZ VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DI ST . FIIvAL
(Table 10-2 ) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAI., GA?'
MINOR RIGITTS
EB 5.70 5.70 0.00 5.70
tti'13 5.70 5.70 0.00 5.70
P•1AJOR LEFTS
S R 5.:10 5.10 0.00 5. J. 0
N f3 5. -10 5.10 0.00 5.10
MINOR THROUGtIS
EYi 6.30 6.30 0.00 6.30
6dLj 6.30 6.30 0.00 6.30
MZNOR LEFTS
EII 6.80 6.80 0.00 6.80
WB 6.80 6.80 0.00 6.80
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME 0F THE EAST/WEST S7'REET...... EB I-90 Ramps
NAME OF TfiE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... Barker Road
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12-14-1994 ; PM Peak Hour
OTHER INFORMATION.... Conditions with DevelopmentITEM ~ A-2
PAGE ~ UF_jj,~.
- 1
CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c(pcph) c(pcph) c(pcph) c= c - v Los
p M SH R SH
THROUGH 1 208 187 > 187 > 186 > D
RIGHT 527 769 769 769 242 C
M I:110F: S`.I'REE7'
WII LEFT 0 101 36 > 36 > 36 > F"
'i'HROUGH 0 262 236 > 525 236 > 524 236 ?A C
}_:IGHT 1 525 525 > 525 > 524 > A
0R STREE7'
13B LEFT 76 510 510 510 434 IA
_''.lfi LEFT 0 822 082 982 882 A
IUEIIJ'a.FYING INF,'0RM?~`1'101,1
iJAME OF THE EAST/ WEST STREET EB 1-9 0 Rarr:,s
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET,... Barker Roacl
DATE AND TIME OF TIiE APJALYSIS..... 12-14-1994 ; PM Peak Hour
UTHEI; INFORMATION.... Conditions with Development
1 TEM
PACEE
~ -
~
. - ~ i~ % ~ /C. • 'r"r'; ^ . J /
. •
~
Washington Sta#e Eastern Region
s::c~:
~ Department of Transportation 2714 N. r,ia
~
Spokar,e. WA 992r-- ~C,_~
Sid Morrison
Secr~:ary of Tr2^s;Dor:G;ion (509) 324-&X-0
December 2, 1994
. Mr. Wallis Hubbard
Director, Spokane County Planning
1026 W Broadway Ave
Spokane, WA 99260-0240 Re: Donwood Inc. Change of Conditions
i I-90Barker Road
'f hank you foi- the opportunity for respond to the above referenced L7NS. 'l'ilt
Washington State Department af Transportation (WSDO"I') has the followin(i
COl71IT1C[ltS:
WSDOT is extremely concerned about the issuance -of a DNS for this proposed
development. Due to the fact that no particular land uses have been specified, and tliat
the site pian submitted is not specific) there is insufficient information to conunent ori
the exact impacts this development will have. Because the applicant has asked for all
those allowed in the B-3 commercial zone, we must analyze this property at its highest
and best use for oui- SEP.A coJYiments. -
Based on tfie site plan subiliitted, WSVUT has deterllur►ed that the liighest arld best Use
for this property will be a 199,000 square foot shopping center. This developme►lt
would have very significant adverse impacts oii t}ie local transportation network_
According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, this development would generate nearlv
11,000 vehicle trips per day (see attached). Based on this information it is probable
that development of this project could have the following impacts:
l. Broadway Road, wliich fronts t}lis site, is a substaiidard, very narrow two-Iane
fr-ontage road, incapable of carrying traffic demands of this size. As identified
lfl the Spokane County Compre}iensive Plan, this development would require
tfiis frontage road to be upgraded to a four-lane minor arterial. Until recently,
this frontage road has carried less that 100 trips per day. The addition of this
traffic to this frontage road is a probable significant impact.
2. The Barker Road/I-90 interchange is currently nearing capacity. This fact is
further documented in the Turtie Creek Traffic Study conducted by Inland
Pacific Engineering in August of this year. The addition of nearly 1,000
additional PM peak hour trips will cause this interchange to fail as a direct
restilt of this development. This could also pose a significant safetyhazard as
PAC-a-E
~
. ~
the ramp terminals are currently unsignalized and drivers would be forced to
accept insufficient gaps to complete turning movements at the interchange ramp
terminals. In addition, severe congestion on the ramps and the possibiIity of
traffic backing up onto mainline I-90 may be expected. This would be an
unacceptable compromise to the safety and capacity of the transportation
system.
Barker Road in the interchange vicinity currentty is a two-lane roadway which
carries approximately 7,000 vehicles per day. The addition of this development
alone would more than double the existing traffic. Barker Road at the
interchange area is unable to safely accommodate this traffic, due to the limited
sight distance and the turning vehicles present at the intersections. In addition
tfie proximity of the Broadway service road to the I-90 intercllange greatly
limits the effective capacity of Barker and Broadway roads to accommodate
Iarge increases in vehicle traffic, which this development will cause.
4. In the past year, VVSDOT and Spokane County have recol-nized the capacity
limitations that exist, in the Barker Road interchange vicinity. As a result of
this, mitigation has been required of the Turtle Creek development (101 single
family lots) through an 1VIDNS. Riverway Villa (37 single family lots) has also
been required to mitigate its impacts in this area. Based on prior environmental
determinations of projects of a much lesser magnitude in this area, the issuance
of this DNS is inappropriate, given Spokane County's position on ot}Ier
development in the area.
5. Air quality conformity is another issue that has nat been addressed. This area is
inside the carbon monoxide non-attainment area and is subject to air quality
conformity regulations. The degradation of air quality that will result from ttle
traffic generation of this development and increased delay has not beell
addressed. This is a probable significant impact.
Given the probable significant adverse impacts this development would have on the
transportation system, along with air quality issues, which have not been addressed in
the current checklist, WSDOT requests that Spokane County Planning withdraw
the DNS for this project. We further request that the applicant undertake a traffic
study to identify and mitigate the probable impacts this project will have and that this
traffic study be reviewed by WSDOT and Spokane County Enaineers prior to a SEPA
determination being rnade.
/
PAC` Zb
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this matter and should you have any
comments please feel free to contact Leonard Cash in our planning off'ice at 324-6199.
Sincerely,
T. C. LENZI
:e~:ional Administrator
~
By: LEONARD CASH, PE
Regional Planning Engineer
JCL
LCC: ja
cc:
Glenn Miles, Spoka►ie Regional Transportation Council
Gary Kennaly, Spokane County Engineers
Pat Harper, Spokane County Engineers ,
Project file
1 1 Lm
l3k'
PAGE ; ~
9
Curry Barker Road
SliMMARY OF AVERAGE VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION
FOR 199 T.G.L.A. OF SHOPPING CENTER
DRIVEWAY VOLUMES
11\30\94
?4 HOUR 7-9 AM PK HOUR 4-6 PM PK HOUR
WO-WAY
1~DLUME ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT
AVER.AGE WEEKDAY 10865 154 90 509 509
PASS-BY TRIPS 181 181
24 HOUR PEAh HOUFZ
TWO-WAY
VOLUME ENTER EXIT
SATURDAY 14090 689 689
SUNDAY 6961 360 375
Note: A zero rate indicates no rate data available
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers
Trip Generation, 5th Edition, 1991.
lFtM -4` ~
r p
PA%-;.-
.
~ ZE-139-766 - AGR TO FREEVITAY COMM. (Cont'd)
that the proposed development is consistent with the regulations and standards
sEt forth in the SpokanE County Zoning Ordinance pertaining to Freeway Gom-
mercial Zones (Chapter 4. 1%j 8A).
C . STAFF ENVIRONTViENTAL REVIEVT:
That a declarati on of Non-Significance be issued, in accordance with Section
11. 15.340 of the Spokane County Environmental Grdinance (SCEO) prior to
approval of this recomrrendation by thE Board of County Commissioners, or
that any approving action of the Board be conditions upon issuance of Final
Declaration of Non-SignificancE in accord.ance with SCEO 11. 15.340.
D. GENE~..~L DATA:
1. T~ -zition: Section 17, Township 25 N., Range 45,
E.V~;*. Ivi. Lot c, Block ? and that portion
of Lots 2, 31 41 5, and 8. Block 3 lying
S of PSH 4-2 (Interstate No. y01) Corbin Add-
ition to Greenacres.
2. Applicant: Donwood, Inc .
E. 92^9 TrEnt-Avenuc
Spo'.:ane, WA 99206
3. Site Size: Approximately 27 acres
4. Existing Zoning: Agriculturai, establisheG June 18, 1957
5. ProposEd Zoning: Freeway Cor.:mcrcial
6. Proposed use of propcrty: Trtick STOp, motel and. restaurant
7. Application of Zoning Provision: Chapter 4. 21, Section 4.21.041,
8. Environmental Impact: A topic of discussion at this hearing may be
whether or not this proposal wili have a
significant adverse envirorlmenta1 impact.
ITEM
PAGE
_ _ - ' _ _ _ ' . . . . . . . . . . • r . : . . . .er u L . ✓ & 3 .
,
~
ti
►
~ f ' ! - = - -
li . . ~ . . •
r~.r s:•.,..~.,...(. ~'i.4-. . . , - . , . _ . . ~ g.y,.y _ i;+ea~ri;~{/ r~ _i ...;+3 . . . y~ z r~ 1 ~ . f . ` ~ - ~ . .
C~j . , ~ - ' Y~'-_ . i . . . . ~ • p- _
, ~ . - . . Q ' ~ •
. ! f P E E W A Y o _ • ~ f ;
o . 7
~ SIGIX1 20'z 15' ' N
cHni~~~Nx iJ U~ Q a~ U 0
FEN
~ CE . ;r.~r.,M._
60
d '£J ~ 0
Q 0
' 'r ~
ANTED
kEES l A ~V i E Ci .
PLT
, _ / . ~ _ . . . . . ~ _
oo~K uV-tiTRUCK :
R CfC~~~ ,o ~,,r
~~{LT
~
~ ~vRt . ~ ~ r'~ ~ ~ . ~•]'~y . 5 r -
/p . ~j/ •0 xN~ ' F U T U R E ` .
w
ti,h7' c,
U
~ k'^ ~ 4l ) . .
s . i z _S~ 4r a'" ~ J , ~3 Y j' . . - : .
~
~ - f • K ~yl.\-~ :
. . . rWCrt n~~.,~. b . 1 ~.r ~~-w ~ `t ~d . . • .
~rc~r;FFic ro>flaFK R.RO a Fr~r Eti~at
~ ~ ~ .~rf'4~ , . . l- ~Y , `l, -t, .i. , ~ > ~ .1-` i • 1 . -
aowar'
CC."IAl -'a r • _ r-"-`+LAfiTEO L'i1W~ Fs 7t'tFE4 ~ - _:i~♦
IH r;IGAlIOiV ~
;
~ ~rrHklN 11~• i ~r5~ !~'lll'I-~It~~Tl~lr.ti F~Illl
i e a k LhK h 1-4 ~ ~F~ENCF.L..y' 'r itrliC~ I~r~~~l{~~na,'~!_. ~...~w.~i`I:I~F ~.G~~~1~71'1:IIIl~tl !If~~~~•ki••r.i;~.
,~l 1~~•• .:FLA~VrEU MOTEL 8 CAfE
TREE.S,
~
IkfIG4T10N o CANAL 1
• _ " I. _ ~ '"z ~ 5 ~ ~UgM'`-1.~ N,. .
, . , .
ti , ; : . ~ . ~O ~
..?~:aivrEO rRF: ~
E ~ Cl -_C-I:.,.
~ ~ ~ . . ~F , ~ ^ ~ ^ . r' . ~ - ~ , iAI' . y . . . _ _
. . ..j ' . . Y . ~ . . 1 . .i•:ti- * . . .
I~_T E P1=
.I.=.IUO'
i BvicY ie b~ A:oivG~ ~ Sovrr
ProK,rti . . . ~ .
fAx Iwo ~.p3V CroeM Me rfG .
I 2>+kC A~CFA To DF FkVF~ StiAFACi . I(I . ~ . . ~ . jI i 1. Sa~fGoWEG ARTA TPi Bi CRV.1MlD F.peK WerX Dvar G'rr9o1lD SPRIY.
4. £LSCrRrC Ovr~~r5 1N F'~l~riwG RRFA r Wiw~fiL T . 1I . .
S L*fCN R~K C'VG/N( N~.~~45 I /
~ ~.r ~~a) . ~IS.NS fOk W~r:R RVM.QF~~ ~ .
\ ' '~a j1f~~KT4D 7 WIrM ~Ri~1f T.;IVS,
~ N..l./ N/D i~..<~ 0 5f vcr 'A!a,nG An•!1 /NArc~~i+~ A7
7 AC[Ff1 To
/ Iy Wl~1 $I 'IeM~OlO /I 7 fuA6F
• y ~ 8. L Wafie lS~AiN ~1 Ce_[D rN( I✓n1
f WILi ~i /Mfr.~ SNf O! SRY~DWJ~ fitf
Af N✓DR/Yr3 ~
0 Crrr~c len~r7 T y.s fw~nitfD w.rw Srer C7
~n~f SNrt
~ .
~
Vlfashingtan S#ate Eastern Region
Department of TYansportativn 2714 N MayfaiT street
Sid Morrison Spokane, V'U'A 99207-2090
Secrei{ary o€ Transpcirtation (509) 324-6000
.
rC.'
December 15, 1994 f( 6 a~A
Mr. Wallis Hubbard pkpo''i''lq
.
Director, Spokane County Planning
1026 W Braadway Ave
Spokane, WA 99260-0240
Re: Danwood Inc. Change of Conditions
1-90Barker Road
Dear Mr. Hubbard :
After review vf the "Ptanning Repvrt to the Hearing Examiner Commit#ee" regarding
the above praposed development, the VWashin,gtvn State Department of Transpvrtatian
(WSI)OT} is concerned about the impacts this development will have on the lvcal
transpartation system. We have been extremely troubled by this development since we
were made aware of it priar to the pre-applicatian conference. W SI)C}T and the
County Engineers expresse+d concems regarding this development and asked that the
traffic issues be dealt with. We subsequently held another meeting with the developers
at which Spokane County Planning was present to discuss just the traffic issues. Again,
concerns over traffic generation of this praposed development were made knvwn, and
we asked that these issues be addressed under SEPA.
Subsequent to this meeting, County Pianning issued a determination of non-sigruficanGe
(DNS) for this proposed prvject. In this DNS, the planning department has concluded
that the full development af this property as a B-3 use will not have any probable
impacts. The futl development of this pTOperty as a retail shapping center, which is just
one use that wauld be allowed by the B-3 zoning, is expected to produce
approximately 11,000 vehicle tnps per weekday and approximately 14,000 trips per
day on Saturday (see attached). It should aiso be nQted that this is nat the highest trip
geneY-ation ratc whicii couici exist on this pz'operty, ratnei' it i'eflects d redsonable
generation of the uses proposed. The development of fast food restaurants3 discaunt
stares, and other uses could generate traffic in excess af this prajection.
Adequate transportativn facilities simpiy da nvt currently exist to serve this
development as proposed. The traffic this development will add by itsetf vwill
overwhelm the existing Barker Road and 1-90 interchange terminals and will lower the
LeVel of Service to I,OS F(see attached). This is a direct probable impact this
development will have to the transportation system.
ng ~
In addition, this development does not promote the genera.l safety of the rnQt+~ri
public as capacity daes not exist to accommodate it as proposed. If this development is
approved, W SDOT vvY1I lcaok to Spalcane County ta fund the needed Barker Road and
I-90 improvements that will be required as a direct result of thrs develapment. In
~
additian, WSDOT will not assume liability far the unsafe conditian this development
could possibly create on vur facilities, and we will again look ta Spokane Caunty. If an
operation or safety problem does occtir at the interchange terminals, WSPQW Wserves / D
RAGE l OFJ
~
the right to physically limit the ramp terminal area to right turns only (no left turns
would be allowed).
As a last point, it appears this DNS is not consistent with County Planning's actions on
previous development is this area. The Turtle Creek development, which was
approved by the Hearing Examiner Committee, and generated approximately one tenth
the potential traffic of this development (1,000 trips), was required to provide
mitigation at the Barker Road/I-90 ramp terminals through a Mitigated Determination
of Non-significance (MDNS). In this particular instance, County Planning did
determine that the development would have significant impacts, but they could be
mitigated. On a consistency matter, we must question why this much larger
development is not held to the same standards under SEPA.
Due to the above concerns, we would ask that this project be denied as proposed.
However, if this development is to be approved, we would ask that the Hearing
Examiner Committee condition the project in the following manner:
l. That the DNS for this project be withdrawn
2. That SEPA be remanded back to the Planning Department so that the potential
impacts of this development can be properly identified and mitigation proposed to
offset these impacts prior to final SEPA determination being reached. This should be
done through the applicant preparing a traffic study on this matter which conforms to
our attached requirements.
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this matter and should you have any
comments please feel free to contact Leonard Cash in our Planning Office at 324-6199.
Sincerely,
J.C. LENZI
Regional Administrator
64,*~
By: EONARD CASH, PE
Regional Planning Engineer
JCL
LCC:ja
Attachments
cc: Glenn Miles, Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Gary Kennaly, Spokane County Engineers
Pat Harper, Spokane County Engineers nc~
Jeff Stier, WSDOT Attorney General's Office ITEM # d
Project file PAGE r7OF r7
.
_ ,
. Curry Barker Road
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION
FOR 199 T.G.L.A. OF SHOPPING CENTER
DRIVEWAY VOLUMES
11i30\94
24 HOUR 7--9 AM PK HOUR 4-6 PM PK HOUR
TWO-WAY
.'0Lt1MF FNTER FXTT F,NTFR EXr I,:i'
~~'~.VERAGE W~;EriUAY 10865 154 90 509 50~
r7~BY TR.YPS 1~ 1 1 t, 1.
24 IIOUR l!'t: i iGtJI:
`I'WO-WAY
OL1.1`~ , I.L~ f :
1
14090 Cc} r3 89
S Lil'll U.~Y 6961 C,O 3 75
Ivute: A zero rate indic~ites no rate data availab7e
Sotzrce: Institute of Transportation Engineer:~
`I'.r_ ip Genernt ioli, 5th Edition, 1991.
, 4
~~,jE 3 oF
' • ,
. • ~
1985 HCM: UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS Page-1
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION -
AVERAGE RUNNING SPEED, MAJOR STREET.. 35 '
PEAK HOUR FACTOR .9
AREA POPULATION 150000
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET......... EB I-90 Ramns '
I
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET....... Barker Road ;
NAME OF TIIE ANALYST WSDOT Planning ~
i
DATE OF THE ANALYSIS (mm/dd/yy)...... 12-14-1994
TIME PERIOD ANALYZED PM Peak Hour
OTHER INFORMATION.... Conditions with Development
INTERSECTION TYPE AND CONTROL .
IPJTERSEC`I'ION TYPE: 4-LEG
MAJOR STREET DIRECTION: NORTH/SOUTH
CONTROL TYPE EASTBOUND: STOP SIGN
CONTROL TYPE WESTBOUND: STOP SIGN
TRAFr,IC VOLUMES
EB WB NB SB
LEFT 228 0 0 67
THRU 1 0 395 259
RIGHT 463 1 290 0
NUMBER OF LANES AND LANE USAGE
EB WB NB SB
LANES 2 1 1 1 ITEM # Qli
PAGE pF ~
.
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS Page-2
PERCENT RIGHT TURN CURB RADIUS (ft) ACCELERATION LANE
GRADE ANGLE FOR RIGHT TURNS FOR RIGHT TURNS
EASTBOUND 0.00 115 35 N
WESTBOUND 0.00 90 35 N
NORTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
SOUTHBOUND 0.00 90 20 N
VEHICLE COMPOSITION
o SU TRUCKS % COMBINATION
AND RV'S VEHICLES o MOTORCYCLES
EASTBOUND 1_ 2 0
WESTBOUND 0 0 0
NORTFIBOUND 1 2 0
SOUTHBOUND 1 2 0
CRITICAL GAPS
TABULAR VALUES ADJUSTED SIGHT DIST. FINAL
(Table 10-2) VALUE ADJUSTMENT CRITICAL GAP
MINOR RTGHTS
EB 5.70 5.70 0.00 5.70
WB 5.70 5.70 0.00 5.70
NiAJOR LF,FTS
SB 5.10 5.10 0.00 5.10
NB 5.10 5.10 0.00 5.10
MINOR TIiROUGHS
EB 6.30 6.30 0.00 6.30
WB 6.30 6.30 0.00 6.30
MINOR LEFTS
EB 6.80 6.80 0.00 6.80
WB 6.80 6.80 0.00 6.80
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... EB I-90 Ramps
NAME OF THE NOkTH/ SOU'I'H ST1<EET Barker Road
DATE AND TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12-14--1994 ; PM
OTHER INFORMATION.... Conditions with Development pAGE ~
. ,
CAPACITY AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE Page-3
POTEN- ACTUAL
FLOW- TIAL MOVEMENT SHARED RESERVE
RATE CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY CAPACITY
MOVEMENT v(pcph) c(pcph) c(pcph) c(pcph) c= c - v LOS
p M SH R SH
MINOR STREET
EB LEFT 260 172 155 > 155 155 >-106 -105 >F F
THROUGH 1 208 187 > 187 > 186 > D
RIGHT 527 769 769 769 242 C
MINOR STREET
WB LEFT 0 101 36 > 36 > 36 > E
THROUGH 0 262 236 > 525 236 > 524 236 >A C
RIGHT 1 525 525 > 525 >524 > A
MAJOR STREET
SB LEFT 76 510 510 510 434 A
NB LEFT 0 882 882 882 882 A
IDENTIFYING INFORMATIUN
NAME OF THE EAST/WEST STREET...... EB I-90 Ramps
NAME OF THE NORTH/SOUTH STREET.... Barker Road
DATE ANn TIME OF THE ANALYSIS..... 12-14-1934 ; PIA Peak Iiour
OTHER INFOP.MATI0:1.... Conditions with nevelopment
ITEM # 05- hu.~.
PAGE & OF 7
. ,
TRAFFIC STUDY REQUIREMENTS
1. Contents of the traffic study
A- Site Map (illustrating the complete circulation system)
B- Vicinity Map(s) (illtistrating traffic distribution)
C - Existing Transportation Conditions
1- Existing Average Daiiy Traffic
2- Existing AM & PM Peak Hour Level of Sei-vice
3- Existing AM & PM Peak Hour Turning Movemejits
D- Projected Transportatian Conditions With This Development.
1- Projected Average Daily Traffic
2- Projected AM & PM Peak Houi- Level of Seivice
3- Projected AM & PM Peak Hour Turning Movements
Nate: This analysis should include traffic to be generated by other
developments ill tlle same viciiiity that have already been
approved but not yet built.
E - I'.ecommeilded Mitigating Measures
l- Mitigating Measures sufficient to maintain existing Level of
Service
2- lf the existing Level of Seivice can not be maintained a
jtistification should be included
Note: The 1TE (Institute of Transpotlation Engiileers) Trir
Generation Maiiual (Stll Edition) should be used as a vases to
comptite trip generation rates of tlle proposed developments.
II. That the applicant agree to fund and construct die necessaty
initigating measures as outlined in the above traffic study. These
lnitigating measures must be approved by both WSDOT atld
Spokane County Eiigineers prior to the issuance of any building
permits for tlhis property.
III. Due to the ti-ip genel-ation potential, any fui-ther development other
than what is proposed will require further review by WSDOT to
assure additional trips are safely accommodated.
ITEM # 05-
PAGE 7 OF " /
. x i
~
Washington State Eastern Region
Department of TNansportation 2714 N. Mayfair Street
Sid Morrison Spokane, WA 99207-2090
Secrelary of TranspOrtation (509) 324-60,00
December 2, 1994 ,
Mr. Wallis Hubbard
Director, Spokane County Planning
1026 W Broadway Ave ~ . /
~
Spokane, WA 99260-0240 Re: Donwood Inc. Change of Conditions
I-90/Barker Road
Dear Mr. Hubbard: ,
Thank you for the opportunity for respond to the above referenced DNS. The
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has the following
comments:
WSDOT is extremely concerned about the issuance of a DNS for this proposed
development. Due to the fact that no particular land uses have been specified, and that
the site plan submitted is not specific, there is insufficient information to comment on
the exact impacts this development will have. Because the applicant has asked for all
those allowed in the B-3 commercial zone, we must analyze this propert_y at its highest
and best use for our SEPA comments.
Based on the site plan submitted, WSDOT has determined that the highest and best Use
for this property will be a 199,000 square foot shopping center. This developmerit
would have very significant adverse impacts on the local transportation networ6; I
According to the ITE Trip Generation Manual, this development would generate nearly ,
11,000 vehicle trips per day (see attached). Based on this information it is probable
that development of this project could have the following impacts:
1. Broadway Road, which fronts this site, is a substandard, very narrow two-lane
frontage road, incapable of carrying traffic demands of this size. As identified
in the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, this development would require
this frontage road to be upgraded to a four-lane minor arterial. Until recently,
this frontage road has carried less that 100 trips per day. The addition of thi ~
traffic to this frontage road is a probable significant impact.
2. The Barker Road/I-90 interchange is currently nearing capacity. This fact is
further documented in the Turtle Creek Traffic Study conducted by Inland
Pacific Engineering in August of this year. The addition of nearly 1,000
additional PM peak hour trips will cause this interchange to fail as a direct
result of this development. This could also pose a significant safety hazard as
ITEM # J
PAGE I OF
~
1 - •
the ramp terminals are currently unsignalized and drivers would be forced tc)
accept insufficient gaps to complete turning movements at the interchange ranif)
terminals. In addition, severe congestion on the ramps and the possibility ot
traffic backing up onto mainline I-90 may be expected. This would be an
unacceptahle compromise to the safetv and capacitv of the transPortation
. . . . . . . ~ . .
_i. I~a(~hC1. ICUdU 111 "l(l~l; II1LC[~Il~i(lbl; ~l~iilll}' ~UIIcIIkij~~ I5 d tWC)-lallc; i.0a(14vdy ~vlll~ft
carries approximately 7,000 vehicles per day. The addition of this development
alone would more than double the existing traffic. Barker Road at the
interchange area is unable to safely accommodate this traffic, due to the limited ~
sight distance and the turning vehicles present at the intersections. In addition
the proximity of the Broadway service road to the I-90 interchange greatly
limits the effective capacity of Barker and Broadway roads to accommodate
large increases in vehicle traffic, which this development will cause.
4. In the past year, WSDOT and Spokane County have recognized the capacity
limitations that exist in the Barker Road interchange vicinity. As a result of
this, mitigation has been required of the Turtle Creek development (101 single
family lots) through an MDNS. Riverway Villa (37 single family lots) has also
been required to mitigate its impacts in this area. Based on prior environmental
determinations of projects of a much lesser magnitude in this area, the issuance
of this DNS is inappropriate, given Spokane County's position on other
development in the area.
5. Air quality conformity is another issue that has not been addressed. This area is
inside the carbon monoxide non-attainment area and is subject to air quality
conformity regulations. The degradation of air quality that will result from the
traffic generation of this development and increased delay has not been
addressed. This is a probable significant impact.
Given the probable significant adverse impacts this development would have on the
transporta.tion system, along with air quality issues, which have not been addressed in
the current checklist, WSDOT requests that Spokane County Planning withdraw
the DNS for this project. We further request that the applicant undertake a traffic
study to identify and mitigate the probable impacts this project will have and that this
traffic study be reviewed by WSDOT and Spokane County Engineers prior to a SEPA
determination being made.
ON # ~y
PAGE OF ~
,
~ i
w
Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this matter and should you have any
comments please feel free to contact Leonard Cash in our planning office at 324-6199.
Sincerely,
J.C. LEN71
Regional Adillinisti-atoi,
By: LEONARD CASH, PE
Regional Planning Engineer
JCL
LCC:ja
cc:
Glenn Miles, Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Gary Kennaly, Spokane County Engineers
Pat Harper, Spokane County Engineers
Project file
ITEM #
PAGE 3 OF ^f
r
~
Curry Barker Road
SUMMARY OF AVERAGE VEHICLE TRIP GENER.ATION
FOR 199 T.G.L.A. OF SHOPPING CFNTER
DRIVEWAY VOLUMES
11\30\94
24 HOUR 7-9 AM PK HOUR 4-6 PM PK HOUR
TWO-WAY
N,?(1T TT?~rr F?,1mFR FyTm ~~.rr~,rr) r~~Tm
:1>VER1-1GL WEEKUtir iuci0 5 154 90 509 509
PASS-BY TRIPS 181 181
24 HOUR PEAK HOUR
TWO-WAY
VOLUME ENTER EXIT
SATURDAY 14090 689 689
SUNDAY 6961 360 375
Note: A zero rate indicates no rate data available
Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers
Trip Generation, 5th Edition, 1991.
PAGE J UF ~
~
TO' ' Spokaae County Planning Departr Zomng Adjuster Heanng
.
FRONL Spokane Couaty ULlities ,w•
DATE 12/s/gt
svBJ Z C - / 349 4 - 7(o DEC 0 71994
Reconumoaaeions are as circlea:
SPOKANE COUNTY
R►ATER SERVICE pLANNIN6 D6PAR7MENT
1) Aay water service for this pro}cd ahall be provided m accordance wdh the CoordmaLod Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended
2) Located witlun the Crihcal Water SuPply Sernce Area but not wntlua any purveyos's distnct. May be semced by an wdividuat well owned and
operatiod bY the lot owner
3) Water scrnoe as approved by the Spokane County Health District aad/or Washington State Dcpartment of Socul and Health Sernoes
SEWER SERVICE
1) Sevverage facilhhes are not affecbod by this proposal therefa+e no recAmmendaUon
2) T6ere are no nxommendahons concenung the metfiod of sevvage disposal as the pco1ect is outside of the 201 sewer study area.
3) Purauant to the Board of County Comrmsmornrs R,esdution No 80-0418, the use of on-srte sewer disposal systems is hereby authorzed This
audKmzabw m aoxhhoned m oomphanoe wah all niles and regulahons of the Spokane Couaty Health Dmtnct aad is further condihoned and subgect
to spemSc apphcahon approval and issuance of permrts by the Heatt6 Distnct
~ / A covenant agr+eement shall be mgned stating. The Owner(s) or Successor(s) m uiterest agree to authonze dte County
to place ttw name(s) an a poMm far the fornoan of a ULID by pebbon method putsuant to RCW 36 94 w►hech ttte pehhon wcludes the Oovner(s)
prcputy snd fucther not tD objeCt bY sqpmS of8 protut PoMm vgmnst the formation of a ULID by resolution aethod pwauant to RCW 36 94 wtuch
wcludes the Owner(s) Prqedy PROVIDED, ttus condiUon shall not prolubit the Owner(s) or Successor(s) 5+om objection to any ass~.vnent(s)
ondmpmnMty as a remlt af maprove~nents c~illed for m oonjwchon vvith the formahon of a ULID by erther pehtion or resoiuhon undec RCW 36 94
S) AnY wwmW semoe for ttns paoJect shall be provided m accordance with the Comprehensive Wastewater Management Pian for Spokane County,
as arnended
6) Eech new dwellhng umt shall be double plwnbed for connechon to future area-vvide col[echon systems
7) Sewer easement for pnvate connechon, shaU be shown oa the fac:e of the plat as "Sewer and Uhtities Easement"
8) A dry wuver c,onnechon to the future area -vnde PubLo Sewer System is to be constructed
(See Item # 12)
~ A wet (hve) sewer connection to ttte exumng area wtde Pubhc Sewer System is to be constructed Sewer connechon pennd is reqwred
(See Item # 12)
10) Pubhc Sacutary Sewer easement shall be showa on the faoe of the ptat and the dedicahon shaU state
"The perpetual [e°xclusive]easement grantod to Spokaae County, its' sucoewors and assigna is for the sole purpose of constructing,
mstalLnB, oWatinB, maintamm6, mPm6, altezuig, replmng, renovmg, and all other uses or pwpose.s wWch are or may be related to a sewer
sysbem SPokim Couutj►, di mooessme aud $smgns at all tims herenafter, at their own oost and expense, may r+emove all crops, brush, grass or treo
that my mterfere wdh die construchng, mstaWng,
oposun6, maintaining, mpm8. altenn5., mPlacmg, removuig and all other uses or puiposes which
are may be related to a sewer sysbem
The grantoa(s) re=ves Oe ngM to use and enjoy thai properiy which is the subject of dua easement for purposes wluch will not wterf'ere
vinth the Countys fuU eajoyment of the nghte hereby
8mnted, Pwvided, the Orantm(s) shsll not erect or canshuct any buildmg or other structure or dnll
on the easement, or dmuniBh or substantalty add to the ground cover over the easement
The easement descnbed hereinabove is to and shatl run vwth the land "
11) App4caut is reqwrod to mgn a Sewer Connechon Agreement pnor to isauance of permd to connect.
~ Applicant shallll submrt expressly to Spokane County Utihties Department "under separate cover", aily those ptan sheets shovvmg wwer plans and
~ for pubhc Sewer nnections for rewew and approval by UhLtm Department pnor
to issuance of pemut to connect
~ Secturty sloll 6e depoabod wdh th+e iJbMes Departrnent for oonshuchon of pubhc facihb a
14) Ttus proJect hes withn the Sewec Service Arca. Apphcant is requu+ed to notify them of tho proposal
15) Arrangemeats for payrnents of adftonal sewer charges must be tnade for pnor to issuance of wwer conneabon
Permit-
PundM The Board of County Commussioners is ~n the praoess of evaluahng whether PubLc Scwer should be eutended a~de tl~e 15 year construchon
aad ffie terms of connechon/extension of public sewer if aUowed
rrEm# d3
~
PAGE I 4F,.j
s
(]FF I CE OF THE COUNTY ENG I NEF R
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASH I NGTON
De cember 1, 1994
Toe Spokane County Planning Department (Cur-rent Planning
Administrator)
IN
.
From: Spokane County EnginPer' S Department ~
Subject: Conditions of Approval Zone Chanqe Noa ZE 139A_76
App 1 i cants Name Donwood_ I nc.,
Se ction 17, Townsh i p ~5 N, Ranqe -45 EWhI
rea _Zoning
The followinq "Conditsn-ns of Approval" for the above referenced zone
change are yubma.tted tv the Spokane Coianty Hearinq lExaminer Committee
fnr inclusion in the "Planninq Report" and "Findinqs and Orcier" of
the pijblic heara.nq scheduled December_15, 1994p
E36A Prior to issuanee eDfi a buildinq permit or at the request of the
County Enqineer in conjunction with a County Road Project/Road
Improvement Distriet, whichever action comes fa.rst:
E36 Applicant sha11 dedicate 60 feet from Broadway south to Spraque
Avenue fior riqht of way purposes.
E38 App 1 a. cant shra 11 derJ i ca te an app 1 x. cab le rad ius on Broadway_~v_enue
and Hodges_Roadd
Prior to release Ufi a buildinq permit or use of the property as
proposed s
E44 Access permits for approaches to the County Road System shall be
obtained from the Co+anty Enqineer.
E43 Applicant sha1 submit for approva1 by the Spokane County
Enqineer road, drainaqe and access plans.
E44 The applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County
Enqiiieer and the Spokane County Health District a detailed
combined on-site sewaqe system plan and surface water disposal
plan f-Dr the entire project or portion thereof if the
cievelupment xs phasedd
ITEM # ~ a
PAGE OF "X ,m
r `
i
t ~
pd cie 2
E45 A parking plan and traffic ca.rcuZatirin plan shall be s+.abmitted
and approved by the Spokane County Enqineere The design,
location and arrangement of parkinq sta].1s shal be in
accordance with standard enqineering practiceso Pavinq or
sEar-facing as approved by the COlAnty Engineer will be requa.red
fior any portion of the project wha.ch is to be occEapied +ar
tr-aveled by vehicles
E46 To construct tl~~ roadway itnprovements stated herein, the
app]. i cant mayt with tF,e approval of the ~ounty Engineer, ,3oin .xn
and tae wi1linq to participate in any petitaoDn or resolutzon
which purpi:,se is the formatit,n of a Road Improve,ment Distra.ct
t R I Dx f4r said improvement purs+aant to RCW 3E. 88, as amended A
Spukane County wa.ll not parta.cipate in the cost of these
improvernents4 This provision is applicab].e tc. that Rortion ofi
Broadway Avenue to be realigned tr., and a.ncliadinq Barker Road.
E47 As an a].ternative method of constructing the road improvements
stated her-einp the applicant may, with the approva1 ~--)f the
County Enqineer, accompls.sh the road xmprovements stated herein
by joininq and parta.cipating in ~County ~~~~ad Project (CRF') to
the extent ---)f th~ ~equired impr-ovementb 5pokane County will not
participate in the cost of these improvementso This prFovisa.on
is appla cable to that porticinof Ecroadway Awenue to be real igned
to and including Bark;er Road.
E48 The construc tion aif the roadway improvements stated herexn shal l
be ~comp 1 ished as apprl:,ved by the 5pokane C,nunty Cngineera
F50 T'he County Engineer has desiqnated Typical Roadway Sectzon
Number Qne,L_L2ca1_Access standard for- the irnpr-Dvement of Modges
Road whi th a.s adaacent to tl-►e proposed development. This wiI 1
reqiaa.re the additx.on of approximately j~ fto F~f asphalt. Curk~.~r~q
and sidewalk m~_~st aIso ue c~~nstr~~cted. _
E50 The County Engineer has desiqnated Typica1 F~~~adway Section
Number Onej_1-2cal~Access standard for the improvement ~~f
Broadway_+Ayenue which x.s adja[ent to the proposed development.
This wil requir-e the adda.tion of waryinq amounts taf asphalt
alonq the frontaqe of the developmento Curbxng and sidewa1E- must
aIso be constructedn
E51 AI Z requxred improvements shal 1 conform to the current State of
Washinqton Standard Specificata.ons for Road and Bradge
construction and ottter applicab3e coi_tnty standards andlor
adopted resol►ations pertaining pertaininq to Road StadTMf#s-and--t99
Stormwater Mariaqement in effect at the 1ate of constr'..~ti. ont ~ QF
i.~n~.ess ~~therwsse apRroved by the County Engineer~.
. ~
. V
pa ge 3
E55 Roadway standards9 typical roadway sectiiDns and drainaqe plan
requirements are found in 5pokane Board uf County C>>mmissioners
resolution 80-159: as amended and are applicable to this
proposal p
E58 IVo constru«tion work is to be performed within the existing or
priDposed riqht of way until a permit has been issued by the
County Znqineerp Ai l wor~ within the public road r-ight of way is
SlAi3aer_t to inspectio-in and approval by the County Engineer.
E59 All required construction withx.n the existinq or proposed public
riQht of way is to be completed prior to the release of a
bux.lding permit or a bond in an amount estimated by the County
Enqineer to cuver the cost of construction or impriDvements shall
be filed with the County Engineere
E59 App3ican't shall sign and record Spok.ane County Notice to the
Public No. 6 which specifies the fUllowinq:
The owner (s) or 5utcessor ts) in iiiterest agree t~~
authoriZe the County to place their namefsaon a petition foDr
the formation of aRoad Improvement DistrLct (RID ) by the
petition methad pursuant to Chapter 36.88 RCW, which pQtition
includes the uwner (s) property. Ir a RTD is formed by ezther the
petition or resolution method, as provided for in Chapter 36d88
RCW, the owner (s) ar successor (s) further agree: (1) that the
x.mprovement or ,:onstruction contemplated wathin the proposed RID
is feasible, that the benefits to be deraved from the
formati~~n of the RYD by the property a.nc 1uded therein, toqether
with the amount of any County participation, exceeds the cost
and expense of formation of the RID. and that the property
within the proposed RID is sufficiently developed. Provided,
further, the owner (s) or successor (s) shal lretain the right, as
author ized under RCW 36. 88. 0"30, to obje c t to any assessment on
the property as a result of the improvements callzd for in
conjunrtion with the formation of the RID by either petitiiDn i-ir
resol<<tion metfiod under Chapter 36.88 RCW. This provision is
appla.cable to that porti>>n of Broadway Avernae to be realiqned to
and including Barter Roade ~n
'T`A" # V-L*
^ - OF
E90 There may exist utilities, ea.ther underground or overneadp -
affecting the subject property, including property to be
dedicated or set aside for future aCquisi tion. Spokane County
assumes no financsal obl iqation for ad justments or relocatioDn
reqarding these utilities. Applicant shiDuld check with the
applicable utility purveyor and the Spokane County Enqineer to
determine wtrether applicant or the iatility is responsible for
Y •
L ~ q
pa ge 4
adjustment iar relocation costs and to rnake arrangements for any
necessary worko
Special Conditions:
This chanqe of conditions is based on an oriqinal approval of of ZE
139-76. It would appear that the applicant has ~.~pproval of a
baseline trip qeneration of approximatly 1300 trips per day on the
existing --ipprowal o Since this reqiaest is hased .^n any lAse on
approxirnately 200,000 square feet of bui Iding, Spokane Cuunty
Enqineering wCOUld reqLtire this applicant at time cif buildinq permit
to demonstrate through trip qeneration analysis that trip qeneration
was not qreater than the oriqinal baseline of 1300 tr-ips. Once the
threshold of 1300 trips ia broE,en the applicant sha11 provx.de a full
traffic analysis includinq mitiqatinq mearures pra.or to any further
buildinp permits being issued. This analysis would 5e done under the
SEPR review process, this r-equirement to be implemented by the
SpuPane County Builda.nq Official and reva.ewed also by the Department
of Transportation.
The applicant shall comply also with a11 conditions of appr'oval ofi
thp origa.nal ZF 139-76.
If th+e Broadway realignment is ncit ci:rmpleted thri.:iuqh an RID the
applicant sholAld be aware that Droadway Auenue coi-ild be right-
intriqht-out onlyo
r~ # C9 a
PAGE '4 OF ~
SPnK.ANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
~
' « • E [RONMENTAL HEALTH DIVI: 1
Inter-office Communication
DATE: November 22, 1994
TO: Stacy Bjordahl, Planner R. Spokane County Planning Depardnent
k&a"WJI~
FROM: Donald T. Lynch, EHS II- EHD, SCHD SUBJEGT: Proposed Zone Change of Conditions: ZE-139A-76 Donwood East RF'~~IVED
DEC 0 21994
1. References. SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNINCi DEPARTMENT
a. Map of subject, scale 1" = 200', by Appucant, undated, received by this office November 18,
1994.
b. Reconnaissance GeoloEic Map of the West Half of the Spokane Quadrangle. Waslunaton and
Idaho, Allan B. Griggs, 1966.
c. Soil Survev. Svokane Countv. Washington, Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A., March, 1968.
d. Spoka.ne County, Washington. Engtneering Intenpretations, Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A.,
August, 1974.
e. Spokane Countv Rules and Reeulations for Sewaee Disposal Svstems, March 1, 1985, (as
amended July 9, 1990).
f. Logs of water wells in Range 45E, Townslup 25N, Sections 8, 162 17, 18, and 20.
g. Map: Greenacres Quadrangle, U.S.G.S., 1973, and Spokane N.E., U.S.G.S., 1973.
2. Findmgs:
a. This project lies over the Spokane-Rathdrum Aquifer.
b. The project is within Critical Water Supply Seivice Area #3 and within the service area of
Consolidated Irrigation District. Water supply will be a public system.
c. The project is inside the Spokane County Comprehensive Wastewater Management Area,
inside the General Sewer Service Area, and inside the Prionty Sewer Seivice Area
recommended in the '201' Study. The method of sewage disposal is subject to approval of the
Director of Utilities, Spokane County, pursuant to County Resolution 80.0418 adopted March
24, 1980. The topography and soils in the area are generally suitable for use of individual on-
site sewage disposal systems.
d. The project lies in a relatively flat area east of Barker Road and south of Broadway Avenue.
Local drainageways are uisignificant.
rgm # 91
PAGE oF a
Proposed Zone Change: ZE-139.A-71; Donwoad East
Page 2 - ti
e. Surfa+ce soils are classed by the U.S. Soil Consenration Service as Garrison gravelly loam with
Q% to S% slopes. They have a septie tank filter field limitation of shght. There is also possible
contaminativn of groundwater.
f. Geologically, the soils are glaciofluvial depvsits. These geological structures generally yield
moderate to very large amounts of water. Data from wells in the area referenced in section 1f
shaws they are from 100' to 120' deep and have static water levels varying from SZ' to 90' below
the surface. The Consolidated Irngation has indicated that Yt can supply domestic use water for
the project upon completian of agreements with the proponent.
3. Required {mandatory} Conditions If Approved:
a. Sewage disposal method shall be as authorized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane County.
b. Water seivilce shall be coordinated thraugh the Director of Utilities, Spokane County.
c. Water sexvice shall be by an existing pubhe water supply when approved by the Regional
Engineer (SpoLane), State Department a►f Health
d. A pubhc sewer system will be made available for the project and individual service will be
provided to eaeb lot priar to sale. Use of individual on-site sewage disposal systems shall not
be authorzzed.
4. Recommended Cvnditions of Approval:
a. Use of private wells and water systems is prohibited.
c: Director of Utilities, Spakane County
c: Sponsor: Donwood, Inc.
502 North Glenn Rd.
Spokane, WA 99206
1ANDUSE6.LTRn2S/mW
mm # cD I
1
PAGE 0 OF
- - ,r - - -
5094546828 SCHPCA 336 F03 nEC 02 '94 14. 51
~ -
~w y ~
SPOKANE COUi~TY
It(R-AIR AIR POILUTION
~Fb~ K A N E CONTIiOI AUTHORiTY
.
WFST 1109 COlLEGF, 5UITE 403 • SPQKANE, WA 99201 •(Spg) 456-4727 Fax (509) 4594828
Date: December 2, 1994
To: Stacy Bjordahl
Spokane County Plannin Department
From: Kelle R. Vigeland \t _
Spokang County Air Pollution Control Authority
Re: SCAPCA CQIUIMENTS REGARDItVG :
zE-1 a9&-Z6
Fo(towing is a list of concernsfissues that, at a minimum, need to be addressed for this project.
SCAPCA encourages proponents to contact their affices at 1101 1Nesx College► Spokane, WA
99201 foP additrQnal information
All air pollution regulations must be met.
~ Air pollution regulations require that dust emissions during demolitian, construction and
excavation projects ba eontrolled. 1"his may require the use of water sprays, tarps,
sprinklers or suspension of aCtivity durfn9 certain weather conditlons. Haul roads should
be fireeted and emrssions from the transfer of earthen matenai must be controlled as uveli
as emissions from aII other construction related activities
~ SCAPCA strongly recommends that ali travelled surfaces (i.e., ingeess, e8ress, parking
areas, access roads) be paved and kapt clean to minimize dust emissions
~ Measuras must be taken to avoid the dsposjtiQn of dirt and mud from unpaved surfaCes
onto paved surfaces If traCking or spills occur on peved surfaces, measures must be
taken imrnediately to cleen these surfaces.
X" 3CAPCA Reguletion I, ArticJe V requlres that a Notice of Canstruction and Applicatron for
Approval be subm(tted to and approved by our Agency pr,or to fihe con$truCtion,
installation pr establishment pf ar► air poUution source. This inCludes any fuel fired
equipmen# rated at greater than 400,000 STIJlhour (boilers, hot water heaters, ovens,
etc It also includeS paint booths, and other sources of air contaminants.
Debns generated as a result of this project must be disposed of by means other than
burning fi.e , construction waste, e#c...?.
IM # QFU ,
PACE 1 QFL9"
t. 6y - ^tr'. t1ik# P'vwt,
~
' 509459t~828 SCAPCA 33o Pl'O DEC 02 `94 14 51
,
Chepter 173-49+1 WAC requires thet all new gasotine dispensing facilities with total
stor'clg8 capacifiy of 10,400 gall'ons or' mor,e Fmust install and use Stsge I vapor recovery
equipmQnt. F'rior t,o~the, instellation of thQ storage tanks and vapor,control equipment,a
Npfice of G_onstruction, must be filed, with and, appr4ved by SCAPCA.
yAli solid fuel burning daviees twood stoves, pelle# stoves, etc...,y must compty with locai,
z -
state, $nd federal rule$ and reg,ulationS
Failure t4 meet SCAF'CA ragulations, may result in dsleys, closure an'd civil end/or crim"inal
sanctions.
ZE=139A-76
Dece►mbez 20 1994
Page 2
U-
Pl~~ ~ OF,
_
~
~
?
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Dafe: October 26, 1994
Depart=ent; SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT ~L
Deparnnent Contact Person: S teven P. Holderby, R. S.
Action: Change of Conditions for Existing B-3 Zone (Donwood, Inc. )
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW MEETIIVG' 10 /26 /94
from 2:130 3: oo aLdie Planning Deoartment
Note:
The following information is to provide the proposal sponsor with primary agency
comments ta assist the sponsor and aid the proc:essing of public hearing items heard before
the Hearing Examiner Coaunittee. The following information dm not prnvide a complete
or binding final review of the proposal. This will occur only aftes the proposal is accepted
and placed on the Pubhc Heaiing Agenda. The acceptance of the a.pplication and
schedulinLr of the apnlicadon on the Public Hearing Agenda is the primary function of this
meeting. A secondary function of this meeang is tro provide a pLehminarv review of the
aRplicacion. This will provide a forum for the sponsor and other departments of what to
expect as standand development condidons and design r+ecomniendations
The comments received are based on a preliminary review of the applicadon form and site
plan by the Departments and Agencies which have been circulated the information (not all
agencies,/departments have been contacted--only those who have been deternuned to have
pnmary inierest.
1. a. Does the application (or can the development) meet requuements of your
agency to be placed on the Pubhc Hearing Agenda? [0 YES ❑ NO
b. If no, what is laclang?
c. To schedule the next public heanng, a complete application must be received
no later than or before the agenda is full _
The next public heanng is
2 After a nrelirrunarv review of the apnlication what comments do you have, or what
recommended "Conditions of Approval" would be required of the development?
,_$eP attached
~'A # f 0/
PAGE I OF~
' l
SPOfCA'111E COUIVMHEALTH D/STR/CT
)COND/T/ONS
'a. Sewage disposal method shall,be as authorized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane County.
,b. Water service shall be coordinated througti the -Duector of Utilities, Spokane County.
, c. Water service, shall,be by an existing pubhc water supply when> approved by the Regional
Engineer i (Spokane), State Department, of Health.
4
, d. A,pubhc, sewer system mill..be made, available for the project, and individual service will'be
provided`to each'lotpnor to sale. Use ofindavidual:on-sife sewage, disposal systems, shall not
`be authorized.
e: Use of privatey wells and water systems is, prohibited.
rl
~
PAGE ~ OF a
,
t A
.
~ w
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANIVING DEPARTMENT
Date: /D /ex 4; AF#
- Department_ L~~'• ~ -e ~
Department Contact Person: Jmze ~
ACti01f: -11 ..r c.•O; v oj l/q C c(n.R.-~,c ai~o~Q..
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW MEETNG:
from to at the PlanninQ Denartment
1Y4~ .
The following infonmation is to provide the proposal sponsor with primary agency
comments to assist the sponsor and aid the processing of public hearing items heard before
the Hearing Examiner Committee. The following infonmation does not provide a complete
or binding fiaal review of the proposal. This will occur oaly after the proposal is accepted
and placed on the Public Hearmg Agenda. The accatance of the annli cation and
scheduling of the an lication on the Public He,aring Agenda is the pnmary function of ttus
meeting. A secondary functton of this meeting is to provrde a=limiqaMreview of the
agWication. This will provide a forum for the sponsor and other departments of what to
expect as standand development conditions and design recommendations.
The comments received are based on a prelimmary review of the application form and site
plan by the Departments and Agencies which have been circulated the information (not all
agencies,/departments have been contacted--only those who have been detennined to have
primary interest.
1. a. Does the application (or can the development) meet requirements to be placed
on the Public Hearing Agenda? ~ YES ❑ NO
b. If no, what is lacking?
c. To schedule the next public heanug, a complete application must be received
no later than or before the agenda is full.
The next public hearmg is a
2. Aftier a vreliminaiv review of the atmlication what "Condittons of Approval" would
be requmd of the developmeat? (Attach condiaoas if necessarY)
ffBA # ~ .
PAGE t OF ~
TO: Bpokane Connty Bnilding Codes
FxoM: spokan. county vtUities /i/o,
DaTE: l%Ofy
SUBJ: Don! i✓00 O 1IJ . G~ A- ~ e o~ C o~'+ G'~• v~~ ITE~A # IV
R,eoommendatione are ae oircled: PAGE ~ OF
•
WATER SERVICE
~
i) Any water Bervice for this projeot ehall be provided in aaoordanoe with the Coordinsted Water Byretsm Plsn for
Spokaae Connty, ae smended.
Looated within tLe Critioal Watsr Bnpply Bervioe Area bnt not within say pnrveyor•s dieErlot. May be eerviced
by an indivldnal well owned and opersted by the lot owner.
3) Water eervice ee approved by the 9pokane County Health Distriot snd/or We$hington Btste Department of Booial
and Health 8ervices.
SEWEA SEAOICE
i.) 8ewerage faoilitiee are not affeoted by tliie propossl therefore no recommendstion.
a.) There are no reoommendations oonoerning the methocl of sewsge diepossl ae the projevt is outside of the SOi
seaer stncly area.
9.) Pnrenant to the Board of Connty Commieeionere Resolntion No. 80-0418, the uee of on-eite sewer dlepossl
eyetsme Ie hereby authorised. This authorizstion !e oonditioned in oomplisaoe with sll rnles and regulstione of
the 8pokane Connty 8ealth Dietriot and ie fnrther conditioned and eubjeot to speoiSo spplioation approval snd
ieenance of perm.its by the Health Dfetriot.
4.) A aovenan,t sgreement ehall be eigned etsting: The Owner(s) or Buaoeesor(s) in
intereet agree to authorise the County to pleae their name(s) on s petitioa for the formstion of a ULID by petition
method pnreuant to RCW 88.84 ovhioh the petition inolndes the Owner(e) property and lurther not to objeot by
eigning of s proteet petition against the formstion of s IILID by resolntion method pnrensnt to RCW 88.94 whioh
inolades the Owner(e) property. PR,OVIDED, thie oondition ehall not prohibit the Owner(e) or 8uooeeeor(s) llrom
obf eotion to aay asseeement(e) on the property ae s result of improvements oalled for ia oonjnnotioa with the
iormation of s IILID by either petition or resolution nnder RCW 86.94.
8.) Any eewersge servioe for this projeot shall be provided in aooordeaoe with the Compreheneive Waetewater
Mansgement Plaa tor Bpokane County, as amended.
8.) Eaoh new dwelling unit she11 be double plumbed !or conneotion to tuture erearwide colleotion eyeteme.
7.) 8ewer easement ior private oonneotion, ehsll be ehown on the ie,oe of tLe plst ae "Bewer and IItilltiee Easement".
8.) A dry sewer oonneotion to tLe iutnre srea-wide Pnblio Sewer Systsm is to be oonetrnoted.
(See Itsm #i2)
Awet (live) sewer oonneolion to !he exieting area wide Pablio 8ewer 8ystem fe to be oonetraotsd. 8ewer
oonneotion permit is required.
(8ee Item # 12)
10) Pnbllo 8anitsry Aewer eaeement shall be shown on the iaae of the plat ead the dedioation eLall etate:
"The perpetusl jesolueive]essement granted to Bpokane Conaty. its' enooeseore and aeeigns is for the eole
Pnrpose of conetrnottng, instslling, operating, matataining, repairing, altering, replaoing, removing, snd all
other nses or pnrposee ahioh are or ma,y be related to a sewer eyetsm. 8poksne County, its' sncceeaore snd
aesigae at all timee hereinafter, at their own ooet aad expense. msy remove all orops, bruah. graes or trees that
my interfere a►ith the oonetrnoting, inetalling,
operating, matataining. repatring. altsring, replsoing, removing and s11 other ueee or purposea whioh
' are may be related to s sevver eyetem.
The grantor(e) reserves the rlght to use and enioy tbat property whioh is the subieot of tLls easement for
pnrposes whioh will not iatertere with the County's itiill enjoyment of the rights hereby
granfsd; provided, the (3rantor(e) ehall not ereot or conetrnot auy bnilding or other etrnotnre or drill
on the easement, or diminfeh or substsntislW add to the ground oover over the eaeement.
The eaeement desoribed hereinabove ie to snd ehall rnn with the land."
AOVT-lt
i i. Applioant ie reqnired to eign s 8ewer Conneotion Agreement prior to iesnsnoe of permit to oonneot.
~ Applioant shall snbmit espreaely t,o Bpokane County Ufilities Departmen! "under eepsrste cover", only those plsn
eheete ehowing sewer plsne snd speoiSostions for : Pnbllo 8ewer /
ooaneotione for review sad spproval by Utilitiee Department prior to iseasnce of permit to oonneot.
tA~
19. 8eonrity eLsll be depoeitsd witL the Utllities Depsrtment for oonstrnotion of pnbllc isoilitiea/ dou
n.
14.) TLie prvjeot lieg aithin the 8ewer Servioe Area. Applloan! is required to noti$r them of tLie
propoeal.
16.) Arraagements ior paymente of additionsl eewer ohsrges mnet be made for prior to iesusnce of sewer oonneotion
permit.
e.) The Board of Conaty Commieaioaere ie ia the procees of evalnsting whether Pnblio 8►ewer ahonld be eutsaded
outeide the 15 yesr oonetravt3oa bonadary and the tsrme of conneotion/extsnsion of pnblio eewer if ellowed.
~
~
S C O U N T Y
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGNEER ~ A DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Ronald C. Hormann, P.E., County Engineer Dennis M. Scott, P.E., Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: JOHN W. PEDERS AND STACY B40RDAHL, PLANNING DEPT.
FROM: BRENDA D KATHERIN#bMLER, STORMWATER
DATE: OCTOBER 25, 1994
SUBJECT: DONWOOD INC., CHANGE OF CONDITIONS TO AN EXISTING
REGIONAL BUSINESS (B-3) ZONE.
The information received for this proposal was sketchy, making our review difficult. In
the future we would appreciate more specifics.
During SEPA review, the applicant will need to address:
1) Mitigation of any possible impacts to public drainage facilities from the project.
2) Erosion potential (the applicant needs to be aware that an erosion control plan may
be needed to safeguard drainage facilities during construction activities).
3) How stormwater will be treated for water quality.
4) The applicant needs to address means of disposing of the drainage associated with
any impervious surfaces and lots without impacting public road facilities or other
properties.
Before final plat approval:
1) A maintenance plan and maintenance schedule will need to be prepared to guide
the responsible individual or group in the maintenance of the private drainage facilities.
Identify the parties who will be responsible for stormwater facility maintenance.
pl8aker Road
ffm # l~1
PAGf I OF I
K
. V\.
1026 W. Broadway Ave. • Spokane, WA 99260-0170 •(509) 456-3600 FAX: (509) 324-3478 TDD: (509) 324-3166
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW RECF11,!cr~.
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT OC d2 41994
p SPOKANE COUN ,
Dciu1.•. I~ I I PLANNING DEPqk7MEN j-
Departtnent: Trr,
Department Contact Person: 7~ o r3 S~
Action: L~o v,,..oooa o F &L
,
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW MEETING:
from to at the PlanninLy Denartment
Note :
The following infomaation is to provide the proposal sponsor wi primary agencd~
comments to assist the sponsor and aid the processing of public earing items heard before
the Hearing Examiner Committee. The following information provide a complete
or binding final review of the proposal. This will occur only after the proposal is accepted
and placed on the Public Hearing Agenda. The acceptance of the application and
scheduling of the application on the Public Hearing Agenda is the primary function of this
meeting. A secondary function of this meeting is to provide apreliminarv review of the
annlication. This will provide a forum for the sponsor and other departments of what to
expect as standard development conditions and design recommendations.
The comments received are based on a preliminary review of the application form and site
plan by the Departments and Agencies which have been circulated the information (not all
agencies/departments have been contacted--only those who have been deternuned to have
primary interest.
1. a. Does the application (or can the development) meet requirements to be placed
on the Public Hearing Agenda? ❑ YES ❑ NO
b. If no, what is lacking?
c. To schedule the next public he,aring, a complete applicarion must be received
no later than or before the agenda is full.
The next public hearing is
2. After a preliminar~t review of the application what "Conditions of Approval" would
be required of the development? (Attach conditions if necessary)
J-1 w. o~ rAcz 't,n` AC ~K'ee l,v c.1 be R<5:-a)► r Pj
Fo- /qv Y-e ;C~144F-
J!~~ ~ i~ ~ ~ i S► J~ ~ F ~`~i.~
~PCT" al?t~L'as` ~ -
' r t
xr~+ # f' Cv ~
- PAGE ~ OF ~
.
~ . w
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Date: October 26, 1994
Department Contact Person: Stacy Bjordahl
Action: Change of Conditions to an existing Regional Business (B-3) zone
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW MEETING: October 26, 1994 @ 2:15 p.m.
1. a. Does the application (or can the development) meet requirements to be placed
on the Public Hearing Agenda? ❑ YES ❑ NO
b. If no, what is lacking?
1. Clarification of ownership (Spokane County Assessor Records indicate the
Consolid.ated Irrigation District owns the subject property, assessor tax parcel
#55175.0410)
2. Nine copies of a revised, detailed site plan and site plan reduction
(See comments below)
c . Fees:
CHANGE OF CONDITIONS
Base Fee (B-3 zone) + Per Acre Fee x# of Acres
$1,500.00 840.00 [$42.00 per acre @ 20 acres] ar 80%= $1,872.00
SEPA Checklist $75.00 $75.00
TOTAL iJO47.00
d. To scheriule the next public hearing, a complete application must be received no
later than November 4, 1994 or before the agenda is full.
The next public hearing is December 15,1994
2. Planning Department Comments:
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The proposal was rezoned from Agricultural (A) to Freeway Commercial (FC) in 1976,
pursuant to a zone reclassification, ZE-139-76C. The specific uses, as proposed at that
time, included a motel, cafe, and truck stop. The site was never developed with these
uses. Since the 1976 zone reclassification, Spokane County has implemented a
Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Zoning Code, and several other regulations which may
affect the use of the property.
~ # .
PAGE Of "7
~ Y
COMPREHEN$LVE PLANs
The proposal is located within the Urban category of the Comprehensive Plan. The
Urban category will typically be developed with residential uses along with
neighborhood commercial and light industrial. The more intensive land uses will be
located near heavily traveled streets with public services ava.ilable. The Urban category
is intended to be unplemented by the Neighborhood Commercial (B-1) zone, while the
more intensive commercial classifications, Community Business (B-2) and Regional
Business (B-3) zones, will implement the Major Commercial category of the
Comprehensive Plan.
B-3 ZONE AND PER;MITTED iJSES,-
The proposed Change of Conditions request to allow all uses pernutted in the Regional
Business (B-3) zone may have potential impacts on adjacent pmperties, air quality,
roadways, and others. The applicant should restrict or specify the types of uses which
may otherwise be permitted in the B-3 zone. Restricting the types of uses may enable
the applicant to mitigate some potential impacts to roadways and the surrounding area.
TRAFFIG/AIR QiJALITY:
Due to the potential impacts of the unspecified future use of the site, the Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOI), the Spokane County Engineer, or
Spokane Regional Transportation Council (SRTC) may require a detailed traffic
analysis/study and appropriate improvements or mitigating measures to mitigate the
impacts of this project.
PROPOSED SITE PLAN:
A detailed site plan has not been submitted for review by the Planning Department.
Impacts from the development of this site cannot be adequately determined at this time,
therefore, a detailed site plan is requested illustrating the following items.
1. A minimum twenty-five (25) feet wide strip of Type II Landscaping along the north
property line adjacent to the Interstate-90 right-of-way.
2. A minimum five (5) feet wide strip of Type III landscaping along all other rights-of-
way.
3. In addition to the above stated landscaping, a thirty-six (36) inch high concrete,
masonry or decorative block wall, a three (3) foot strip of Type I landscaping or sight
obscuring fence shall be provided and maintained on the outside perimeter of all off-
street parking areas abumng or visible from a public street except points of
ingress/egress.
4. Illustrate and label all setbacks which meet the development standards of the B-3 zone.
5. Illustrate any proposed signs.
6. Label approximate location of structures and parking areas. A detail of a typical
parking area shall also be provided which illustrates compliance with the Zoning Code.
7. Illustrate proposed access points and travel areas
8. Label and illustrate any dedication or future acquisirion area (FAA) as required by the
Spokane County Engineer.
pEPART1ViENT RECQY1ViENDATION:
If the applicant chooses to subnut the fees and application without a specific, detailed
site plan, the Planning Department will recommend denial of the Change of Condirions
request, and if approved, that a condition of approval be included to require a
subsequent public hearing prior to development of the site. (See condirion No. 2
below)
ITW #
PAGE ~ OF ~'1
. ~
.
3. After a,ureliminar,y review of the ap ' ' what "Conditions of
Approval" would be required of the development?
1. The proposal shall comply with the Regional Business (B-3) and Aquifer Sensitive
Area (ASA) Overlay zones, as amended.
2. A public hearing review by the Hearing Body is required prior to any site development.
The detailed site plan presented at a subsequent hearing must address concems raised at
the public hearing and address condirions of approval imposed by this hearing body.
3. Approval is required by the Planning Director/designee of a specific lighting and
signing plan for the described property prior to the release of any building permits.
4. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for maintenance acceptable
to the Planning Director/designee shall be submitted with a performance bond for the
project prior to release of building pernuts. Landscaping shall be installed and
maintained so that sight distance at access points is not obscured or impaired.
5. Direct light from any exterior area lighting fixture shall not extend over the property
boundary.
b. The Spokane County Planning Department shall prepare and record with the County
Auditor a Tide Notice specifying a future land acquisition area for road right-of-way
and utilities. The reserved future acquisition area Title Notice shall be released, in full
or in part, by the Planning Department. The notice should be recorded within the same
rime frame as an appeal and shall provide the following:
a. At least feet of reserved future acquisition area for road
right-of-way and utilities, in addition to the existing andlor newly dedicated right-
of-way along . NOTE: The County Engineer has
required feet of new dedication.
b. Future building and other setbacks required by the Spokane County Zoning Code
shall be measured from the reserved future acquisition area.
c. No required landscaping, parking, '208' areas, drainfield or allowed signs should
be located within the future acquisition area for road right-of-way and utilities. If
any of the above improvements are made within this area, they shall be relocated
at the applicant's expense when roadway improvements are made.
d. The future acquisition area, until acquired, shall be private property and may be
used as allowed in the zone, except that any improvements (such as landscaping,
parldng, surface drainage, drainfield, signs or others) shall be considered interim
uses.
7. The Planning Department shall prepare and record with the Spokane County Auditor a
Title Notice noting that the property in question is subject to a variety of special
conditions imposed as a result of approval of a land use action. This Title Notice shall
serve as public notice of the conditions of approval affecting the property in question.
The Title Notice should be recorded within the same time frame as allowed for an
appeal and shall only be released, in full or in part, by the Planning Department. The
Title Notice shall generally provide as follows:
The parcel of property legally described as is the
subject of a land use action by a Spokane County Hearing Body or
Administrative Official on , imposing a variety of special
development conditions. File No. is available for
inspection and copying in the Spokane County Planning Department.
8. Any subdivision of the property shall conform to state and county subdivision
regularions.
9. Prior to the issuance of building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Planning Department that the owner(s) or representative(s) did
negotiate in good faith with the Spokane County Transit Authority for the possible
provision of facilities that would enhance the provision of public transit.
ffEM # /,5-
PAGE 3 OF
,
Note:
The following information is to provide the proposal sponsor with primary agency comments
to assist the sponsor and aid the processing of public hearing items heard before the Hearing
Examiner Committee. The following information does not provide a complete or binding final
review of the proposal. This will occur only after the proposal is accepted and placed on the
Public Hearing Agenda. The acceptance of the a li ation and schgduling of the apvl on on
the Public Hearing Agenda is the primary function of this meeting. A secondary funcrion of
this meeting is to provide a preliminarv review of the avv,,,~lication. This will provide a forum
for the sponsor and other departments of what to expect as standard development conditions
and design recommendations.
The comments received are based on a preliminary review of the applicarion form and site plan
by the Departments and Agencies which have been circulated the information (not all
agencies/departments have been contacted--only those who have been detennined to have
primary interest).
,
#
PAGE OF '7
. .
,
,
N0`T'It,f," O;; iiI:..AJ:ING
IN THE MATTER OF
T&'4POiZARY CLOSURE
OF A PORTION OF
BROADWAY AVENUE
COUNTY ENGINEER'S ROAD FILE N0. 443-E
TO THE PUI3LIC:
t NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County,
State of Wa shington, will on the 7 th day of NOVEMBER, 1989, at S: 30 P.M., hear the
County Road Engineer's report on the temporary closure, proceedings for which were
initiated by Preliminary Resolution, such road to be temporarily closed being more
particularly described as f ollows:
BR4ADWAY AVENUE - from approzimately 500 feet East of Barker Road, East
to the East boundary line of Corbin Addition to Greenacres.
All located in the West Half (W 1/2 ) of Section 17, Township 25 North,
Range 45 E.W.M. in the Plat of Corbin Addition to Greenacres.
Said hearing will be held in the City Council Chambers, W. 808 Spokane Falls Blvd.,
Spokane, Washington. You are hereby notified to be then and there present to shov,
cause, if any there be, why said BROADWAY AVENUE should not be temporarily closed a:~
provided by law.
DATID THIS lOth day of October, 1989.
Ronald C. fIormann, P . E.
Spokane County Engineer
. ~
Verril Smale
Enni_neer. inn Admi_ni.s t-r_;it~or
PUBLISH: SPOKANE CHRONICLI:
Oc tober 13, 1989
nCtO}`e'' 2(1 , i989
OFFlCIAL_ PLAT ~E C. I T ~ T~05 P46-R.4-5 E: .
OFFlCE OF . !
CDUNTY ENGINEER •
POKANE COUNTY WASH.
p~~,
~ G~f fri~n D 19~f/ ~v0
6X
, (~raM1
7 ~ 8o
~,~3•00 E. I 13a ri ~oAO 388~53'E Nu TS'7 -.:r *
~
-17 .1, 2 ' 1 4
o . ."f t ¢ a^, ~
K GC~,/ y r - ~I C, 5 I 4 MA El ~ AVE ; • ~F'• , ~ f; • ~'•u z
P ~"f G ..p~_'t.~ ~ ~~.,i..• ~ ~ e
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 . 1 a
J S j g
~ ~ I .y I.,~Gr f , ( ' !''1 ; I;~ : "'y 1 s• ! Jjrc e I I
i•... ~ ; I.P,I fJJ a
/0 ~Z ~ i...
~ C:~h , . . . 1•.` ~ t``Q a . 5- ~ ~7 u~ , J~
~ I ~`.'a ~ s/ M1io j:;. ,
. •1-
10 V O I r ~ ~
~ 1A w q ~
A 15 tL 1
22 23 r•'~.I 1/-~/~
I ~ I
i II
;z 20
~.~s~ I j•N. 1 : t 1~ ~ A ~tS°r?~h$°"~ ~ p, ~ .
.
13oVN ~'o
z o-&-e
~-76 C •
v 0 0 ~ ~ , ...1 , ~ o
` m ~ ~ r~ ~,.i' ( • ~r~ i5 y 9 0 ~ ~ ' W
y. ~-v /dr ►Wa
~N~~
~ < ,vzzeo ~p ,i ( t
=54s4*vct--,4liers N ° 165y - 4 Ci CATAL00 R1 7
14 tn l~ v C . ~ ~ . u ~
T
.
ZZ' Ca+ald C&TnL-Do Av_tr. n4 2280 -40'Ooc.3is4~~,~
rL
-
~;RS.H. No.2
• Q Nd9°53E FREEWAY
o l
a~
L~
~0,
C 2t,: 6:~1P~TTc i.r rrw~y:~,, pEk D p(~1 I
~ _ Sert i4- 6 ~
..r
) P.O.T," i fttC¢ ' _ C GL C l' - - -
r. ~ I ti• ~ a~ 4'~ ~~C( ~ ~~✓i~,'f ~ 3\2 o0pE-
i ;
~ ~ F 'L N7 2 •
~-0.. ~ ~ ~ ~i ~•Y ,~.~r C ~ 0 No.+
y ~ ~ _ y i ~ t}••~A•' -~-.-r ~ _.~`,._C~,~„r a i~ ItD N~~ 5~~v
Q 3 , i'Tt s.•;su,f~d,~c 4!e,~:j~ I n o23!Z -~%f
,4•'
I +o
r 6 G s o~n u W
d P
~ i ~
~J T ALni 'Fir
i 'r Stn Q1.~'
G 7 f 9 ~ ~;i .
7 • ~
ot
j . 3 f i I~ f" ~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ `y, ~ ♦
a N~ s ~ , ~ o •f ` , ~ .
5 °
3; 44 ~
6 u ~ iA
~ . i ~ _ ~ ~ .i ~ r~ ~r ie 9 i
A
~ . r L•~~1 , I/ A . ~ , p ~ I 7 .f 1 ! .3
~ A l- ~tc~1 ~ ~
••CONT1Nl1ED
M 04
~ J .
: 8955 J08 1D: 013043 SPOKAtt COJrir 1AEASURER'S 1Ax ROLL - REAL ESIATE AS OF 09/10/44 PaGE B
-
SEW=80-O1Z3 DfEDM=1801768
LTVTH= 1 LTDPTH= 1 PROP[00E=790p
S PA(Mf G11N CLUB PO BOX 00100 GRE E NA( RE S. W+ 9901 b-O100
17-25-45 PTN 0f Sv1i4 OF SE1/4; BEG Ai S1/4 COR OF SEC 17 TM N34fT TM E29.64fi 10 iRUE P08 TM rrccDEG 08M1N E379.47 Fi TM ET(.
SS114.S022 SPO GtN flU6 INf SPOKAHE GUN (L118
f,pD Rf PO BOx 00100
":'O I R C l AS=PROP=8300 GRE E NAC RE S, W+ 99016-0100 ADDRE SS UNKnOW►r SPO ~ U rPD 5w SASS= 2.87 (NSvI 2.87 WEED
TD1400 5,120 LMD vAt. 5,120 ASSR vAL 5.120 lAxaBtE ~ a
RE= 82.48 ASMT 5.74 SASS 4L.11 PAID cc.11 INPp RE ~
94 P 1532670 04/29/94 04/29/94 88.22 OuED 44.11 PAID
SEGO=80-4123 DEEDM=1801766 ~E
LIAREA= 16510 PROP(ODE=8340
- SPOKME GlN CllAB PO BOX 00104 GREENA(RES, W 99016-0100
17-25-45 Su1/4 Of SE1/4 ExC BEG AT S1/4 (OR OF SEC 17 1H H30fT TH E29.64FT TO TRIE P08 1N N44DEG 08MIlN E379.1-7F1 TH E1(.
- - - -
55175.0303 SPO VAILEY 1RR 1RR D15T 10 Pn01=(
ADDRE SS UN1(NOWN . T E XM--V"
PROP=0000 SPOKAAE. W 99 ADDRE SS UNcNOW SPO
r" RE TD1400 500 1.M0 VtL- SOU ASSR VAL. 500 EXW vAl ExrP=Ex40
rPD 1R RE= .00 PAID .00 V*10 Rf
P" 5w 1 R= 1 R= .00 119 . 00 PA1 D .00 uNF'D 1 R ,
SE W=80-8005 UEED+r=000000 LAST SALE 1NF0: DATE=05113/81 PRlff= 200.00 M1l3ER=870p-6809
PROPtO0E=OO00
1 RA D 1 ST 10 ADDRE SS UNKfrOW . SPOKAf . W 99 S4
(OR91N ADD TO GREENACRES THAT PAR1 OF 4OFT CANAL LrG S Of N LN OF CaTALDO AvE t ADJ l15 U7 BLK 3 rLSO lrr( 50F1 Ca-AAL N ETC.
- 55115.0610 DONJ000 1NC tOKSOIIDATED 1RR DIS1 919
~
pp/~pN~p/1J5y0r2~~ ~1ft GiEr~r (R][]U(~(/~pQ ~M p[ (~~y~~y
~~I1I\ ~ ~pV
r1~lJr-,,10M` V X~V 772W-J~/00 ~W{/RGSJ V
SasS= 3.00 (rrSV3 1.00 uEED
TD1400 261,400 LMO VAL 261,400 ASSR VAL 261.400 IAXABLE
RE= 4,210.40 ASMT 4.00 SASS 2,107.45 PAID 2,107.45 uNPD RE
Af 1R= 1R= 472.00 119 236.00 PAID 236.00 IIWD 1R
tw iR sw=con> 1994 sv= .oo .00 PAID oo uNPD w ~
.rpD Sw 94 P 1516705 04/25/94 04/25/94 4,214,90 puEO 2,107.45 PAID
SE W=T1-14S8 DEE0J=7700162952 LAST SALE INFO: DATE=09/22/93 PR1CE= 395,700.00 NJIBER=9301-5413
LiARfA= 1045440 PROPtODf=1070
LONSOl1DATED 1RR D1ST 019 120 N GREEriACRES RD GRfE w►tRfS, w 99016 93
fOR81N I1DD TO GRfENACRfS lTS 2-3-4-5-8 t 9 BLK 3 lrG 5 OF HUr t tLr OF GRfEW►CRES (iwAl ExC BROADwr avE ETC. 94.
55175.9001 SPKN CHIr ErVGR/FUTURE R/u SPOKAPE COU+ITr
Y 1116 BROIIDWY AVE 1 E lcM--trPD
PROP--0000 SPpcME W 99260-0010 ^DDRE SS t1rcHOw SPO
SASS= 1.66 CkSVI 1.00 WEED
TD1400 24,100 uiNp arL 24,100 A.SSa vu 24,100 ExrP vk E XPV=f x00
RE= 2.00 SASS .00 PAID 2.00 u+FU RE SS'
r" AE SEW=81-8034 OEED0=8000237441
:,PD 1R ACRES= 4.810 PROP(OOf =0040
~.00 SY SPOicAft fOVrTr u 1114 BROADuar AvE SPOu?f. W 99264-4010
11-25-45 Cr SPeP RY R/v WITHIN E1/2 OF SEf 17 1
S~.
~/1/
' 1 ~„!o c____ - 3 p;S'~ fT~ ar ~
^tA I F • ~ ~ 1 r
~ " .
~ a+~• , ~ 1°
1 ~-q ~-A L D D ~
1
Q CQV~TY
" ' • ~ ~of;r
" ~ ' ~ 4w• r
(),544 ~
I o » ~ ~ ~ o ~ EXp1R'~ 31c{
v `
i
\ ~ „ . t ' `q p' , •
~
-T ~j~i
.
t♦
1 ti iy J~ ~ S ~ ' -a,!-T,Cf~
` • ~
.7 ~ 1.-1 c 1 ~ ~ . , ~ r ! ~j ^ ~ ~ J'f ; , • V ♦ ' ~ ~
~.►."f ~ 1 t'~ r'~' 1 . 1 p ~ ~ ~h ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~J~ ~
~ 1 • h ! ~
*4V
~
r'J'~ . , •
.
2g $1C , ~ ~ ~ , ~
.
.
.
o ro.~ ~z•1 'ts" ~ ~ ~ ~
1Q9- t' + } U ~ / •
~ • ~ 1 Q ~
4• ~ i
t r3
1 ^ ~ ~z 's t o ~ °im v~
, ~ ~ ~ at • r S
~ ~ ~ • i
V L ~ .
.
, 26..68 e 'O
Cr,a o02 ~ '~t ~ ~ 4 fTo
~
.a~1 'f6
~
~ ~ I lLrl t ¢ 1J I• C.. "
, . <~q"~!'a~i}~►„~, ,;i. . ,J'~~+• ' " ~ I v I , ~ ~ I
~ +N
.~iJ.7. ~ . . ,oo• ~ -p ► , ~ tJ ~ ~ i• B
7' zz
~ •
%
a
J .►e
/J ^ 16 2 17 ' ~ D ~RY~ ~
1~0• ~ ~ ~ ,~~~r t~Ni~N ~ I I
A E~ B J .
O
y -c ~Ne ' ~ / ~ ~sQO//~`flr• I ~ ~ I~ t
~ • r~
~ ,~L i/~•' ~ p ~ . I I ~ ~ ~
`D
r r
Df)
jl
(DI
' ~ I ~ ~ ~jdsh • I
•,yin~. e 2, • ~ y _ y,
'
r ~
~e., `~`^r~ • ~i O '
~t~.~~ .t j~. ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ • ~
~ . , ~
~-:.~...~R
~ 4
,4,~•' ' • ~ ` ~ ~ 'o ' r 237 ~
7
..~Ar kr ` ^ S0o' ~ ~ J✓~' J.'O' e .J9.~' ' I
iP 4dptl!42-g=- CA T E ~ 8 @ , 30•S6 f~
1~/1 9 -✓f:'ROAI). F/LL' 228U *$09y=-
1l
.'~y';~....:~ , ~ .a~.a~ o, ~ F , JPa• ~ ~.r~c• ~
~ • .i' r. o4 ~
I t : ~ . , ~;ifr5 X t! ~ A.L
' ~r ~ . .t.~~, yb ~ ►.~-y / ' 1 ~ i,.
`o ::.x~*:.:'!, , , ~ ~ , ~o• J I ~ ' ~ ~
^~;•',1~I ~ ti,'~J..f..,Si,^~~ b ✓ i ~ ~ I
: r`~AD ''"''►1~ 'o i' ~ R/W DEED I r0 COUNTy I ~r~~rr• ~
v~c. ~CATACDO A V E
4 ~ 1 . .rtr,r~ , i ~ io • a
A. i i ~ ♦
S I I i i
/lla 2 x
o _ r x k '4 ~;ii .,r ~ u , P ~ S' ~
r~~ ~ ~i ' p ° j I I ! ~ ♦ I
~i~ . ~'1 n ~ t ~ ~ 6' +i, ~ •o ~ , •1 r i
'~1 f ~ ~ • 1 ~1 I
'1 ,f"~ 9~.ti,y4~`~f i~.~e~.~' . ,~a ~•4~y.,'S •a - I ~ ~ ~ ~
le'~Q ~ I
~,►.,~.~r:.. .w.v,~ r-.~:, . r~~ J'•_ 'r' yae• Jo .
, ,~~4,` ,~l'~~^'... jj • yc, '7 k'; M
T r
: ~ ` /Y. ~ C 6 .1 C
u~n Q-.-K-", S ~ - B.f• .r,r w. .~.r.,r.
1tiY'1^r~- ♦ I .
1~:,.~±f~~ ?.Y+'.+~~S1r,•;`„ , ~ / /
r y~
q1. +4. i i q x,•~ ~k~'~t~.~•~ ~~~~-~'k1 t 9Y~il ~•'.•I
b SEE S_
7..F•l3 / / { r 76
- r
.
. ~ ~
r LEGAL JESCRIPTON
Lots 2,3,4,and 5 lying South of Primary State Highway No.2,
Spokane to Greenacres, and all of Lot 9, Block 3, CORBIN ADDITION
TO GREENACRES, according to plat recorded in Volume "S" of Plats,
Page 30, in Spokane County, Washington.
EXCEPT those portions of said Lots 2,3,4 and 5 conveyed by Burl-
ington Northern Inc. to the State of Washington by Quit Claim
Deed dated June 4, 1976, under Recording No. 7609160303, and
EXCEPT those portions of said Lots 2,3,4 and 5 conveyed by the
Great Northern Railway Company to the State of Washington for
highway purposes by Quit Claim Deed dated October 10, 1957,
Rcording No. 493871B and described as "Freeway Right of Way" and
"Frontage Service Road Right of Way" only.
4`O " f, ~~~~~f • ~ ~ (•>,f~ '~y
~
ti ZS~
t~
,
S M44
'Ji~
L. Lt-y /
~ EXPIP,ES 12/3/ 94--
. _ . _ Or
vtECEIV ED
0c-T p 51994
gpOKANE COUN'1~Y
pEpARTMENT
PLANN,NG
~
1
zi • l3qA- Av
FILE NO. ZE-139A-76
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss:
COUNTY OF SPOK:ANE )
,
J
7)1 &,-5ai'l, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
At all times mentioned herein I was, and now am, a citizen of the United States of America
and over the age of eighteen years.
On the day of 2~ , 1994, I PersonallY Posted a sign(s) as
required in the Spokane County Subdivision/Zoning land use regulations at the following
location(s) in Spokane County:
ih eo~A-7 w/-2~d'6r'
~
~
, Si f Applic~at orI~
Date ~
Signed W,j)yorn to re me this day of 4 1994.
M ;L;p
0~••'$sion '•.'~F ~i~
Fx ~i o ~ '
& *OTARy'~~ 00 ~
NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND R'THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
~ •
°~•;`O~ ~
';-Z-~F• 75
Residing at: .
WASN
L ~~~~ii~i►~~``
My appointment expires:
~
(APPLICANT FILL OUT AND SIGN BEFORE A NOTARY AND RETURN TO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
~
FILE NO. ZE-139A-76
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
County of Spokane )
(Print Name:) r d n h
being first dulY sworn on oath, dePose(s) and say(s): ~
I am a citizen of the United States of America and over the age of eighteen years.
On the 213 day of 1994, I personally deposited in the
United States mail at -7~~-es-~ ~i~ ,:P,-7 with sufficient postage
prepaid, a true and correct copy of the PUBLIC HEARING NOT'ICE, a copy of which is attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, to the recorded real property owners and/or taxpayers,
as s own on he Spokane County Treasurer's records as of the day of
Uimw ✓ , 1994, who have been found to own property within a four hundred
(400)-foot periphery of the applicant's (andlor his/her agents) owned, controlled or under-option
property. The notices were addressed to those individuals and sent to those addresses indicated on
the attached list, incorporated herein by reference. In the event an address was not available in the
official records, I used the current local telephone directory to attempt to locate a valid address.
Notices to property owners andlor taxpayers adjacent (or directly across a street or road) to the
proposal (including land owned or optioned) by the applicant and/or his/her agent) were by
CERTIFIED MAIL as indicated by the attached certified ipts.
Signa e: .
Date: /9~
• ~ ~lllfl//l~ ~
S;~ c~ ~ati s~~ to fore me this,~-~ ~y of 1994.
. .;9
0,• ~~ron .,F,o ;
= o~'~°„
tA ~
Ry . ~ `
• NOTARY PUBLI IN AND FOR TI-E STATE OF WASHINGTON
~ .
4r, :..G pUB1.%G N .
.
l'
•'f'E ~ 5 ~ Residing at
, ~~rr~~t►~~~ _ My appointment expires:
(APPLICANT FILL OUT AND SIGN BEFORE A NOTARY AND RETURN TO
PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
~~t ~~G~~~✓ ~j ` O~a.l~ l ~~~{.e r s ia c5
~ cVOO, yy
alwe60 OD C&t-,Vy
,
~
f ~
~
I~e-c°d Cov?d`l.f701-)5.
fOK a q&76(a_
Gwraioq U syS~~ /26,11-)
~
L- l 0
~
-
co,
~ 6
~
.
r6l
ck.L
~
lnr~~ ~ 1 Q-,/a I v ak cm jjU L)~-s ~ra :
,
.
jk~s 1-lc,
s ya~s-e ~
.
S'~ ~ p~~~, c.~~ ~v ~ ~•-r,~~~ ~~~.~~c.~-s ~ _ ~
Ocodi-hoos Lol
Zlr7,z7 -c/zi /r~4C
ITENI # J ~
~ .
D,A,rt!
IM;P;ORTANT M ESSAGE
~
FOR
- - A.M.
,DATE TIME P.M.
WHILE • • •
. ~
OF
PHONE NO.
TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU RUSH
RETURNED YOUR CALL ~
MESS GE
~
~
SIGNED ITFM 71r
PAGE O r
ASSOCIATED Lt•A2334 wr+ae in u.sw
,
" y `'7 1 SR ~ • • " _ i1
od
, k
,4 . . . . r
~ . •
. _ ^ ~ - . .
\ ~ +
l
R 9C R/w L iN~ •
~ -•G`. ~ 4--
, ~ ~c ~ . . . , , .
~ Ln . . .
$zr►~~ ~f . . . . . . , ~ . . ~ _ ~
90 c" ti. • • . , . : . .
~r~ r ~ . . ~ . - .
7 . , ~ , . .
't " , • ' • ~ " , , , . .
~ C `C. • _ - , • • . ' ' . . . . ,
~ - ~ ' • . . . . . • , . . , • ,
` ~ • ' ~ " • _ ' _ . , • - . . . ' . . .
. ~ ~ ~ . ' • . ~ ~ . ~ - , ~ ~ta l""PpQ' .
. . . ~ . . ~ .
~Y '_r~ ' , ; '~"r' I ~ " " , . .
~ ~.~•F .
R,-~~+r S,Crvrte aG: .
, f , ~ . . • :
_ ~~d • ~ .
• L~ L.i. . .
. ~'1 '
I d i ; ' A/~
9
. \
. .
. , N,~ , ; ° , . ' •
. . . ~ 1 ~tiC . . . . . • .
~ ~ . - _ _ ~ - . . ~
. . . ; . ~ _ , • . F • . . _
~ fD ~ ~ - . ' • .
L _ . . . . r
_ ~ . . . . , . . _ , . ~ . _ . . . .
Y ~ . ~ 1 ~ I • ~ r / 1 . . . ' I ~ .
1' ~ I ~ _ . . . . . ' . . ` ~
. . . • . . . .
~ , . 1 • -1 d ~ ~ ~ t ` . ' • , . ~
. • ~ •I?= . • . • .
~C . _ ~ ' , I ~ . ' • .
~ ~:a ~r• ~ ~ _
11 ~ .
' • ' ~ . - , ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 ,a ' . .
~ . Y ~ .
• , • ' , ,r~ l . p ~
~ . •
.
+ ~ • ~
: F v-:'rA NJ ~o
P .
4 i ~ •
. • ~ r( II
f~
~ ~ . .
1~ . .
. ~
; . ~ . , .
~ f
41. , . . . , ,
REcFrvED -
~
,
YO
. ~ ~
. SPQKAN£ COUNTY - ~ .R ~r.
PLANNIhiC3 DEPARTM£NT I~~,
,
FREr',NAY ''Qti1.'- rR1C AL
W'~t SECTlo~Pr 17, T Z STI, R : 5: w w.
S M'y"K R`t t--~.+'1'
. ~ - CLM9`c f- S4ysoy i~ic~&f.C:'. W. i
i ft xy1 xRCop"74 9:; ]
~ •
00
Z• - .
~
I _
. oiA
!a~`
lsk
-
~
_r~----_~-
' ~ , ' ~ ~ -
_
- 'l r
~
. . . .
.
y r_-----"-- , ~
.
f - , ~ ~ -M•• . ` . " ,~.~.w.w~..:r~"'~~_.. .
r ~
•
. - '
_
.
• ' .
_ _ - `J~ . _
_ - - _ _ - - -~r.._~--------_ . r
- • _`_r,,,,-..-r--"-`
_ . • ' •
~ ITEM ~
~ PAGEOF
_ .
f
a
' e
SPOKANE COUNTY
HEARING EXAMIlVER COMMITTEE
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER
INTRODUCTION
This matter has come before the Hearing Exanniner Commit~ee on December 16,
1994, continued from the December 15,1994 regularly scheduled hearing. The
members of the Committee present are: Verona Southern, Chair, and Toni
Nersesian.
PROPOSAL
The sponsor, Doawood Inc,, requests approval of a Change of Conditions,
ZE 139A-76, to an existing Regional Business (B-3) zone to allow a revised site
plan and those uses permitted in the Regional Business (B-3) zone.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The property is generally located south of and adjacent to Interstate-909
approximately 800 feet east of Barker Road, in the West 1J2 of Section 17,
Township 25 North, Range 45 E.W.M., Spokane County, Washington.
2. The Committee adopts the PWnning Deparmaent Report as a part of this record.
3. The eJnsting land uses in the area include single family residences, a truck stop,
commercial uses, administrative offices and vacant, undeveloped laad
4. The proposed use is compatible with existing uses in the area.
5. The Comprehensive Plan designates this site as Urban and within the Prionty
Sewer Serrvice Area (PSSA). The Urban category is intended tio provide the
opportunity far development of a"city-lik+e" environmenL The Urban category will
typically be developed with residential, neighborhood commercial and light
industrial nses with the more intensive land uses located near heavily traveled
streets with public servives available. The Urban categozy is intended to be
implemented by the Neighborhood Commencial(B-1) zone, while the more
intensive commercial classifications, Community Business (B-2) and Regional
Business (B-3) zones, will implement the Major Comtnercial category af the
Comprehensive Plan.
6. The existing Regional Business (B-3) zone does implement and conform to the
Comprehensive Plan.
7. The Arterial Road Plan designates Broadway Avenue as a Local Access Street with
a re,commended right o€ way width of 60 feeL
8. The existiag zoning of the property descnbed in the application is Regional
Busuiess (13-3) previously established as Fr+eeway Commer+cial (FC) zoning in
ftEM # I 9
PAGE I OF I U
. ;
~ .
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNIlVG DEPARTMENT
1. The proposal shall comply with the Regional Business (B-3) and Aquifer Sensitive
Area (ASA) Overlay zones, as amended.
2. A public hearing review by the Heari.ng Body is required prior to any site
development. The detailed sit+e plaa presentiod at a subsequent hearing must adciress
concems raised at the public hearing and address conditions of approval imposed
by this heaFing body.
3. Approval is required by the Planning Directar/desigaee of a specific lighting and
signing plan for the described propeny prior to the release of any building permits.
4. A spxcific landscape plan, planting schedule and provi,sions for mai.atenance
aa;eptable to the Planning Directar/dessignee shall be submitted with a perforinance
bond for the project prior to release of building penqoits. Landseaping shall be
installal and maintained 5o that sight distance at acce.ss points is not obscured or
impaired.
5. Direct light fiom any exterior area lighting fixture shall not extend aver the property
boundary.
6. Landscaped areas of at least 100 square feet shall be located no mare than 100 feet
apart alang building fronts faciag street right of ways. Ia addition, all major public
entranoes to buildings shall be landscaped. The landscaping described above shall
be Type IIL Modifications to thi,s condidon may be allowed if approved by the
Plannuig DepartmenL
7. A meandering deoorative wall 36 inches in height shall be constructed along the site's
Broadway Avenue frontage. A fifteen foot wide strip of 1ype III L,andscaping shall
also be installed along both sides of the sites' Bmadway frontage. (Modified per
Hearing Examiner Committee Condition No. 1).
8. Twenty (20) feet of Type I Landseaping is required along all praperty lines abutting
a residential zone.
9. Free standing signs shall be limited to 250 square feet in surface area and 35 feet in
height Free standing signs along Broadway Avenue shall be lacated near access
points. Signs along Intierstate-90 shall be pennitted as per the sign standards of the
Zoning Code, pmvided that any free standing sign adjacent tio Interstate-90 shall be
limited t0 350 square feet and 40 feet in heighL
10. The Planning Department shall prepare and reoord with the Spokane County
Auditor a Tit1e Notice noting that the property in question is subject to a variety of
special conditions imposed as a result of approval of a land use action. Tbis Title
Notice shall serve as public notice of the condidons of appmval affecting the
property in quesdon. The Title Notice should be recarded within the same time
frame as allowed for an appeal and shall only be released, in full ar in part, by the
Planning Department. The Title Notice shall genmlly provide as follows:
The parcel of property legally described as [ ] is the subject of
HEC Order for ZE-139A-76 ftw # Page 4
PAGE ~ oF rb .
, f
r •
a land use action by a Spokane County Hearing Body or
Administcative Official on [ imposing a variety of special
development conditiona. Fite No. [ ] is available for inspection
and copying in the Spokane County Planning Department
11. Any subdivision of the property shall conform to state and county subdivision
reguladons.
12. Priar to the issuanoe of building pemut, the applicant shall demanstcate to the
satisfaction of the PYanning Department that the owner(s) or representative(s) did
negotiate in good faith with the Spokane County Transit Authority for the possible
provision of facilities that would enhance the provision of public nansit
13. The applicant shall comply with all coaditions of ZE-139-76, except those modified
herein.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND ROADS
Prior tio issuance of a bnilding permit ar at the request of the County Engineer in conjunction
with a County Road Project/Raad Imprmement District, whichever action comes first
1. Applicant shall dedy.cate 60 feet from Broa,dway south to Sprague Avenue for right-
of-way.
2. The applicant shall dedicate an applicable radius oa Broadway Avenue and Hodges
Road. (Modified per Hearing Examiner Committee Condition No. 2)
Pnor to release of a building permit or use of the property as praposed:
3. Access permits for approaches to the county road system shall be obtained from the
Spokane County EngineeF.
4. The applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer road,
drainage and access plans.
5. The apphcant shall submit for appruval by the Spokane County Engineer end the
Spokane County Health District a detailed combined an-site sewage system plan
and surface water disposal plan for the entire pmject, or portion thereof, if the
development is to be phased.
6. A parlang plan aad auffic circulation plan shall be submitted and approved by the
Spokane County Engineer. The de.sign, location and aaangement of parking stalls
shall be in a,ccordanve with standard traffic engineering pracdces. Paving or
surfacing as approved by the County Engineer, will be required for any portion of
the project which is to be occupied or traveled by vehicles.
7. To construct the roadway improvements stated herein, the applicant may, with the
approval of the County Engineer, join in and be willing to participate in any
petidon ar resolution which purpose is the forniation of a Road Improvement
District (RID) for said improvement, pursuant to RCW 36.88, as amended.
Spokane County will not participate in the cost of these improvements. This is
HEC Onia for ZE-139A-76 Page 5
[d
PAGE 5 OF~_p
r •
applicable to that prntion of Broadway Avenue to be realigned to and including
Barker Road.
8. As an alternatlve method of constructtng the road improvements stated herein, the
applicant may, with the approval of the County Engineer, accomplish the roaci
unprovements stated herdn by joining and participating in a County Road Project
(eRP) to the extent of the required improvemenL Spokane eounty will not
participate in the cost of these improvements. This is applicable to that portion of
Broadway Avenue to be realigaed to and iacluding Barker Road.
9. The construction of the road impravements stated herecin shall be accomplished as
approved by the Spokane County Engineer.
10. The Couaty Engineer has designated Typical Roadway Section Number One, Local
Access standard for the impmvement of Hodges Road, which is adjacent to the
pmposed developmenL This will require the addition of approximately 40 feet of
asphalt along the frontage of the developmenL The construction of curbing and
sidewalk is also required.
11. The County Engineer has designatied Typical Roadway Secdon Number One, Local
Avicess standard for the improvement of Broadway Avenue, which is adjacent to the
proposed development This will require the addition of varying amounts of
asphalt along the finntage of the development The construcdon of curbing and
sidewalk is also required.
12. All required improvements shall conform to the current State of Washington
Standard Specifications far Road and Bridge Construction and other apphcable
County standards and✓or adopted resolutions pertaining to Road Standards and
Stormwater Management in effect at the date of consiruction, unless otherwise
approved by the Caunty Engineer.
13. Roadway standards, typical roadway sections and drainage plan requirements are
found in Spokane Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 80-1592 as
am+ended and are applicable to this proposaL
14. No construction work shall be pe~farmed within the existing or proposed public
right-of-way until a permit has been issued by the County Engineer. A11 work
within the public road right-of-way is subject to inspection and appmval by the
County Engineer.
15. All required construction within the existiuag or proposed public right-of-way is to
be completied priar to the release of a building pemnt, or a bond in an amount
estimat,ed by the County Engineer to cover the cost of construction of improvements
shall be filed with the County Engiaeer.
16. Applicant shall sign and record Spokaue County Notice to the Public No. 6 which
specifies the followuig:
The owner(s) or successor(s) in interest agree to authorize the County to place their
name(s) on a pedtion for the formarion of a Road Improvement Uistrict (RID) by
the peddon method pursuant to Chapter 36.88 RCW, which petidon includes the
owner(s) property, and further not to object, by the signing of a ballot, the
HEC Onder for ZE-139A-76 Page 6
fT'EM # Q
PAGE 4 OF I (d
.
, i
Y •
forniation of a RID by the resolution method pursuant to Chapter 36.88 RCW,
which resolution includes the owner(s) property. If an RID is formed by either the
petition or resolution method, as provided for in ChapteF 36.88 RCW, the owner(s)
or successor(s) further agree:
(a) that the improvement ar consuuction contemplated witlun the proposed RID is
feasible;
(b) that the benefits to be derived from the farmation of the RID by the pmperty
included therein, together with the ainowat of any County participation,
exceeds the cost and expense of formadon of the RID; and
(c) that the ProPertY within the proposed RID is sufficiendy developed.
Provided further that the owner(s) or successor(s) shall retain the nght, as
authorized under RCW 36.88.090, to object to any assessment on the property as a
result of the improvements called for in conjunction with the foma~ation of the RID
by either petition or resolution method under Chapter 36.88 RCW.
This raquirement applies to that portion of Broadway Avenue to be realigned to and
including Barker Road.
17. There may exist utilities, either undezground or overhead, affecting the subject
property, including property to be dedicated ar set aside for future acquisition.
Spokane County assumes no finaaci,al. obligation for adjustments or relocation
reganding these utiliries. Applicant(s) should cheGk with the applicable utility
purveyor and the Spokane County Engineer to deterniine whether applicant(s) or
the utility i.s responsible for adjustment ar relocation costs and m make
arrangements for any necessary work.
18. This change of conditions is based on an original approval of ZE-139 76. It would
appear that the applicant has appro►val of a baseline trip generation of appmximately
1,300 trips per day on the existing approval. Since this request is based on any use on
approximately 200,000 square feet of build.ing, Spokane County Engineering would
require this applicant at time of building permit to demonstrate through trip generation
analysis that trip generation was not greater than the original baseline of 1,300 trips.
Once the threshold of 1,300 trips is broken the applicant shall provide a full traffic
analysis including mitigating measures prior to aay future bnilduig peanits being
issued. This analysis would be done under the SEPA review process, this requirement
to be implemented by the Spokane County Build.ing Official and reviewed also by the
Department of Transportation. (Modified per Hearing Ezaminer Committee
Condition No. 3)
19. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval of the original ZE-139-76.
20. If the Broadway realignment is not completed through an RID the applicant should be
aware that Broadway Avenue could be right in/right out only.
HEC Order for ZE-139A-76 Page 7
PAGE 7 Of lb
.
. ~
ti •
SPOKANE COTJNTY DIVISION 4F UTILITIES
1. Any water service for this pmject shall be provided in accordance with the
Coordinated Water System Plan far Spokane Connty, as amended.
2. A covenant agreement shall be signed stating: The owner(s) or successar(s) in
interest agr+ee to authorize the County to place their name(s) on a petition for the
fomaadon of ULID by petition method pursuant to RCW 36.94, which petidon
includes the owner(s)' properly; and further not to object by the signing of a protest
petidon against the fornaation of a ULID by msolution method pursuant to RCW
Chapter 36.94 which includes the owner(s)' property. PROVIDED, this condition
shall not prohibit the owner(s) ar suwxssor(s) from objecting to any assessment(s)
on the property as a result of improvements called far in conjunction arith the
formation of a ULID by either petition or resoludon under RCW Chapter 36.94.
3. A wet (live) sewer cannection to the existing area wide Public Sewes System is to
be constructed. Sewer connection permit is required, (See No. 5)
4. Applicant shall submit expressly tio Spokane Connty Utilities Deparm4ent "under
separate cover" only those plan sheets showing sewer plans and specifications for:
public sewer connection are tio be reviewed and approved by the Utiliaes
Department prior to issuance of penmit to connect
5. Security shall be deposited with the Utilities Department for construction of the
public facilities.
6. The Board of County Commissioners is in the process of evaluating whether Public
Sewer should be extended outside the 15 year construction boundary and the teims
of connection/extension of public sewer if allowed.
SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
1. Sewage disposal method shall be as anthorized by the Directar of Utilities, Spokane
County.
2. Water service shall be coor+dina.tied thnough the DirectoF of Utilities, Spokane County.
3. Waier seivice shall be by an existing public water supply when appTOVed by the
Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Health.
4. A public sewer system will be made available for the pmject and individual service
will be provided to each lot priar to sale. Use of individual on-site sewage disposal
systems shall not be authorized.
5. Uss of private wells and water systems is prolubited.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDINGS
1. The applicant shall contact the Division of Buildings at the earliest possible stage ui
order to be informed of code requirements adnoinistered/enforced as authorized by
HEC Order for ZE-139A-76 Page 8
nm # lp
PAGE ?r OF fl)
. a' •
~ •
.
the State Building Code Act. DesignJdevelapment concerns include: addressing,
fire apparatus access roads; fire hydrant/flow; appraved water systems; building
acxessibility; constcuction type; occupancy classif'ication; exiting, exterior wall
protection; and energy cxode regulations. (Note: The Division of Buildings reserves
the right to confirm the actual address at the time of building peamit.)
5POKANE C4UNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AUTH4RITY
1. AIl air polludon regulations must be met.
2. Air pollution r+egulations require that dust emissians during demolition, oonstcuction
and excavation projects be cantrolled. This may req,uire use of water spFays, tarps,
sprinklers ar suspehsion of activity during certain weaiher conditions. Haul roads
should be tneatod, and emissions from the transfer af eartheu material must be
controlled, as well as enrissions from all other construction-related activities.
3. SCAPCA strongly recommends that all traveled surfaaes (i.e., ingress, egress,
parking areas, access roads) be paved and kept clean to 'mmimize dust emissions.
4. Measures must be taken to avoid ihe deposition of dirt and mud fiom unpaved
surfaces onto paved siufaces. If tracking or spills occur on paved surfaces,
measures must be taken immediately to clean the9e surfaves.
5. Debris generated as a result of this project must be disposed of by means other than
burning (i.e., construction waste, etc.).
6. All sohd fuel burning devices (wood stioves, pellet stoves, etc...) must comply with
local, state, and federal rules aad regulations.
7. SCAPCA Regulation I, Article, V requires that a Nodce of Construction and
Applicatian for Appmval be submit~ed. tio and appraved by our Agency prior to the
construction, installation or establishment of air pollution soume. This includes any
fuel fired equipment rat+ed at gneaterr than 400,000 BTU/hour (boilers, hot water
heaters, ovens eLc...). It also includes pauit booths, and other sources of air
conta.minants.
8. Chapter 173-491 WAC requires that all new gasoline dispensing facilities with t,otal
storage capacity of 10,000 gallons or more must install and use State I vapor
recovery equipment Priar to the insmllation of the storage tanks and vanor control
equipment a Notice of Construction must be filed with and appmved by SCAPCA.
HEC 4rder for ZE-139A-76 Page 9
fYEM # ra
PAGE 9 oF la
.
. ~
•
~
ORDER
The Hearing Examiner Commiuee, pursuant to the above Findings of Fact and Conclusion, APPROVES the application of Donwood Inc. for the Change of
Condidons to an existing Regional Business (B-3) tione m allow a revised site plan
and those uses pcrmitted in the Regional Business (B-3) zone as described in the
application ZL-139A 76, and as modified.
Motion by: Toni Nersesian Seconded by: Verona Southera
Vote: (2-0) UNANIlVIOUS TO APPROVE 1BE CHANGE OF CONDITIONS
HEARIlNG CO
HEREBY ATTF.ST TO 1JHE ABOVE FINDINGS, ORDER AND V
~ •
ATTEST:
For WALLIS D. HLJBBARD
Planning Direcbor
A/ oe,
JOHN W. PEli E ON
Senior Planner
42-e< 41ZA4JA~~
DATE
Puisuant to Spokane County regulations, any aggaeved party has the right to appeal this
written decidon to the Spolsane Coimty Board of Connty Commissioners within tien (10)
catendar days of the signing of this orrlez. Upan receipt of an appeal, a public hearing will
be scheduled. If you desire to file such an appeal, you must submit a written appeal,
preferably on forms designed for such purpose, to the Board of County Commi.ssioneis,
West 1116 Broadway, Spokane, WA 99260, along with a$210 processing fee payable Uo
the Spokane County T'reasurer.
If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at (509) 456-2205.
HEC Order far ZE-139A-76 Pa to
PAGE lb OFJ b
0%
~ - ~
. '
~
~
~
199 2oo ZO
~ 0 o~N m ~ 19z ~9 R
< o W _ 01 Z ~ g3 ~s~ tgg
O ~
W ~
juSTA~ ~ ,Qg ~
a , ~r
18g 186 ~rCS c'yc~ o .
180 ~g~ 182 Av .tpr'r) ~
, Z N
W ,
~ . e
~ ot
' ~T . - ` ~ aEE~ aY
a
NE • pv ~
000 9° v
~a•
P
9 ~t;~'►
~ •
t
1 i
• • a~
.
• ~►°1 E ~
. ~ A
cr ~ ,~t S~~AGV~
. ,
~ ~ ~ 1
~
1+ -
i ~
1 O . ~ ~~Ar►~.r/
' p„ V,~..■ t
~
s • ~ ° c~'~
zNO • ~ X' A~E
a ~ ~rr+ s'"~~
~
~p;Gae" ~ f ~ ~ J
UR « q
-
~
-
. ~
~
-
-
_~r • ~
;
_ . .
~ ~ ~ ' • ~ ~
.
, ` / M t I \
~ • r
fl~ at~. ~ y t
~ J~ N `U' ~~`"rt a a'~~ ~ • ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~t Y ~ • ~ 1~ ~ f ~
o • a ~ ~ ~ \'~'aA A ~
. ~
f
~ 1 4~~ • A ~ ~ 1
' ~qy~ • Y ~ 0 • ~g y1y ~ p I'
~ ~y ~ • i a_~! s..vl'.'' . • e ~ o~
qo..o , . , o ~ ~ ♦ ~ ~
` ' 1 ~ bY ~ • j . ,.+a e ~ , q ~ ~
* . a a . ,
•
~ ' ~ ~ ~
4, ~ • • ~oa ~ 4 'n ~ ~ • ~
N ty ° ~ y~
~ • y~ ~ ~ O ~ i: tl l~~~Y a• ~~w ~ / ~
• ' r i ~ ~ i ~ ~ a.•
~y~►4ti"H ~ 9 ~ `s ` i i ~ ~ ~ • ~ a ~y
~ • ~ ' ~ ~ ~ • Y~~ . o~~~~ ,
. ' k ~ • ; I~
ti~ ~ o ~ e ~ •~r
i ~ ~ ~ ~ • to ~ • ~ ' ~ • ' R
eisa•~~a~ ~ ~ ~ Ve S~t•
~.0- 6•~ !•~i' : ~ ; • ~ ~ a!~ ; o + A ~ j ~ ~ ; ! •
a # ~ ~ % + a 0 ' ot. ~ ~ ~ '4•
00 • ~ ~ • o a A b **4~• ~ p
, ~ . M • ~ ~ • ~ j ~ r~~ 4 :o 0
~ • ~ p,~ ~ ~ • • • e • • ~a • • ~AI~ ~ ..1
s ~
e i
~ ~ t• ~u • ~ • • i ~ ~ ° ' ~ . 00
~ . 1
i
~ ~ • a ~ ~~y~~. S • • Z a►♦ • 0 00 i4 +
• • ~ • ' , ' • • , o • ~ • ` +M1 1 ~
` . ~ e ~ • ~ • ~ ~ ~ ' ~ i
~ L~ ~ o • . . ~ . ~ ! . ~ ~ r ~ .
• ~
` F, , ~a ~C~ ~ ~ •to'• 1 ~ ~ o.' ~
i • • r ~ ~l ~ • ~
i ~ o'~--"~~• • • Z 4~ ~ ~ 4 + • C =
R •'r • a a • a • ~ 0~ ~ re6
~ L 1~ 1 ~ M ~ • t~ ~ • V
' i~ : . . t ' ~~t • p '
~ J' 1 ` ~ • t ► ~ • ~
+ ~ ~ ~ ~ pV • ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 • ~y ~
~uuu~~~ .~A ~a.«- ~ ~ i • `i ' j , l~
~ ~ . • ~ i ~ ~ i • ~ ~ ^ I ~ , ~ i 1
yA <
+-~t'~ • ~ , S~~ ~ • t ~ ` ; ~ .
• " ` {
o.~ ~f~: ~ ~ ` ~ •f'~^ =js00o
1 • o:
• ~ • 1• ~ • ~ , ; ~ f ' + 1 ~
• M ~ ~ .
' • ~ ~ .
• r... '
•
. ,
r . ~ i ' : ~ • ~,~a,.
. ~ t
~ i
,
~ zx ° ~ • ; r ~ ~ ~ ' k
•
~ ~ ~ . ' ti ~ + . u
.
i'o Pt ~ ~ ' ~ • r~~ r
` 3• , ' ~
"\Qyr i ~ • a..i,~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ , ~ 1
~ • • • ~ ~ ~ i „ •
+ ~ • 0 • ~ ~ ~ n
• ` A • r' ~.7' t 1 ~--rY t,A
18ER
~ MEM~r• ~ = I ' ,r~ ~ ' i' ~ g f~ 2b" u ~
~ ~ ` `"'~v„ , ~ • ti ,I ~ r
~ v
~p 1t Mt
~ ~ ~ ' ` ~ • •'~',,+~L. p~i 00
palm
► '
.
~
N
~ +
/ ~
~
00
.
. ~ i97 198
<
~ 92 ~ 3~ 194 195
~ ~to ' 9011 1 W
~
I~,Sia
Ig4 t85
, $2 la'S o ~ ' ~ ~
UR
~ ~gp 18 ~ . ~ ~v 3
,J ~
I77
. c~
~ 'c ' ~ V~• . ~
~ pC,ti
~ " S +
e . ~ ' i
MOM ~
~ i ~ ►
. .
ATALOO~•r~~~'•~~ F aEE,NA`f
. gop E
•
y►gt 2 '
, 9 -
►
A~E ~ ' ~'3 ~ oPV N'CdG
a _ ~G ~
AY ~
6C~ '
_ , ~ . .
. f . .
r {
.t' ' ~
• 'y,r A.Y
yr- ; ►
6
tII I►i M
~ C ~ ` ~ ~ ~ tJ •
_ ~ Q~ • . Sgq~µ'G
-
~
,
u ~
o • ~i i
w • a ~ ~t,.+~N ~ r ~ ~ ~6 L
a
T • = Q
~d a ILi ~
o►
~ y
. *
~ s a y
~
~wo,■
~l -
. , Z ~ 139A=76
~ - •
Trailer
4 ; ` . ~ . • ~ Perk I of AN_ ~1J
. . t . . ~ `
^
.
~ •~:f~ Lr c
o
. • 41 N
17~"Ooool~~~ ; • u StB iOn I&V LL
`J • AUBLIA'~
#
SOi
t~l x~{, r ~ ~ • N • n
~ f • f~ • ' ,f 'j ~ `.7 ~K r' `a r ~ -~.u~. _¢.~a 1~ (U ~ 'a"twr'"~ _ 4
.fi • , ~ fi~,.j I(Y T~'sd~r ~ ' ~tu:
8orro ! A 0 '~N -'Perk le 91 ,
v
• • t` ~ _~~p Y n 7 ~ ~ i ~C..~ r ~ _
~ •~~~u• • • • ~Y" b ~ y:
-
~
j' • • ~ n~ • !
1r ~ u • ~u • • b .
o n • ` ~'t*-s ` ~
! • • o'~ ' ~ :
~ f • u u n ~ v• • i ' ~ • 8 •s~• ~ N ~
' 7 ~ u .y_~ ass u ~ 0 /t • 1~
4D'O WOQ
't f ~ ~ • a a
2010 • ~ ~ { ~ ~
f • ° • I 4' .t
' g°'
i • • Y , ~ u ~ " ~ u n o Z
AV
• • o~ • I~• • ~ 7 • -reaWTo • ndWe
a a o oo~L•~ p u ~
/ _ ~ A • WeitS
: : ~ i~ '!''•.~~'..,.r.~;. ii ~ 0 DIY Well~ Cof v
~ • ~
~ •1056 ~
Greenacres i • o ~ _ - N - , Q ~
• ~ ~
, • • . . • ° • . . V RL 20SO y *
%
rr"''.:. - : ~*i.'r~-~•: ~ `i~ U f
W . ~ ~ .
.
~ • s • ~
• n~_ _LdN.6% A , -
- _ ~ a LANE
• r 5219
j
u d►u tl o b ~ ~ ~ • • 1
~ + ~ f TOIi
a18
• o n :~rYi . „ ~ ~
us • °po o ° °W ° 4 e
• • • • • • •*on
o • - - ..r r ~ :eyLU.... ~ ~
~ . • n ~ a e ~a . . ~ ..~I. + u , . . • ~ (
l ~
. _ ° • ' o
• ~ eiler
Y • ~ . t
~ . ~ e m~ • ~ p8fk
VAY •p .6.@« ~ !^i ~ n ~y • • ~ ~ • • • ~ ~ ~
~ u ~ . ~o j!'High ~ • "00- vQ' : _ ~ •4G~~.~~i`~a d-P
•
~ - /
• • ~ ~ ~ • • 4
.203$~
0 , t ; • ,.ti~, ` ~ 1
•
• I •~r• ~
p= ~ ~3 • • e ~ ~ • a! ~!!~1 . ~ n~ }Alj ~
. . a . . .r.s. .v . , , ~ _
~ ~ • • •~r~ • • •o • ~'Sr l ~
• ~ • ; ~ , ~ . ~ . • ~s- s .-i.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ vE ~78
n ~ • i rr Q u p°SP O u 1 ~ I d
• • • r ° u • " Q
~t ' : • a 1
~ _ , . . . ~
~val Pit.r. . ~ ~ . . '
- - I . • o~f~ • u • i
~ _1 _ Y • . .
P8-f k ~ . . Y~ : . J ~ ~ . M~ `j : 1 ~r:~' . ~ . . ~ •
.s • a ~ d~ a o ° o • • •
u~~, , O I ' 2~
O
, ~ ~fr = • °,6 o . • n ~ ~t • ~ . 4 / i ~
~ ~ • • • p 4p • ~ • • ~ • • ~ • ~ ~ ~
, ~ l i ~~asa ~s r~•-s..ra~-rs~~b ~i ~
o-r` 4 I ' v S8W8 lOISQOSB~, ~,y ' •n ~ • i ~ 6
v ~
Grayel.
f ~ ~ + •
/ISOA W17
t
,y Hill
4 `
U f 1 1 t~~ ~ yi41 o`~S~'
s p t E I, ~
~ h it) r
t~
~
t = ~wnkrs f ` ' t~VRe~N ~11~ Q OV
-3---~6-
i ~
1 ~ • ry
'L~~ 1 i ~ ~ ~s ^ • ~ QS` , t ~ ~ ' I p
~ ~
- -
i~~, ~ / ~,~,~p,• s~i7~.n~~n , _ .
i~,r~.e9rd, r, 1. 90
f~b ~00 ~rpp ~
0 0 ,
Cb
o ~ p a 0
~Cor 5 g .lor' '1 y /.e~' 3 ,Lor ~2
p 4 ~
g ~°T
Brea✓.riaY y _ ~
~
~8 OP O I M
Lor ,lvr 3~ p 20,oca ~
Lor0 A
20.cca 4 Ler9 ~
~
TRUCK STOP PROPERTY
Lega1 Lots 2- 3- 4- 5 and 9, Corbin Addition to
Creenacres, Approximately 10 acres North of Broadvay ~ • ~
and ApproxLmately 10 acrea South, Broadway has a 60'
right-of-way, The lots vill range in size from
approximately 1 acrea to approximately S acres, alt '
set back fram property lines will oe to code; Laad-
scaping will be erovided for eacb Lot. Also, provis- ~
ioas for 208 drainage vill be deaign ed. Watet from
Consolidated ie on the property, Blectricitq from
Washiagton 4later Poaer is on the property, Cas from
4lashingtoa lJater Power aLll come from Barker Roed,
Sewer is avaitable acroae the Applexaq Road approxi-
mately 100 feet.
M ~
~
SITE PIAN
o UF RECORD
~
7ZF~~1.39A-7h
I
• t
y
.
PLA►NNING DEPARTMENT REPORT
TO: SPUKANE COUNTY HEARING EXANIINER COMMITTEE
FROM: CURRENT PLANNING SECTION
DATE: DECEMBER 15, 1994
SUBJECT: ZE-139A-76; CHANGE OF CONDITIONS TO AN EXISTIING
REGIONAL BUSINESS (B-3) ZONE WITHIN THE AQUIFER
5ENSITIVE AREA (ASA) OVERLAY ZONE
1. GENERAL INFORMATION
Applieant: Donwood, Inc.
502 North Glenn Road
Spokane, WA 99206
(509) 924-2559
Contact Planner: Stacy Bjomdahl
Locstion: Generatly located south of and adjacent to Interstatie-90, appi+~ximately
800 feet east of Barker Road, in the West 1/2 of Section 17, Township 25 North, Range
45 E.W.M., Spokane County, Washington.
Proposal: Change of Conditions to an existing Regional Busiaess (B-3) zone
to allow a revised site plan and those uses penmitted in ttie Regional Business (B-3)
zone.
Background Information: The subject property was rezoned from
Agriculrn-al (A) tio Freeway Commercial (FC) in 1976, pursuant to a zone
reclassi.fication, ZE-139-76, and redesignatied to Regional Business (8-3) in 1991
consistent with the Program to Implement the Spoka»e County Zoning Coode. The
zone rocbssificarion was oo ned for substandal oonfommance to the site plan of
record which included a truck stop, motiel, and cafe. 'Ihis Change of Conditions
request is m allow a revised sitie plan and those nses permitted in the existing
Regional Business (B-3) zone, rather than those uses specifically requestedthrnugh
the original application and site plan.
II. SITE INFORMATIUN
A. Site Size: Appmximately 20 acres
B. Comprehensive Plan
1. Land Use Plsn: The proposal is located within the Urban category of the
Comprehensive Plaa and within the Priarity Sewer Service Area (P'SSA).
The Urbgn caeegory is intended to pmvide the ~p~partunity far development
of a"city-lik+e" environment The Urban caiegory will typically be
develaped with residential, neighborhood conm~ercial and light industrial
uses with the more intensive land uses located near heavily traveled str+eets
12494 HEC Staff Report far 2E-139A-76 P 1
~TEM # r
PAGE (P OF /rI
. .
. with pnblic seavices available. The Urban category is intended to be
imple~ented by the Neighborhood Comnnacial (B-1) zane, while the more
intensive comrn~ercial classifications, Cammunity Business (B-2) and
Regional Business (B-3) zones, will implement the Majar Commercial
category of the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has not provided a
detailed, specific site plan in amxla far the Planning Department to deiermine
if the proposal, and proposed uses, are consistent with the Goals,
C~: 'ves, and Decision Guidelines of the Urban categary, ar the Zoning
2, Arterial Road Plan: The site abuts Interstate-90 to the north and
Broadway Avenue biwcts the property. The Spokane County Arterial Read
Plan ideatifies Intersstate-90 as a state lughway and Broa,dway Avenue as a
Local Access Street Broadway Avenue, west of Barker Road, is
designated as a MinorArterial with a nocommended right-of-way width of
80 feeL The nearest designated artwrial is Barker Road, a nortb/south street,
which is located appr- ximately 800 feet west of the pruposal. Barker Road
is designatied as a Principal Arterial with a revommended right-of-way width
of 100 feeL
3. County Parks Plan: The Spokane County Parks and Recmation Plan
does not identify any existing couaty parlcs within 2 miles of the proposal.
The parks plan does identify aproposed park acquisidon sitie approxiinaOly
1/2 mile southeast of the site in the Henry Roa,d/Fourth Avenue area.
I
C. Site Characteristics: The site is relatively flat land which is presendy
undeveloped and vacaut Weecls, brush and nanural vegetation are pnesent on
most of the site. Interstate-90 borders the north boundary aad Broadway Avenue
bisects the interior of the site.
D. Neighborhood Characteristics: The area to the south consists of single
family reddences on smaller urban sized lots and larger acreage par+cels with some
large animal kceping also present There are some business uses established
along Barker Road to the west and along Appleway to the south. The area north
af the site includes Intierstate-90 and wholesale busiuesses, offices, and
oommencial uses.
E. Zoning Anslysis: The surrouading area is zoned for residential, commercial,
and industrial uses. The immediate area has undergone several recent zone
roclassifications. Approximately 5 accres of property laatod e,ast of aad adjacent
to the proposal was approved for a rezone from Regional Business (B-3) to
Regional Business (B-3) and Light Industrial (I 2) for food product
manufacturing and retail sales in Juae,1994 (ZE-22-94). Another zone
reclassification' was approved on approximately 2.4 acres locatied west of and
adjaoent to the,proposal, along the nort6 side of Broadway Avenue (ZE-22-92),
and this zone reclassification fi~m Urbaa Resid~ential-3.5 (LJR-3.5) to Regional
Business (B-3) for RV sales/service and a five (5) space ovelnight RV Park for
customers was approved by the Hearing Examiner Committee in Iune 1992. The
recent zoning trends in the area indicate that the area may be tmnsitioning from
urban residential to c ' and light industrial uses.
Propasal: Regional Business (B-3) established in 1991, previously cl.assified
as Freeway Commercial (FQ (ZE-139-76).
12194 BEC Staff Report for ZE-139A-76 PA ge 2
ITEM # I
r
PAGE OF I #7
~
~ • . .
, .
North: Light Iaduswial (I-2) and Regional Business (B-3) established in
1991, previously classified as Restricted Industriai (RI) (ZE-94
71C) and Freeway Commercial (FG) (ZE40-71) respectively.
South: Urhan Residential-3.5 (LJR 3.5) and Light Indusuial. (I 2)
established in 1991, greviously classified as Agricnltural (A) (2E-
225-579 ZE-376-58) and Restricted Industrial (Rn (ZE 29-81C)
respectively.
Easx Regional Business (B-3) and Light Industrial (I-2) established in
1994 (ZE-22-94), previously classified Regional Business (B-3)
(ZE 139-76)
West Regional Business (B-3) and Urban Residential-3.5 (UR 3.5)
established in 1992 (2E-22-92) and 1991 respectively, previously
classified as Freeway Commercial (FC) (ZE40-71) and
Agricultural (A) (ZE-225-57).
F. Land Use Analysis: The surnouading area is partially developed with
commezCial, residential, and industrial uses. The remaining undeveloped
pr~perty in the area is zoned for development of similar uses. The area nonh of
Interstatre-90 is developed with commercial and induswial uses, including GTX
Truck Stop, Unitei Paint and Coating, Evergreen Wholesale Lumber, and the
Central Valley School District offices. The area south of the site is developed
with single family residenc,es and some comniencial uses along Appleway. The
area east of, and adjacent to the praposal, is presendy vacant aad undeveloped,
but was approved far development of food product menufacturing and retail sales
in 1994 (ZE-22-94).
Sitie: Vacant and undeveloped
North: Interstate-90 and offives
South: Single famfly residences and oommercial uses
East vacant, undeveloped land
West Single family residences and small businesws
G. Circuiation: Broadway Avenue bisects the property and will provide primary
access to the site. Broadway Avenue provide.s access to Barker Road ancl will be
improved tio Collector Arterial standards ttmough a Road Impro+vement I?istrict
(RID). The RID will include re~lignment of Broardway Avenue at the intersection
of Barker Road which will move the Barker-Broadway inwc section appmximatiely
200 feet south of its present location. The realignment will create a m,are effective
and safer circul r ation pattern far the I-90/Barker Raad intier+change.
I
H. Design:
1. Site Plan Data
Proposed Site Plan: The proposed site plan illustrates approximately ZO
acres of Regional Business (B-3) zoning on eight (8) lots. Thirteen separate
structms are proposed far atotal of 199,000 square feet of unspecified
12J94 HEC Staff Report for ZE-139A-76 Page 3
mm # if
PAGE r OF_n
• > '
uses. As designed, the site plan does not illustrate the required
parking, setbacks ar other development standands of the Regional Business
(B-3) zone. To implement the site plan as gryoposed, a Binding Site Plan is
required, which is an administrative process to divide the laad into lots,
tracts, or parcels as indicated on the submitxed development plans.
I
Use: No ;specific uses proposed
Proposed Buildings: 13 structures
Site Coverage: 60% building coverage allowed in B-3 zone
Maximum Structure Height: • 35' for structun~es within I50' of RR-10
through UR 3.5 zone,
• 60' all other structures
Total Floor Area: 199,000 square feet
* Building Setbacks: $eawmd
Front yar+d 35765'
Side yard • Stiructures adjacent to RR 10 through
UR 22 zones =15 feet
• All others = no setback requdred
Rear yani 15 f+eet
Parking ~ Fer Chapter 14.802 of Zoning Code
~
*Note: The proposed site plan does not illustrate any proposed setbacks.
Proposed Buffering/Landscaping Techniques:
The praposed site pIan does not illustrate any requirod landscaping. The
Zoning Code roquires twenty-five (25) feet of Type II Landscaping along
the north property liae adjaoent to the Interstate-90 right-of-way. A
minimum five (5) foot wide strip of'Iype III Laadscap~ng is requirei along
all other rights-of-way and a minimum twenty (ZO) fooi wide strip of Type I
Iandscaping is reqnired along rear p;roperty lines wluch abut Urban
Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zones. Any subsequent site plans are required to
demonstrate oompiiance with the lamdscaping requirements of the Spokane
County Zoning Code.
Other Site Plan Considerationa:
~
The Planning Department has included r~~co~mmended vonditions of approval
to ensure landscapuig and signing standards are similar to previously
approved Iarge scale projects such as this pmposal. These recommend~
conditions roquire fifteen (15) feet of Type III Landscaping along Broadway
Avenue along with a thirty-six (36) inch high meandering decorative wall
along Bruadway Avenue. The surface area and height of signs have also
been limited through conditions of appmval.
A specific, detailed site plan has not been submit~ed for review by the
Heazing Examiner C~mmitt~. Impact~ from the development of this site
cannot be adequately determined at dus tim. Therefore, a future public
12/94 HEC Staff Report for ZE 139A-76 ft.. '/Page 4
I PAGE 9 OF 17
• •hearing for detailed site plan review before the Hearing Examiner
Committioe is r+ecommended.
I. Drainsge: A dainage plaa is required. This plan must be reviewed and
approved by the County Engineer's Departiment prior to development
J. Power Transmis9ion Lines/Other Kaown Easements: None illustrated.
Any recomded or required easements will be disciosed during the bOding permit
process.
K. Water Supply: The pmposal is within the Consolidated Inigation Water
District. Provisions for water senrice will be coordinated with the water purveyor
prior to the issuance of building permits.
L. Sewage Disposal: A public sswer system will serve the proposal. The
applicant is required to make grovisions for public sewer with the County Utdities
Department pnar to development of the site.
M. School: The pmoposal is in the Central Valley School District No. 356. No
comments were submitted by the school district regarding the proposal.
N. F'iice Protection: The proposal is within Fire District No. 1. The Fire District
and the Division of Buildings Department (Fire Marshall) are required to approve
fire protection pznvisions pnor to the issuance of building permits.
0. Wetlands: Spokane County Wedand Inventoiy Maps do not indicate the
presence of wedands on the site.
P. Cutturat ResourceelCritical Areas: None have been identified.
III. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
An Environmental Checklist was submitted by the sponsor and was reviewed by the
County Planning Department The review considered the specifics of die proposal, odier
available information, County ordinances, other regulations and laws, possible standard
Conditions of Appmoval, the Generalized Comprehensive Plan, and other County policies
and guidelines. The Planning Department has deteimined that "No probable significant
adveTSe Wnpacts" wonld result from the pmoposal being developed and has issued a
Det+ermination of Nansignificance ("DNS").
The "DNS" was circulated to 13 other agencies of jurisdiction and other
~ S es,/departnents affe~cted by the future development far review and comment The
comme t penod ends December 13,1994 and was advemsed 15 calendar days
before said date in the newspaper, by letter tio adjaoent property owners within 400 feet of
the pmposal, and by notice on a sign postied on the proposal site. The Hearing Examiner
may consider additional e,nviranmental related testimony at the public hearing.
The Washington State Department of Transponarion (WSDOT) has responded to the
DNS and has indicazed that the site plan as subrnittod includes approximately 199,000
square feet of unspecified uses and due to this, ther+e is insufficient information to
detennine the exact impacts of this projext on the surrounding roadway sysunn. WSDOT
has evaluated the proposal at the highest, maximum use as a 199,000 sqnare foot
shopping center. Based on this use, the proposal may create nearly 11,000 vehicle trips
12J94 HEC Staff Report far ZE-139A-76 Pag+e 5
~TEM # ~ I
~
PAGE ~ OF
. ~ •
per day which would create sigaificant adverse impacts on the sun,ounding area.
WSDOT has revommend~od that the Det-mination af Nonsignificance (DNS) be
withdrawn aad the applicant undertak+e a traffc study to identify and midgate the prnbable
impacts this project will have and that the traffic study be reviewed by WSDOT aad
Spokane County Engineers prior to a SEPA de~enmination being mad~e. 1'bi.s issue will
be discvssed by reviewing agencies at the public hearing and based on inforimatiion
submitted, the H+earing Examiner Comarittee may uphold the threshold deteamination or
may withdraw the DNS and issue a new tlmeshold deteamination at the time of the
hearing.
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUfMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION
The proposed Change of Conditions request is very general m nanme and a detailed,
specific site plan has not been provided. The praposed site pian doe.s not demonstrate
compliancae with the development standards of the existing Regional Business (B-3)
zone for parldng, setbacks, landscaping, bnilding coverage or building height. The
Planning Depardment rwx ommends that the praposed (hange of Conditions request be
denied, vr if appmved, that a condition of appr+oval be included to reqnire subsequent
public hearings pri(n to any site developmenL A subsequent public hearing will ensure
that issues snch as traffic circulation, air quality, land use compatibility, Zoning Code
compliauce, and others are addressed and adequately mitigated through a public
hearing. The Planning Departiment does recommend denial of the proposal as presendy
submitted.
t
t
v . CONDITIUNS OF APPRUVAL
,
i. All conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner Committee shalt
be binding ' on the "Applicant", whic6 terns shall include the
owner or owners of the property, heirs, assigns and successors.
i i. T6e zone reclassifieation spplies to the following real property:
Lots 2, 3, 4, and S lying South of Primary State Highway No. 2, Spokane to
Greenams, and all of Lot 9, Block 3, CORBIN ADDITI4N TO
' GREENACRES, accomding to plat recarded in Volume "S" of Plats, Page 30,
in Spokane County, Washington.
EXCEPT those portions of said Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 conveyed by Burlington
Nm-thern Inc. to the State of Washington by Quit Claim Deed datied June 4,
1976, uader Recording No. 7609160303, and
~
EXCEPT those portions of said Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 conveyed by the Great
Northern Railway Company tio the Stm of Washingtcin for highway purposes
by Quit Claim Deed dated October 10,19579 Recording No. 493871B and
descabed as "Freeway Right of Way" and "Frontage Service Road Right of
Way" only.
12)94 HEC Staff Report for ZE- 139A-76 P 6
~ # I r-
PAGE I OF~
. SPOKANE COUNTY PLAN1vING DEPARTMENT
1. The proposal shall comply with the Regional Business (B-3) and Aquifer Sensitive
Area (ASA) Overlay zones, as amended.
2. A public hearing review by the Heariag Body is requirod prior to any site
development The detailed site plan presented at a sulsequent hearing must addness
concerns raised at the public hearing and addness condidons of approval imposed
by this hearing body.
3. Appmval is r+equired by the Planning Director/desigaee of a specific lighting and
signing plan for the described groperty prior to the release of any buitding permits.
4. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for maintenance
a,oceptable tio the Planning Directar/dessigaee shall be submittel with a performance
bond for the project prior tio release of building pennits. LAndscaping shall be
installed and maintained so that sight distance at access points is not obscured or
imPaired-
5. Direct light from any,exterior area lightmg fixtm shall not extiend over the property
boundary. 1
6. Landscaped areas of at least 100 square feet shall be located no more thaa 100 feet
apart along building fronts facing street right of ways. In addition, all major public
entrances to buildings shall be landscaped. The landscaping describei above shall
be Type III. Modifications tio this condition may be allowed if approved by the
Planning Department.
7. A meandering decorative wall 36 inches in height shall be constructed along the
site's Broadway Avenue frontage. A fifteen foot wide strip of Type III
Landscaping shall also be installed along both sides of the sities' Broadway
frontage.
8. Twenty (20) feet of Type I Landscaping is required along all property Iines abutting
a residential zone.
9. Free standing signs shall be limited to 250 square feet in surface area and 35 feet in
heighL Free standing signs along Broadway Avenue shall be located near access
points. Signs along Inteistate-90 shall be permitted as per the sign staadards of the
Zoning Code, provnded that any free standing sign adja,cent to Interstate-90 shall be
limited tio 350 square feet and 40 feet in heighL
10. The Planning Degarament shall prepare and record with the Spokane County
Audimr a Tide Notice noting that the pmperty in question is subject tio a variety of
special conditions imposed as a result of appraval of a land use action. This Title
Notice shall serve as public notice of the conditions of appmval affecting the
property in question. The Tide Notice should be recomded within the satim
frame as allowed for an appeal and shall only be released, in full or in part, by the
Planning Department. The Tide Nodoe shall generally provide as follows:
The parcet of property legally described as [ ] is the subject of
a isnd use action by a Spokane Connty Hearing Body or
Administrative Official on [ imposing a variety of special
1
12/94 HEC Staff Report for ZE-139A-76 Page 7
~I frEn # 11
~ PAGE I ~L OF L7
• '
•
development conditions. File No. [ ] ia available for inspection
aad copying in the Spokane County Planning Department.
11. Any subdivision of the pmperty shall confrnm to state and county subdivision
regulations.
12. Prioz to the issuance of building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate tio the
satisfaction of the Planning Departmnt that the owner(s) or representative(s) did
negotiate in good faith with the Spokane County Transit Authozity for the possible
provision of facilities that would enhance the grov~ision of pnblic trensit
t
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION UF ENGINEERING AND ROADS
i
Prior to issuance of a build'uig permit ar at the roquest of the County Engiaeer in conjunction
with a County Road Project/Raad Improvement District, whichever action vomes first
1. Applicant shall dedicate 60 feet on Broadway south to SpTague Avenue for right-of-
way.
2. The applicant shall dedicatie a an applicable radius on Broadway Avenue and
Hodges Road.
Prior to release of a building penmit or use of the property as proposed:
3. Avicess peamits for approaches m the county road system shall be obtained from the
Spokaue County Engineer.
4. The applicant shall submit far approval by the Spokane County Engineer road,
drainage and access plans.
5. The applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer and the
Spokane County Health District a detailed combined on-site sewage system plan
and suiface water disposal plan for the entue projet, ar partion thaeof, if the
develapment is to be phasei.
6. A parking plan and bmffic circulation plan shall be submitted and appxoved by the
Spokane County Engineer. The design, location and anangement of parking stalls
shall be in ac;condance with standazd traffc engineering practices. Paving oz
surfacing as approved by the County Engineer, will be required for any partion of
the project which is to be occupied ar traveled by vehicles.
7. To construct the roadway impr-vements stated herein, the applicaat may, with the
approval of die County Engineer, jain in and be willing tio participate in any
petition ar resolution which purpose is the fonmation of a Road Improvement
District (RID) for said impravement, pursuaat to RCW 36.88, as amended.
Spokane County will not participate in the cost of these impr~vements. This is
applicable to that ponion of Broadway Avenue to be realigned to and iacluding
Barker Road. Y
8. As an alternative method of vonstructing the road improvements stated herein, the
applicant may, with the approval of the County Engineer, accomplish the road
improvements samed herein by joining and participating in a County Road Project
(CRP) to the extent of the required improvement Spokane County will not
12#94 HEC Staff Repart foz ZE-139A 76 P$ge 8
TTEl1A #
PAGE I ~ OFJ3
• i
r y
i;
I
particiPate in the cost of these improvements. This is applicable to that portion of
Broadway Avenue to be realigned tD and including Barker Road.
9. The consuuctiun of the nfa,d impra►vements ~t.tad herein shall be accomplished as
appnoved by the Spokane Cvunty Engine.er.
10. The County Engineer has de~ignated Typical Roadway Sectivn Number Chie, Loca1
Ac,cess standard far the improvement of Hvdges Road, which is adjacent t+a► the
proposed developmenL This will requise the addition of apprq►ximately 40 feet of
asphalt along the frvntage of the development The construction of curbing and
sidewalk is also required.
11. The County Engine,er has dessi..gnated Typical Roadway Seetion Number Qne, Local
Avicess standard fvr the improvem~nt of Broadway Avenue, which is adjacent tiv the
pnaposeci developmeat Tbis will require the addidan of vatying amounts of
asphalt along the finontage of the developmenL The consixvction of curbing and
sidewalk is atso required.
12. All requhW imprvvements shall canffozm tn the cumeat State of Washingtan
Standard Specifiications for Road and Bridge Construcdon and otier applicable
County standards andlvr adopted resolutions penaining to Road Stanciatds and
Staimwater Management in effect at the datie of constrwt%on, unless atherrwise
approved by the County Engine,er.
13. Road.vray st~u~dands, typical madway sections and drainage plan reqWnements are
found in Spokane Board of County Commissioners Resolution No, 80-1592 as
amended and are applicable tv dus pnoposal.
14. No constructian wark shall be ~rfo~ned wnthin the exis#ing or proposed public
right-uf way untLI a permit has'beea usued by the County Engineer. A11 work
within the public road right-of-way is subject to inspction and approvsl by the
Cou.nty Engxaeer.
15. AlI requned construction within the existing cyr pmoposed public right-of-way is to
be campleted priaar to the nclease of a builchng penmit, vr a bond in an amount
estimated by the C.punty Engineer to cover the cost of conmctian of impravements
shall be filed with the Cownty Engineer.
16. Applicant shall siga and remd Spokane County Natice tv the .Public Na. 6 which
specifies the followuig:
The owner(s) or successor(s) in mwrest agree to autfimze the Caruaty to place thesir
name(s) on a petitian far die fomLation of a Road Impmvenaent District (RID) by
the petitian method pursuant to Chaptier 36.88 RCW, which petidon includes the
owner(s) progerty, and further not to object, hy the signing of a ballot, the
fonmation of a RID by the resolntion method pursuant to Chapter 36.8$ RCW,
which resQlntivn includes tbe awner(s) pra►perty. If an RID is fonmd by either the
petinon or mmlution method, as provided fvr in Chapter 36.88 RCW, the owner(s)
or successor(s) fiarther agree:
(a) that the impnavement ar construction contemplateci within the groposed RID is
feasible;
,
I
1
12/94 HEC Staff Repon for ZE-139A-76 ge 9
~
+ ~NI ~
PAGE 14 OF
~ ~
.
• . . . '
(b) that the benefits to be derived from the fotmation of the RID by the ProPertY
included tkierein, togethes with the amount of any County participarian,
eacceeds the cost and expense of falmarion of the RID; and.
(c) thait the groperty withia the pmpoud RID is sufficiently devel+caped.
Pravided further that the owner(s) or successcm(s) shall retain the right, as
authorized under RCR,' 36.88.0901, tio object to any assessxnent on the pmperty as a
result vf the impmve~ents called for m conjunction with the - ormation af the RID
by either petitivn or resolutioa method under Chapter 36.88 RCW.
This requirement applies to th,at partion of Bmadway Avenue to be reatigaed to and
including Baxker Road,
1
17. There may exist uulities, either undezgnound or overhead, affecting the subject
proPertY,, includiag PmPertY to be dedicated or set aside for future acquisition.
Spvkane County assumes no fYnancial obligatian far adjnstments oar relocativn
regarding these utilities. Apglic,ant(s) should check with the applicable utihty
purveyor a.nd the Sgokane County Engineer to determuine whether applicant(s) ar
the utility is responsib►le for adjustment ar relocation casts and t+D make
arraingements for any necessary work.
18. This change of condiavns is based on an origmal appmval of ZE-139-76. It wauld
appear thax the applicant has a,pproval o►f a baseline trip g+enemtivn of apProximatelY
1,300 trips per day on die existing appmval. Since thts raequest is based oa any use on
approxinoately 200,000 square feet of building, Spokane Caunty Engincering would
requue this applicant, at tim af buildiag pemmt to deanonstraft throagh trip generatian
analysis that trip genecation vwas not greater than the onginal baseline of 1,300 trips.
Once the tbreshold of 1,301 mps is braken the applicant shall pravide a full mffic
analysis including mitigating meesures prior to any fuhuu+e building Permits being
issuecl. TMs analysis would be done under the SEPA review pmcess, this reqnirement
to be imglemented by the Spokmne County BuiWing OfficYal and reviewed atso by the
Department of Transportation,
19. The arpplicant shall cvmpTy with all conditions of appmval of the original ZE-139-76.
20. If the Broadway realignment is not comgleted thnough an RID the applicant shautd be
aware that Broadway Awenue +cautd 1e nght inffight out anly.
SP4KA►11TE C4L11'VTY DI'VI5IQN CIF UTILITIES
1. An.y wacer service for this project shall be provided ia accamdance with the
Croondinated Water Systezn Plan for Spakane County, as amended
,
2. A cavenant agreement shall. be signed stating: The owner(s) or successor(s) in
intenest agree to authorize the Cuunty to place their nan~e(s) om apetition for the
fonnation of ULID by petition method pursuant tv RC'W 36.94, which petitioa
includes the owner(s)' property; and fiuther nvt to object by the signing of a protest
petition against the faxnc~tion of a UI.ID by resolutian method pursuant to RCW
Chapter 36.94 which includes the 4wner(s)' property. PR{)VIDED, this conditioa
shall not prohibnt the, owner(s) or successor(s) from objectiag tio any assessment(s)
on the property as a result of improvements called for in conjunction with the
fonm~ativn of a ULID by either getition ar resolurion under RCW Chaptier 36,94.
IZ194 HEC Staff Repwort far ZE-139A-76 l/ Page 10
~a #
pAcE 15 QF__U
L
.
• ' t ►
~ .
a.
3. A wet (live) sewer connection to the exisdng area wide Public Sewer System is m
be constructed. Sewer connecdon permit is required. (See No. 5)
4. Applicant is requinod to sign a Sewer Connection Agreement priar tio issuanoe of
permit to connect.
5. Applicant shall submit expTessly m Spokane Cownty Utilides Deparnnent "under
separate cover" only those plan sheets showing sewer plans and specifications far.
public sewer connection are to be reviewed aud approved by the Utilides
Deparmnent prior m issuaace of pemnit to connect
6. Security shall be deposited with the Utilities Degarmaent for construction of the
public facilities.
7. The Board of County Comnnissioners is in the process of evaluating whether Public
Sewer should be extended outside the 15 year construcdon boundary and the tenms
of connection/extension of public sewer if allowed
SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
1. Sewage disposal method sball be as autharized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane
County.
2. Water service shall be coondinated through the I?irector of Utilities, Spokane County.
3. Water seivice shall be by an existing public water supply when approved by the
Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Deparmnent of Healdi.
4. A public sewer system will be made available for the pmoject and individual service
will be provided to each lot prior to sale. Use of individual on-site sewage disposal
systems shall not be authorized.
5. Use of privatie wells and water systems is prohibited.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDINGS
1. The applicant shall contact the Division of Buildiings at the earliest possible stage in
arder to be informed of code requirements a~dminisbered/enforced as authorized by
the Statie Building Code Act. Desigo/develapment voncenns iaclude: addressing,
Ere apparatus access roads; fire hYdrant/floW; aPProved waw systems; building
aoce.ssibility; oonstruction type; occupancy classification; exiting; ext+erior wall
pro~ection; and energy code regulations. (Note: The Division of Buildings neserves
the right to confirm the actual addr+ess at the time of building permit.)
SPOKANE COUNTY AIR PQLLUTION CONTROL AUTHOIiITY
1. All air pollution regullations must be meL
2. Air polludon regulations require that dust emissions during demo ''on, oonstruction
and excavadon projects be controlled. This may require use of water sprays, tarps,
12V94 HEC Staff Report fozi ZE-139A-76 Pa 11
~
PAGE ~ GD OFjj
~
` `
~
• '
♦~i',,
.
.
,
sprinklers or suspension of activity during certain weather conditions. Haul roads
should be tneated, and emissions from the tcansfer of earthen material must be
controlled, as well as emissions from all other construcdon-related activities.
,
3. SCAPGA strongly recommends that all traveled surfaces (i.e., ingress, egress,
parking areas, accesAl roads) be pa.ved and kept clean to 'minimize dust emissions.
40 M+easur+es must be taken to avoid the deposition of dirt and mud from unpaved
surfarces onm paved surfaces. If tracking or spills occur on paved surfaces,
measnnes must be taken immediately to clean these surfaces.
5. Debris generated as a result of this project must be disposed of by means other than
buining (i.e., construcdon waste, etc.).
6. All solid fuel bunning devices (wood smves, pellet stoves, etc...) must comply with
local, state, and federal rules and regulations.
7. SC'APCA Regulation I, Article, V requires that a Notive of Construction and
Application for Approval be submitted to and approved by our Agency prior to the
constcuction, installation or estabUshment of air pollution source. Tbuis includes any
fuel fired equipment rated at gneater than 400,000 BTCJ/hour (bailers, hot water
heaters, ovens etc...). It also includes paint booths, and other sources of air
contamrinants.
8. Chapteer 173-491 WAC requires that all new gasoliae dispensing facilities with wtal
storage capacity of 10,000 gallans or more must install and use State I vapor
recovery equipment Prior to the installation of the stamge tanks and vapor control
equipment a Notice of Construction must be filed with aad approved by SCAPCA.
I
I
~
12494 HEC Staff Report for ZE-139A-76 Pa 12
PAGEOF_Jg
.
~
~ '
w~
~
DETERMINATION OF
NONSIGNIFICANCE - "DNS"
WAC 197-11-970 and Section 11.10.230(3)
SPOKANE FNVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE
FILE NUMBER(S): ZE-139A-76
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Change of Conditions to an existing Regional
Business (B-3) zone to allow all uses in the Regional Bosiness (B-3) zone.
APPLICANT: Donwood Inc.
502 North Glenn Road
Spokane, WA 99206
(509) 926-2539
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL Generally located south of and adjacent to Interstate 90,
approximately 800 feet east of Barker Road in Section 17, Township 25 North, Range 45
EWM, Spokane County, Washington.
LEAD AGENCY: SPOK:ANE COUNTY PLANNIlVG DEPARTIIENT
DETE1tMINATION: The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have
a probable significant adverse impact on the environnient An Environmental Impact Statiement
(EIS) is na required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of
a cornpleted environnaental checklist and other infoimation on file with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public on request
Thi.s DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal
for at least 15 days fi+om the date issued (below). Comments regarding this DNS must
be submitted no later t6an 4:00 p.m., December 13, 1994, if thep are intended
to alter the DNS.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: WALLIS D. HLTBBARD, PLANNIlVG DIRECTOR ,
f
By: Stacy Bjordahl, Planner II ~
~
Phone: (509) 456-2205
Address: Spokane County Planning Department
West 1026 Broadway
Spokane, WA 99260 ~
DATE ISSUED. • & . D V (P 1994 SIGNATURE: 64iaW ,
C RBGARUNG FNVIItCt*AffqTAL CCNC'ERNS ARE WIIXXCM AT T[M HEARIlNG.
APPEAL OF THIS DETERMINATION, after it becomes final, may be made to the
SPOK:ANE COUNTY PLAS1NIlVG DEPARTIVENT, West 1026 Broadway, Spokane, WA .
99260. The appeal deadline is the same as the above project's appeal deadline, being ten (10) ~
calendar days after the signing of the decision to approve or disapprave the project. This
appeal must be written and the appellant should be prepared to make qxcific factual objecdons.
Contact the Planning Department to assist you with the specifics far a SEPA appeal.
!
This DNS was mailed to:
1. WA State Department of Ecology (Olympia) .
2. WA State Department of Health
3. Spokane County Health District
4. Spokane County Division of Engineering
5. Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority
6. Spokane County Parks Department
7. Spokane County Boundary Review Board
8. Spokane Regional Transportation Council
9. WA State Deparnnent of Transportation
10. Spokane Transit Authority
11. Central Valley School District
12. Consolidated Imgation District
13. Fire District No. 1
~
rr&A #
.
PAGF ~ pF j
~
~
~
. ~
. . - .
SPQKANE COUNTY
PLANNING 4BPARTMENT
~
A
~
(~R
~
Y
t
o
TRON
.23
E 1~
PofNNE
stcrf-JON
~ V
pAC~---
~ . . ~
. ~ OPOKANE EKYIR044fNT11L ORDINANtE _
(YAC 197-11-960) Settion 11.10.230(1)
Envirorniental Checklist
File Ho.
Pvrpose of Checicllst:
The State Envirormental Policy 11ct (SEPA) chapter 43.21C RCH. requlres all governsental agencles to conslder tfie envirorxnental impacts of a proposal
before msking Aecislons. An Environwntal lapact Stateaient (EIS) inust be prepared for all proposals rrtth probaDle significant adverse impacts on
the quality of the envirorxment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your
propossl (and to rcdute or avoid impacts frow the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency detlde whether an EIS is required.
Instructions for ApplScants:
This environwentsl checklist asks you to describe soae bas4c information abw t your proposal. Governoental agencles use this chec1c11st to dete rtnine
vfiether the environaental impacts of your proposal are signiflcant, requtring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the nast
precise inforoation knarn, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In nast cases. you should be able to answer the questions
from your own observatlons or project plans with w t the need to hire exDerts. If you really Go not know the answer. or tf a question does not apply
to your proposal, write 'do not know• or 'does not apply.' Complete ansrers to the awstions now may avo1E unnecessary delays later.
Soire questions tsk about governwental regulattons, suth as zoning, shorellne, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you
have probleais, the governmental agencies can asslst you.
TAe checklist questionz apqly to a11 parts of your proposal, even if ya Dlan to do thna over a perlod of tirne or on dtfferent parcets of lanC.
Attach any additional infonmation that will describe your proposal or its environnental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may
ask you Co explain ,rour answers or provide sddtttonal infonaation reasonaD}y related ta deter+aining tf there way be signiflcant adverse 1mDact.
Use of cfieck 11 st f or nonproject propo sa 1 s:
Caaplete this checklist for nonproject proqosals, even though questions Aay be answered 'Coes not aoD1r'•
iN ADDITION, cwplete the SUPPLEtIENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIOttS(Part D).
For nonproject actions. tAe references in the checklist to the words 'Droject,' 'iDOlicant.' and 'property or site' zhould be read as 'proposal,"
'proposer.' and 'affected geographic area,' respectlvely.
~
A. BACKGR OUKO ~ ~ I` A O I~~ I S~► e
l. ~1 of proposed project. 1( appti Dle:
3 t I n. Al - kzse S f
d w°ie1•
u a Ml`lk stw f12 a
&-& L~
2. Mawe o pplicant:
3. Addrezs and phone number of appllcant or contttt person: C-"- /
4. Date check 1 i st prepared :
S. Agenty requesting Checklist: / Q7f/f L/`C e7-1 ,
6. Proposed tlaing or schedule (lncluding phaslnq. 1f appllcallle): //C'/'1
7. a, Do y hare any plans for future additions. expanslon, or further activity related to or co m ected w1tA thls proposal? lf yes, explain.)APS
b. Do you own or have options on land nearby or adjacent to thls proposat? lf yes, explain.
8. List any enrironwntal infornation you know ab t that has been prepared, or rill be prepared. directly relateE to this proposal._/~
i Z~ I 5q --I-u ce~
Rev.2/1/88 1 PAGE C9 OF f ~
Z/w 13qA-74o
• ~IL LIIVIRONldNf~L O1tDI11A1TCL -
(uAC 197-I1-960) Section 11.10.2]0(1)
• k. EAdaCGiOOQD (eoncimued)
9. Do you lmov vhether applicatlons are n` for =oversmental approvals of other proposals direetlr affectin6 the property covered by your
proposal? lf yes, expLln.
L0. Lisc aay aovaramnt a rovala or peraits thac viLl be naaded tor your proposal. if Imova.
04V* eop - "
~ h _ a ~~y ~v,~i . Q~`" / ~ ~so/%!~
11. Give a brief, casplete description ot 7rour proposal, including the proposed umcs and the sise of the project and sice. -here are several
questiona Ltcr n[hi• cFeckli~t~ aslc rou to escribe cersain upect• of rour proposal. You do not oeed co repac chose anavers on this
PaEe• - r t ~ ?
1:. Locacion of the proposal. Givt safficient infotsation for a person to understand the precise location ot your proposed projecc, lncludtng a
street address, if any, and sectloa, tovnship and range, lf known. I( • proposal vould occur over a raoge of •rea, provtde che range or
bouadariea of the sSte(s). Provide a legal description, •!tt plan, vlclnit7 aap, and topo`raphic sap, t[ reasonably avalLble. tfhile you
•hould subsic any pLna required by the asancy, you are eot reduirsd to duplicace oaps or detailed pLns sulsitted vtth any perai[ application
reLced co this checklisc.
e~~' ~0- Zo~l
~he-7' 9'Q
~ /
~~#~.or~ f~~ Z~1~ r,~2 r' • N~
- ~
~
11. Does the proposed accion lie vichi the, -A~uifer See~lcive Ar Gencra 5 er SeMce Ate :he Prior c Ser e AreyN 'hd''~
Cicy ot Spokane? (See: Spokane County'TASA OverLy Zone Aclas foc boundarie~ . f
r
T
.0 EC COML'.'LD tT APPLLCAM
E. O19IRO11W"JI. Q.IIKE2Tf5
Evalua[ion For
1. EAP,-i1 Agency Ume Only
A. General description of the •lte (circle onNilITO.y rolliaa, hilly. •caep slopes, mouatainws,
other:
b. 'fiat is the •ceepest slope on the •ite (approtiaate percent •lope)? !
c. 'lhat general cype• of soils are found on the slte (for euaple, elay. uod, aravel. psat, wck)' ~
If you ov the rlasslfiutlan of agricultural • iL. specify then and note anr prime fatsLnd. m~r
~
! oarh
C caCioos or history of unstable moils 1n the lisediate viclni[y? Tf so. I(A-veaq
d. Are chere surface 1
deseribe.
~
ffEM # 9
PAGE ~ OF J/
2
ZE -13Q A-'`1(0
. . ,
• • .;POfUt1E ENVIRONMENTAL OROINIINCE
(WAC 191-11-460) Settioo 11.10.230(t)
~ B. ENVIROIMENTAL ELEMENTS(tontinued)
Eraluation For ^
Agency Use Only lf'~
e. Describe the purpose, type, and app~mate wntlties of any filling or grading proposed. ~rJ
Indicate source of fill.
f. Could erosion o a ur as a sult of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe.
~
~
i
About ahat percent of the site will be covered w t in~ ervlous surfaces afte constru
9 tion (for example, asphalt or buildings)? ~I~ p ~~L° ~ NlD S
ee
50e IP(ctn, vra,b~ ~
'tD de~c~rnrli,~~ . ~
h. ProposeE me~ res to ►eGute or tontrol ero s n. or ther impacts to the eartA, if any: ~
~
?C~aOF ,
~
r
~
2. AIR
a. What type of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (f.e., Cust, auta++obtle, odors
industrial, wood smoke) during construttlon anG when the project 1 leted? if af y,
:nr a 11 y describe and give approximate Quantttes tf known. re yrJ a .3
b. Are there any off-slte sources of 4slons or odo that aiay aff e your proy osal' If so.
generally dezcribe. j~ ~ /
r
~
t
'
;
i~/CJ~1 P ~
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emisslons or otber iapacts to air. if any:
•
3. wATER
a. Surftce:
(1) Is there any surface water body on or in the iawedlate vicinity of the stte lncluding year-
roun0 and seasonal streams. saltwter. lakes, ponds, wetlanCsl? !f yes, describe type artd n
provide names. If appropriate, state what Ttream or rirer it tlows into. v`
(2) Will the project require any woNc over. in, or ad3acent to (Mithin 200 fjeey~ the described I
waters? If yes, please describe and attacfi avallable plans. /IZ ~
I
I
nEM # g
3 PAGE 'q OF
Z~• ~3~~
,
. . ssos~►aa trvi~ea~z►i, otcixu~cz
(aAC 19T-11-960) Seetioo 11.10.2~0(1)
B. LNVIRONlQNTA1. EIMM 1':'S (eontinued)
Evalua[lon Foc
Aseacy Use On17
(3) Estioate the asoun[ oE fill aad dredte material that vould Ds placed in or resoved frou the
•urface vater or vetlands aod indicate the area of the •ite that~ y6uld be affeeted. Indicate
the •ource of till wterial.
(4) vill the proposal require sutfue water vithd n vala or diverslon$'. Cive easral deserip- Pool ~
tion, purpose, and approxiaace Quaatities, !f knovn.
(5) Doe• the proposal lie vithin a 100-pear flood plain? If so, oote lou[Sun on the site plan. ✓
~v
(5) Does the proposal involve •ny disc}u rZee of vuce aacerials to surface va~e,~s? If •o, ✓
de■cribe the cype of vastc and •nticipated volu~e o( dischar;e.
b. Ground:
(1) uill sroundvater De withdravn, or vill vater De dischar`ed to troundvster' Give geaeral
description, purpose, and approxi+ute quaatltles. if Imovn.
Deseribe waste aaterlal that vill ee dischargad loto the =rouad trom septlc tank• or other
unitsry vaste trss oatnt [aeillt7. DescriDe the =eneral slse of the syst m, the nuaber of
houaes to be •erved (it applicable) or the ntmber of persoos the s7rsten(s) are expetted to 5;elj ~.I~
s e rve .
1
~ c-ve/' C,/oa tv~wI s 'h1Vr1Q
L°nyl cv+ ~ovn sv Q c#~ fio
t'v
(3) Desezibe any sys[ems, other tAsn thof• dsslsnad for the dlsposal of sanitarp va~te. Cv~t~u~~ Nr~ •
inscalled for the purpose of disehar=in= tluids belov the grouod surtu e(locludas srsceas such 1
as chose for the disposal of scorm vacer or draloase [zoa tloor draloA). Deseribe the cype of
systes, the •sount of asterial to be disposed of [hrough the srstea snd the types oI material•
likely co be disposed of (includln6 sLateriais vhich aay socer the ~r~ ~oadw r tnt17 chrou`h .2
•pills or as a result of tirefightin= activicies). fNn
.
aneas
Co►-4n► •
(6) Will any eheaicals (espeelally or;anic solvents or pecrolew fusla) De stored in aDove-
grouad or uoder`rouad •torage tsdu?~/U so, vtiac q nd qu~ntitles o( matarial• vill be -
otored?
ITUA #
4 PAGE ~ OF _
7-S MAI(a
i
ZANL IIf9ItO1QWNLI. OtDINAHCE ~
~ (6JAC 197-11-960) See[ion 11.10.230(1)
.E. LRPLAOlMlf'fAL II.MUN'tS (contlnued)
Evaluation Tor
(5) Vhac yrotective oeasuree vill be taken to insurt chat laaka or spilla of any eheaical• Ageae) Use Onlr
atored or used oo site vl11 not be alloved to pereolate to =roundva[er (this Sacludes neasure•
to keep chesicals out of disposal ■ystea• deseri d ln 1b(2) and 3D(1)'
c. Vater Runoif (including storm vacer):
(1) Describe the •ource of tueoft (intluding sto n vateT) snd tiet:wd of collaetion and disposal
if anr (include auaatities, if knovn), tdh~ v111 ter f ! Will this water Ilov ieto
other vateri? If •o, deacribe.
~ n
"fY Cl fSeobm
Z~ ~ a~ic~.t~~rl[S•
(2) :Jill anr chealeal• De stored, handled or used on tf+e site !a a lou tioa vhere & spill or J
leak vill drain to surface oT aroun a[ or co astocm vacer dlspo wl srstm dlseRaralna to
surface or grounA w[er' /
(J) Could vsste saterlal• enter gT wnd or sucfaee v[ers? If so, generally describe.
d. Proposed measures to reduce o[ eoatrol •u[face, `round. and rvnotf vatet ispacts, tf •n7 (lf
c che proposed aetion lie• vithia the Avuifer Sensitive Aru be •speCia117 clear on •xplanicioar
r rslatias to facilitie• concetniat Saccions 3b(4), 3E(5), •ad 3c(2) of thi• cMcklist):
4. Puvrs
a. rheck or circle typc ot ve`etatlon tound oe the aite:
deciduovs tree: alder, auple, aopen, oCher.
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other.
•hrubs.
~ gtass.
paSEure.
crop or gralo.
vet soll pL nta, cattall, Duttsreup, bullrush, •kumk eabba;e, other.
N cer plencs: water 1121y, ee2`Cass, al2foil, o[hac.
other types of vesetation. ~
b. Nhat kind and aaount of veaetation vill pe rarovsd or altsred? exiSbn
.~1I I
f"mo~ .
c. List threacened or endangered •pecie• Imown to be on or asar ths •ite.
d. Proposed landacaping, use ofyYets. or ocDer ieu re• to p~ or enhiace ve6etacion j
on the slte, if any: ~
PAGE Lp OF '
s
~
'
(W11C 197-11-960) Section 11.10.230(1) :ANE ENYIRONMEMTAL ORDIMANCE
'
B. ENYIRONME!lT11L ELE?1ENT5 (continued)
Evaluation For
Agency Use Only
5. ANIMALS
a. Clrcle any birds and animals which have been observed on or neer the site or are knoMn to be on
or near the s1te:
birds: ha~+k, heron. eagle, songbirds, other: G~
mamaials: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
fish: bass. salaion, trout, herring, shellftsh. other: ~
other:
b. List any threitened or endangered species known io De on or nsar the sfte.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? if so, explain. Wa
~
d. Proposed neasures to preserve or enhance wildllfe. 1f sny: /7 Q1 ~ •
f
1
5. ENERGY ANO `1ATURAL RESOURCES
a. what kinds of energy (elettric, natural gas, wood stovt. solar) wl11 be useE to aieet the
the complcted project's energy needs? Describe vheCher it will be used for heating, manufac-
turing, etc.
-WAi AA
b. Would your project affect e potentlal use of solar energy by adjacent propertles? Jf so, ~
generally describe. ,
ti
~ i
i
~
a
~
c. What kinds of ener9Y conservatSon fcatur s are intluded 1n the plans of this proposal? list
other propostd arcasures to reEuCe or Co ro1 energy fnpttts. 1f arty:
. ~
1
t
7. ENVIRONNENTAL HEALTH
a. Are there •ny envlron.enttl health ha2arCs, Including exposure to toxic cheAicals, risk of flre
and explosion, spill. or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result ot this proposal? lf so.
describe.
~
(i) Describe special energency services that mlght be requi nd.
i
tTGlrl
6 PA r] OF~
-Z&I3q~-1b
sro,u►ICE MxvisoMMxri►t oinirtMz
(L►AC 197-11-960) Sectior 11.10.230(1)
E. LRVIRONML1rM LI.zmzN'LS (contlnusd)
Lvaluaclon For
Ageaqr Use Only
EINIROHtQtT:AL HEAL:fl (contlnued)
(2) Proposed seasure• to redute or control envlromencal lualth hasards. if aar:
/
b. Noise:
(1) What trpss of aoiss e:ist in the area vhieh mar affect 7rwr project (for esaaple: [raffic,
equipmnt, opera[ioa, other'
~
(2) What cype• and levels of aoise vould be ctea[ed bry or a uoclated vi[h [he project on a ~
short-tets or a lonE-ters basi• (for e:aapls: traEfic, eon truetion. operatlon, other)' Indicate 'Nd~ / ~
vhac hour• noisc vould eome froa che site. ~V~
1 ~
, ~
~/.'L- ~o
- - n,o lse as~ak-d w 14%
8-3 L)ses a~d.. adQ ►t-io~.r
(3) Proposed searure to reduee or control noite ispacts, if any: ~1'ov e, ~a ~c,
t
9. LA:7D AND SHORELI`IY USE ~ ~
a. What in the current w e of the •lte and adJacent properties'. /
~
e
b. lLs the s1ce been used for •griculture? If so, describe. y
/
c. DescrlDe any rtrucrures on [he site. 'e, .
d. Nill •ny •[ruc[ure• be deeolished? If •o, vhich? Cy7
e. What 1s the current soniaa classification of the •ite? ~1~3
co p.
f. What is he current caapreheosive pLn desigeutioa of the site? LW:eww
~~a~ ~ ;~'Z~ . j~ ~f
g. Lf applieable, vhat ls the curtreat shoreline master pro6ras designatloa of the s1Ce'~ / ~
h. Has ao7r part of the site basn fied as an 'enrironmenta117 waaitive' •reat If so,
specify.
NEM # 9
1. Appro:iaately hov sanr people vould teside or vork ln the eapletsd projec[? &'14e G~ol ~
PAGE OFJ/ _
7
-
X11fE IIIVIROlQMRI'AI. OYDINANCE
({IAC 197-11-960) See[ion 11.10.230(1)
.E. L1fVIR0lRMR>I. IIZMZ1rf5 (eoatinued)
Svaluation For
1liency Usc Only
j. Approxlsately hov san7 people vould the cosplscad project dlsplace? ~ '004
k. Proposcd aaasures co •void or reduea dimpLcaent lapacts, if any:
1. Yroposed measures to ensure che proposal i• coupatiEle vith eziatitu and projected Lnd usas aod (tM~ 1
plans, it anr:
r~ / ~ c~ $ ~ ~ ~ ~a ✓ ~l ~ GV,n~~
G'~i►~j~~~-f l~/ ~
t1J 1 t"V\ :!~C . ZZV1 I
~ . nCJ
. code.
9. HOUSINC
a. Approxisacely hov sanr w+its vould be providad, if anyi todicate vbechar hlgh-. ■iddle-, or
lorincome houiing.
b. Approxiaately hov aanr uaita, if any, would be ellaloated' Iodlute vhsther hl=h-, aiddle-, or
lov-incose housing. .
-100'w
c. Proposed measures co reduce or control housina impac[s, 1[ any:
10. AfSTIlE7IC5 ~
a. Hhat 1s the tallest helght of anr proposed ■tructuce(*), aot lncludlnt antecmast Whac is the 1
principsl exterior buildias material(~) roposed'. .
Y~rY
D, uhac vievs in ctu imedlace vicinitr vould be altered or obstructedt "'~43
• ,
c. Proposed measures to reduce or con[rol aesthetlc impacta. Sf aa7: .G 7 " ~!5 ~
"ooo
~i✓ ~f ~ ~c~r7 i" GDQ' c/ ~
/
11. LICH:' AND G7.ARC
A. '.ltut cype of ll;ht or gLre vill tha pro sal prod e! Jhat time of da7 vould ic aaiol7 oecur'
>r / 1~2 S
b. Could light or t Lre Erou the finishsd projsct be a aafec7 hasard or incertec• vith •ievsi # ~
- PAGE L? OF__br
c. 1Jhat exis[ing off-sice •ourees of li=ht or aLre affett your proposal?
1 1
~
\
• `
d. Proposed seasure• to nduce or coatrol ll;ht aod gLre utM. f aa7: At 1~ ~ ~i ~i
~ ~
GT/~/ ~
l~cu.-~cd o~ - s, k cold
S1na~ l nor " khd atr
wweio"tv s hu nda nes •
aun aMRoHeENTu oaDnurice
cvAc 1970-ii-96o, s.ccioo 11.10.230(i)
•E. DfVI1tOfRQlfiAL B.EMElRS (eontinnad)
Evaluation For
Agency o.e onlr
12. RECRL'A2ION
a. tfiat deslanattd and lnfonal ree eational opportunities are 1n the immediate vicinic7?
b. Hould the proposad project disp Lce an7r a:isting reereational wes' If so, describe.
c. Proposed woure• to reduce or eontrol Lpaccs on recreacion, lncludini recru cional opportuni-
ties co be provided ths project or appliunt. if an7:
13. HIS':'ORIC AND CIILTURAL PALSERYA:ION
a. Are there any places or oEyects listed on or proposed for oational. stace or local preserva-
r next to t M site! If so, generally describe.
cion reaisters kiwvn co :;Zr,"
b. Generall7r deseriDe ao7 landmark• or evidence of hlstorlc azehaeolosical, acleotlfic or cul[ural
isporcance Imavn to De on or xt [o the s1[e.
qw~
c. Proyosed ■easures to reduce or eontrol lapRCts, lf any: ego
14. :F.ApSPOR'ATION
a. Idencify public street• aad hiahvars servin= the site and descrlDe proposed acce u to the .
existing street •rst a. Shoron slte p no. lf any. _
9~ ~i-a a c~w
~
b. Is •ite currently •erved br public tcansit' If noc, vhac is ths appros3aace dlstance co the
nsar t crawit stopT
6/e c- k~
c. Ilov un7 parlcla; •paee• voald tfie eompleted projtet haret Bov tiey vould the project JUASAAL«' - r~C L/~ Q fwIi~ IK vl ~,/y.~/~ `
•
VnWore todeJeemioe
Ptsd°Q us
d. Vill che propo ul reauire •oy otv raads or •tr M ts, or Lwprovemncs to •:istina road• oc streat• C
noc ineludinQ dri v y v a7at If •o. goneTally deseriba (iodiute vh~[her public or pri• e). ~ VIe~e tJ
i~
~
- . , ~a~ •
j~ ' (Yp,rw ery)cr,
e. uill che projeec use (or occur in tlse loediate viciaity of) rcer, rail, or air crsnsportationt ~•JV"'~r"R Y ~C IM
If so, aenara117 dekriDs. i hp ~
t'`_ ~u t "d ,
nEM # ~
' PAGE IC~ OFLl
-Zj~,1~ta-7~
~ 11E II1VZi0NlaoRlJL OtDIIUN(.Z
(YAC 197-11-960) Ssecioc 11.10.270(1)
D.' IItpIRpIRWRI/1L II.IIKEfS (continwd)
Evaluation For
116anq Ose Oo17
f. Aov aany whiculat trip• psc dar vould De cenerated tF7 the completsd project? IE lmovn,
indieate v n peak vould oceur.
~
` yL S~G1 AL
PIOLeN ario~ os~,S'
.
S. Proposed msasure) to r"uceor contro transportatioa inpaets, i~7:
re
%VWd by S Po. C.o
~t/1 • o~ Sp C~'~.
15. PUDLIC SERVICES vV
~
A. 57ould the projeet result in ao lacrusod o"d for public ser►ice• (tor eLsple, fire procsction,
police procection, health care, schooL, other)? If so. =snerally descTibe.
~
b. Proposed seasur to reduee or control direct lapacts oe quDlie setviees, if anr:
16. lJ'ILITIES f 1
A. Circle util rr • avai L ble at the •ite: elaecricit~ural 9 as vates~if~6~
serviee celephone •anitary satv" ssptic •y~tea.
b. Describe the utillties that •re proposod for the projeec. [M utillt7 providing ctw •ervice anE
the genesal conacructioo •ctivities oo the site or in the lamdlate rltlnity vhlch aight be
needed. . • •
c. sicxATURE
1, the undersigned. ovaar under the penalt7 of perjury that the abw►e rssponses are wde Cruthfully and to the Desc of ay kawladge. I also
understand that, tlould thers be •ny villtul dereprsmentacion or villful Lek of full dlselosurt on ry parc, the a ency way vithdrav aay
deteraination of eonsisaifieaoee that lt d tht iooue la rellaoee upon thir eheckllst.
Date: ponent An~
- ~ (41~ue hlat or T7pe) ~
Proponen . Addrass: .~~C/ ~ ~ `7
C ' _(S1g u /
Phone: i~~&Js~~ z~~
Date: ~`7 4-.1 ~
Person cospleting fon:
1-4
Phone:
♦ '
TOR S'fAtT DSL ON1.T
I' U H
Staff seaDer(s) revievios checlclist:
Da.ed on this stsff revisv of the enriron~ental checkliat • othar partiasnt infocmatfon. the statf:
A. ~ Coneludes tlut there are no probable sisa.ifiunt adverse laputt aod recooaads a dateralnatlon of ooositnifleance.
E. Cooelude• that probaDle sifaiflcaac adwrie en+ironmeotal lapacts do esist for the eurrsat proposal and recoaend• a aicigacod dater-
sination of nons isnlflcanee vlth conditioos.
C. Coaeludss ehat chere are probaDle slge►ifiunt adverse anvironmental lapact• and reeamends a determination of mignificance.
TILIIIC !Q - $75.00
10 ?rEM # 9
PAGE 1 / OF_.Ll
u
~
~
AGENDA
1L~gaiIl IYotnee You° Uhe IPmbIlnc Iffiemii°nmg 3eftn°e
'TIHIIE SPOKANIE ~OUMPTY SU3IIDIIVIISR0IY/7L0NfffiIG
IHIIEAIRffRTG IEMAWNIER (CGMM~TrTIEIE
DATE: DECEMBER 15, 1994 TEVViE: 9:00 A.M. OR AS SOON
TBEREAFTER AS POSSIBLE
PLACE: Spokane County Planning Department TELEPHONE: (509) 456-2205
1026 West Broadway
Spokane, WA 99260
HEARING E;XAMINER COMMITTEE STTE TOURS:
The SubdivisionfZ,oning Hearing Exa.miner Committee may tour all sites advertised for this
hearing by County car, accompanied by a Spokane County Planner, on Tuesday, December
13, 1994, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. For details, contact the Spokane County Planning
Deparnnent.
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA):
A Detemnination of Nonsignificance (DNS) has been issued for most proposals scheduled for
hearing. The "change of conditions" and "time extensions" are usually exempt from the
provisions of SEPA. A DNS is a decision, based upon information available at the tune the
DNS was issued, that no EIS has been ordered to be prepared. Comments regarding a DNS:
(1) are due by the close of business hours, Tuesday, December 13, 1994; (2) should reference
the specific file number; and (3) should be addressed to the Spokane County Planning
Deparanent, West 1026 Broadway, Spokane, WA 99260. Additionally, comments on the
DNS and any other environmental documents may be made at the public hearing, the time and
place of which is set forth above. Contact the Planning Department far more infonnation.
In the event that a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) has been issued for a
project, it means a project sponsar has agreed to certain project modificarions or conditions
designed to mitigate environniental impacts which would otherwise have necessitated an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
In the event that a Determination of Significance (DS) has been issued for the project, it means
that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been required for the project Copies of the
environmental documents are available at the Spokane County Planning Department, West
1026 Broadway, Spokane, WA 99260.
ADDTI'IONAL INFORMATION:
Project details, legal descriptions, and other infomzation for these applications aze on file and
available for public inspection in the Planning Department.
THE HEARING EXAMINER CO WILL NOR:MALLY RECESS FROM 12:00
NOON TO 1:30 P.M. FOR LUNCH. TTEMS NOT HEARD PRIOR TO 5:00 P.M. MAY BE
COrf1'INUED TO A LATER DATE AS ANNOUNCED BY 'IHE CTIADZMAN OF 'IHE
HEARING EXA,MINER CO . 5:00 P.M. IS THE TENTATIYE HEARING
ADJOL;fRNMENT. THE CO WII.L HEAR ITEMS IN NUMERICAL
SEQUENCE AS INDICATED BY THE ITEM rIUMBER.
All meetings and hearings will be conducted in facilities which are accessible to d.isabled individuals. For more
particular information, please contact the Spokane County Planning Department at 456-2205.
Yl'El1A # 0
PAGE I OF ~
PAGE ~
ZEl-39A76 .
mw
\
~ _
~ Q LD$ N a co 4
O OU3 ~ 9 200 2C
? {98 19
a W 195 1191
> ~ ~g 190 19 1 ~92 133 t~ N.R
AUGUSTA ~ tg7 188
4 185 166 ~ - B
~ ~ w ~ -
180 18 182 183 t8 rC5 SG}-too~ W
MAXWELI"' A~ ~IEE. I~~~ tary) cr-.
Qr
Z = ~OON
W N ' ~
11~ ~ 1
t7 ~ .
i -
- ; .
~T
~
500 NE ' s ZAL. ~
~ • ' - ~ FREEwAY
.
.
90
~ . ~ ~~XVa,r ~:7 • ~ t~,~ P
_ N. P V 601
N°
p,o~ ~ G141
r Q
9~
,
Pp"`' • " ,
L.Y~ < < . .
~ • ~ ~ ' .
~ r ~ ~ ~-E•r .
~ ~ ~ ~ v
~ ~ ~ ~ •~RO~ t~ ~ Q
,T OF FI ~ . AL Y
. . . ~ ~t j ♦ M n i a
CJ ~ ~ } vR
i ~ ~
• • ~ 7 ~V£
Pill
IN
i • . ~/a •
O , .
• ~ ' • ~
Av'E •
s 1ST . E ~ p ►J ~ ~ .c ~ ~,,,Ca
rt • . ~ f ~ , r-'~
ND 6
~ 2 t Y N ~ Q~
C
~
r ~ Q AV E• c~+
f 4uRTH
v p~c;c , _ ~ ~ W ~ .
V ~ • d
~ rN A
1
• ~ ~ }
z.
. Q
~
,Mwowlllllllllllll
. ~1
~
.
ITEM NO. 7
ZE-139A-76 Change of Conditions to an existing Regional Business (B-3) zone
Generally located south of and adjacent to Interstate 90, approximately
800 feet east of Barker Road in Section 17, Township 25 North, Range
45 EWM, Spokane County, Washington.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Urban and within the Priority Sewer
Service Area (PSSA)
PROJECT DESCRIPT'ION: Change of Cond.itions to an existing
Regional Business (B-3) zone to allow all uses in the Regional Business
(B-3) zone.
SITE SIZE: Approximately 20 acres
APPLICANT: Donwood Inc.
502 North Glenn Road
Spokane, WA 99206
(509) 924-2559
I
iTEM # °
PAGE 3 OF 3
J
~ -
4vh
MEMORANDUM
Spokane County Division of Engineering
Spokane County Utilities
Spokane County Health District
Spokane County Division of Buildings
Spokane County Air Pollution Control Authority
Spokane County Parks Department
Spokane County Boundary Review Board
Spokane Regional Transportation Council
Spokane Transit Authority
WA State Department of Transpoitarion
WA State Deparunent of Ecology
WA State Department of Health
Fire Protecrion Districts No. 1, 3, 4, and 9
Central Valley School District
Cheney School District
Mead School District
West Valley School District
City of Spokane Public Works
Consolidated Imgation District
Modern Electric Water District
Pasadena Park Imgation District
Spokane County Water District No. 3
Vera Water and Power
Whitwarth Water District
FROM: John Pederson, Senior Planner
DAZE: November 14, 1994
SUBJECT: Review and comments for below listed files for the hearing of December 15, 1994
Please review and return any comments for the following files by November 30, 1994. If you
have any comments regarding roads and circulation in your response, please forward that
response also to the Spokane County Engineer's Office. Please forward your
comments to the attention of the assigned planning personnel.
1. ZE-46-94
UR-22, B-2 & B-3 to B-3
Sec. 8-25-44
Sponsor. Inland Empire Baptist Temple/Dwight Hume
Assigned Planner: Ken Kuhn
ITEJA # V
PAGE I OF ~
, r
. -
12/94 HEC General Circulation
November 14, 1994
Page 2
2. AIW-27-94 Appeal
Sec. 17-24-22
Sponsor. David Cowdrey _
Assigned Planner. Mike Nicholson
3. PE-1757-94/PUDE-5-94
Sandy Ridge
Sec. 31-26-44
Sponsar: Northwood Properties/Ramm Associates
Assigned Planner: Stacy Bjordahl
4. PE-1763-94
Remington Hill
Sec. 25-25-44
Sponsor: William Evans
Assigned Planner: Ken Kuhn
5. PN-1764-94/ZN-47-94/PUDN-9-94
SRR-5 to SR-1/2
Sec. 26-27-43
Sponsor. Robert Guthrie
Assigned Planner: Mike Nicholson
6. ZN-48-94
SRR-S to SRR-2
Sec. 23-27-43
Sponsor: Julie Holland
Assigned Planner: Ken Kuhn
7. ZE-139A-76 Change of Conditions
Sec. 17-25-45
Sponsor. Donwood Inc/Gondon Curry
Assigned Planner: Stacy Bjordahl
8. ZW-49-94
I-1 to I-2
Sec. 12-24-41
Sponsor: E.W. Brockman
Assigned Planner. Stacy Bjordahl
9. PE-1765-9411:E-50-94/PUDE-10-94
Fraser Estates
Sec. 32-26-44
Sponsor: Mike Kinney/Ramm Associates
Assigned Planner: John Pederson
10. ZN-40C-85 Change of Conditions
Sec. 8-26-43
Sponsor: Douglass-Vandervert Development
Assigned Planner: Mike Nicholson
ITEM # 17
PAGE OF_,~
•
. , -
,
• SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING
ZONE RECLASSIFICATION APPLICATIUNECEIvEu
pART I OCT 0 5 1994
sPOKaNe couNTY
A. GENERAL INFORMATION: pLANNING DBPARTM6NT
NAME OF APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE
MAILING ADDRESS ..:!e:p 42jo7 d4l 4/ro,6z I" eg:vl
CITY• O eA~ STATE ZIP. -q-folo ~G
PHONE (work) 9c Z (home)
IF APPLICANT IS NOT OWNER, INCLUDE WRITTEN OWNER AUTHORIZATION
FOR APPLICANT TO SERVE AS REPRESENTATIVE.
LEGAL ow►rrEx's NAME PxornE
MAILING ADDRESS /I/ ~1~1~1y! •
CITY STATE ZIP
~
PROJECT/PROPOSAL SITE AREA (acres or sq ft) 7,w . v~~3 ~
ADJACENT AREA OWNED OR CONTROLLED (acres or sq ft.) ~
ASSESS4R PARCEL #S OF PROJECT/PROFOSAL
ASSESSOR PARCEL #'S OF ADJACENT AREA OWNED OR CONTROLLED ~STREET ADDRESS OF PROPUSAL
EXISTIING ZONE CLASSIFICATTON(S) ATE ESTABLISHED)
EXISTII~IG USE OF PROPERTY _ ~
PROPOSED ZONIlVG
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CATEGORY
SCHOOL DISTRICT .
FIRE DISTRICT
✓
uim~
WATER PURVEYOR !4.:a P / GG7~~'L
PROPOSED USE OF PROPERTY Single family dwellings Duplexes Mulnfamily dwellngs
Manufacaued homes Busmess QQ Industnal Mixed Use
Other ( ) - Descnbe .
LIS VIOUS PLA,NNING DEPARTMENT ACTIONS IlvVOLVING THIS PROPERTY 21620,&Ve
aC
.
~
B. LEGAL/ZONE RECLASSIFXCATION INFORMATION:
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL Zasl A ~ XvIA~ C. Zn !
SECTION ~ TOWNSHIP a5 RANGE ~
NAME OF PUBLIC ROAD(S) PROVIDING ACCESS
/
~
WIDTH OF PROPERTY FRONTING ON PUBLIC ROAD .
ITEIM # ~p
PAGk ~ .,p -
~
z~~131A -'q( v
.
• JNF RECLASSIFICATTON APPLICATION Page 2 of 4
.
DOES THE PROPOSAL HAVE ACCESS TO AN ARTERIAL OR PLANNED ARTERIAL YES 00 NO
NAME(S) OF ARTERIAL ROADS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY FOR EACH ZONE RECLASSIFICATTON PROP SED
~
u;q ~
e.
We 747
• REir
~
EXISTIlNG ZONE(S) + TO PROPOSED ZONE(S) 3
FOR nffi F4LLOWWG DESCRIBED
PROPERTY (ATTACH LEGAL DESCRIPTION STAMPED BY LAND SURVEYOR OR PROVIDE
BELOW
IF YOU DO NOT HOLD TTTLE TO THE PROPERTY, WHAT IS YOUR INTEREST IN M ~Gv7t~~
WHAT ARE T'HE CHANGED CO~~f~TIONS OF'[~~7~F AREA WHICH YOU FEEL e
~~~/*AKE nZ
PROPOSAL WARRANTED? c~ c !o-c.v
WHAT IMPACT WILL~T~ PROPOSED ZONE RECLASSIFICATION HAVE ON 'TI~ ADJACENT
PROPERI'IES? i ~'~~"ne..-
WHAT FACTORS SUPPORT THE ZONE RECLASSIFICATION? /9,Va
i ~
~
.
WHAT MEASURES DO YOU PROFOSEIYMITIGATE YOUR PROPOSAL'S IlVIPACT ON
SURROUNDING LAND USE?
RE-CEI' ED
o^T ~199~
# ~
PAGE ~ OF J~
0- RECE V
. ~
- '~;)NEvRECLASSIFICATION APPLICATION OCT O 5 1994Page 3 of 4
3POKANE COUNTY
PART II pLANNIMG DEPARTMENT
THIS SEC'lTON OF THE APPLICATION WII.L PROVIDE THE PLANNING DEPAR'I'MENT STAFF WITH
WRITTEN VERIFICATION THAT THE APPLICANT HAS HAD PRELDI]NARY CONSULTATION WITH THE
AGENCIES IDEN'IgibD RESULTS OF THE PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION SHALL BE INCORPORATED
IN THE PROPOSAL BEFORE FINAL SUBMITTAL TO THE PLA,NNING DEPARTMENT.
FIRE MARSHALL/FIRE DISTRICT A THIS PR4POSAL IS WITHIIV FIRE PROTEC NO ~
B ADEQUATE ARRANGEMENTS (HAVE) AVE TU~a BEEN MADE TO MEET OUR NEEDS
IN PROVIDING FOR AN ADEQUATE WATER SYSTg-M AND FACII,IT'IES FOR FIRE
PROTECTION PURPOSES
C. RECOMWENDED FIRE FLOW. L4- hk, , OR UNABLE TO CALCULATE NOW
BECAUSE USE IS NOT DEFINITIVE; AND WII..L BE DETER:MINED AT BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION TIME
D REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE
FIRE DISc P ~CT SIGNATURE/TI DATE
WATER PURVEYOR A. SATISFACTORY ARRANGEMENTS A~$TIC WATER AND FIRE FLOW
REQUIREMENTS (HAVE) + BEEN MADE
B REQUIltEMENTS/COMMENTS Amr6le iKeua sec•l 6-,.oc.t.0
9ll/f/
WATER DISTRICT ASIiGNATURE E DATE
COUNTY ENGINEER A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE AND GENERAL REQUIIZEMENTS FOR ROADS
AND DRAINAGE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT
A COMMENTS
SIGNATURE/TY'I"Y.E DATE
COUNTY UTILITIES
A PR:ELIMIIVARY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR
SUBMITTAL OF THIS PROFOSAL (HAVE) ~.TJOTJ,, BEEN SATISFIED THE DESIGNATED
WATER PURVEYOR FOR THIS SITE IS
A COMMENTS
SIGNATUREfI'ITLE DATE
HEALTH DISTRICT
A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLAPAVE AL REQUIREMENTS FOR
SUBMITTAL OF THIS PRO SAL (H VE) NOT BEEN SATISFIED
A COMMENTS. ,
4DAi
SIGNATURE/ITI'.E .
SEWER PURVEYOR A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION HAS TAKEN PLACE AND GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
PROVISION OF PUBLIC SEWER ARE UNDERSTOOD BY T'HE APPLICANT
A. CON[MFNTS vv~~
SIGNATURE/'TITLE DATE
ITEM # ~p
PAGF ~ OF 4c A
'„rs'►a- " ~
RECMvEn
ZONE REGLASSIFICATION APPLIGATION oCT O 51994Page 4 of 4
SPOw+Ne couNnr
PART III PLAN"ING DEPARTMENT
SURVEYOR VERIRCATTON
I, THE UNDERSIGNED, A LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR, ' ORMATTON '
REQtJESTED FOR THE ZONING MAP AND WRITTEN LEG D ~
~~f V
_
SIGNED t << Z z''
ADDRESS i~'IZf/- 3 M6
_ L 1
EXPfRES 1213/9.
PART
(SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNERS 4R LETTER OF AUTHORIZATTON) •
I, THE UNDERSIGNED, SWEAR OR AFFIlZM UNDER PENALTY 4F PERJURY THAT THE ABOVE
RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE
I FURT'HER SWEAR OR AFFItM THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE AREA PROPOSED
FOR TFiE PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED LAND USE ACTION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED
HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER
BEHALF
NAME DATE
ADDRESS /G' Lvl~,OVW PHONE.
ZE?
r ~
~
SIG ATURE OF Mailt' RESENTATTVE DATE
STATE OF WASHIlNG'PON )
) ss
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
SIGNED AND SWORN OR A,FFIRMED BEFORE ME ON THIS DAY 4F
~
, 1994, BY
.
~
NOTf1RY SEAL ~ i
Notary Public m and i the State of Washmgton
Residing at
, / L
My appointment e pues
PART V
(TO BE COMPLETED BY T'HE PLANNING D ARTmEN1')
DATE SUBMITTED FILE # C
DATE ACCEPTED. h'oq BY ~71
TOTAL FEES: CL-LQD RECEIPT ~
ITEM # ~p
PAGE ~ OF 39 A '-ko
I
♦ I
J
e r
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNINQcuvw
CHANGE UF CONDITIONS FOR A OCT o 51%4
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ZONE CHANGF,qNN NQNpEPART ENT
Date: Application No.
.
Name Of Applicant/Represemative:
Mailing Address: ~ ale-,0,0 /10, ~
City: State: ZiP:
Phone: ~91r,~~eo (Work) 5P-6 -,,253 5P (Home)
Existing Zone Classification: /9- 3
Date Existing Zone Classificadon Established:
Legal DescriPti 'on of ProPert' . m d ~a6r~~o
4ez
Y'
/lso z.
Se,ction L7 Township Range
Source of Legal: e:~z .
Parcel No.: O q
PROP05ED CHANGE OF CONDITIONS
Reference specific "Condition(s)" of original, approval. (Cite the applicable condition from the
F'indings and Order of the Hearing Examiner Committee's public hearing).
~ ~d~ ~i~ 5%4~o - ~edr,~
4~le
3
Give detailed explanadon of request for change ia status of the proposal.
!
If development of the site will be changed substantially by this request, or the property has
bound,aries different than originally proposed, a revised development plan must be submitted.
~ rre-i1' l
A ture Qplicant gent Address if different than Applicant
, .
Rev. 8/93; sam ITEM #
PAGE ~ pF ~
~ r ~ ZE -139 A -7(o
v
I ~
'v SPOKAiiE COUNTY PuANNING
PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE FOR:
Thiis preluninary conference form documents the required inforniation for submittal pnor to
acceptance of your application by the Spokane County Planning Department. It also provides
uifoimation concenaing your pamcular proposal and those issues or concerns that caa affect your
application. You will need to maintain conta,ct vnth the Plannuig Department as new informauon
becomes available during the application and review process which may change your proposal or
affect the requirements of your application. Professional planners are available tio provide
assistance and advice concenung your proposal. Land use applications typically require fees and
compliance with regulations other than those of the Planning Department This form is intended to
give you basic information and refer you to other agencias for follow-up.
After compledon of the requued application(s) and exhibits as shown on the Submittal Checklist,
an apphcadon acceptance and design review meeting will be scheduled approximately 2 to 3 weeks
after the submittal of your applicaaon. This meeting will provide a review of the completeness of
your application and exhibits and also provide you vvith requirements and recommendations from
other agencies. After this meeang, if appropnate, your proposal will be scheduled for the next
available pubhc hearing.
Applicant:
Address•
~
Phone: Caip (work) (home)
Parcel No. 551 Sec-Twp-Rge / 7-Z ~ -~-4<S
Locataan. . "14~ ~ ~~Oro
1 G~
PROPOSAL INFORMATIUN
ISSUES/COMMENTS
IMPRO'vEMENTS jrIFC1RMATION
7(oC
Type of Access: Existing Zone: ~5 - 36 /3
Water District: Proposed Zone:
Fue District. Number of Lots: ~
Waste Water: Acres:
Proposed Use(s). 3 Comp. Plan:
ql-po =
Power/Phone: 4zx/, S ° Arterial Plan'
SIT - SPECIFIC INFORMATIOr1
Adjacent Zoning N,_j- ~Z, S~ W fJ
Adjacent Land Use N a/ S W
Affected By: Aquifer PSSA Shorelunes ~l'.
Overlay Zone(s) Easeme s
Influence Area (if within 1/2 mile of city) Environmental or Cultural Resources ~
Cnacal Areas , .
Nearest County Park(s) KF.Y DEPART11ENT/AGE CY CnNTACTS
~C`.ounty Engineer 456-3600 ~ -
~,,~County Utthaes 456-3604 ,
❑ Builduig & Safety 456-3675
~ ~
10 LRealth Ihstnct 324-1560
❑ County Parks 456-4730
QU,,water Purveyor " .
ffEw~ ~
PAGE
~
~
~
XONFERENCE FO_- _ Page 2
0/Sewer Purveyor ~
QJ.4='tDistrict _ •
~School District
Z--Ier (DOE, DOT, DNR,
City Planning)
~
PROPOSAL REni7IRES PROFESSIQNAL ASSISTANCE
urveyor
~
Z~
❑ En-~ ~
~
o ArduW ~ . .
❑ Planner
PREcONFERENC'E SLIMMARY NOTES AND RE(:OMNiENDATIONS
Plan ' g Issues:
~
Landsca in uffering: /
~
R
Land Use Compatibility:
442 r;-3"
~
v
A.ir Qu ' Co rm ce:
Mingatin eas Recommended:
~
Other Planning Department Approvals /AsLiated with Proposal: Certificate of Exempdon Variance Conditional Use
. ~ /
Plat Alteration 4
Zero Lot Line t~
Other ~ ~ S
. 00I i "'XI
Concerns or
.Ge
PRE!CONFERENCE
• dei
Prclimiriary Plat $47.00
Zone Reclassificauon $47.00
Planned Unit Development $47.00
Vacation or A.lteration of Finai Plat $47.00
Change of Condiaons ~ $31.00
Variance •
Other
Receipt # TOTAL $
•
ate er
SUBMIT THIS DOCUMENT WITH YOUIt APPLICATION AND OTHER EXHIBITS
T'~ ir
PAGE ~ ,OF~
a~ • ~r
i I
S p p K A N E C O U 1-4 T Y
PLANNING DEFARTMENT ~ MEIVIORANDUM WALL15 D HUBBARD, DIRECTOR
TO: Pat Harper, Spokane County Division of Engineenng
Brenda Sims, Storm Water Unlity
Jim Red, Spokane County Unlities Department
Steve Holderby, Spokane County Health Distnct
Wyn Bukenthal, Spokane County Parks & Recreanon Department
Greg Figg Department of Transportanon
Chnstine Fueston, Spokane Transit Authonty
Susan Winchell, Boundary Review Board
Glen Miles, Spokane Regional Transportahon Council
Central Valley School Distnct
Consohdated Imgadan Distnct
Fire Protection District No 1
FROM: John W Pederson, Senior Flanner
1
DATE: October 13, 1994
RE: Donwood Inc., Change of Conditions to an Existing Regional
Business (B-3) Zone
APPLI('ATION AC('EPTANCE AND DESIQL_REVIEly MEETIIyfi
Qctaber 26, 1994 AT 2 l5 PJ~L
COUNTY PLANNINC CnNFERENCE RQQM, 2ND FLfJOR
Please review the above application and use the attached APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN
REVIEW MEETIlNG FORM for your comments The Plannmg Department encourages your presence
at this meenng The sponsor and representative have been invited to also attend if you can not
attend, please forward your review comments on the attached form to Stacy B3ordahl for the
meering The attached APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DES[GN REVIEW FORMS will be given to
the sponsor at the meenng and included in the Planning Department file (so bnng ree copies to
the meeting) Thanks for your cooperation If you have any questions about the application,
please contact Stacy Bjordahl of the Planning Deparanent at 456-2205
c Donwood Inc
Attachments Applicauon Acceptanc.e and Design Review Form, Project Design, Site Plan
ITEM #
PAGE I OF ~
1026 WEST BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANE, WASHINGT'ON 99260-0240 •(509) 456-2205 • FAX (509) 456-2243 • TDD (509) 324-3166
y ~W
October 26, 1994, 2 15 p m
Donwood Inc
Generally located south of and adjacent to I-94, approaumately 800 feet east of Barker
Road in Secnon 17, Township 25 N, Range 45, EWM, Spokane County,
Washington
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Urban and within the Pnonty Sewer Service Area
(PSSA)
EXISTING/PROPOSED ZONING Regional Business (B-3)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Change of Conci.itions to an existing Regional Business
(B-3) zone to allow all those uses permitted in the Regional Business (B-3) zone.
PARCEL NUMBER 55175 0410
SITE SIZE Approximately 20 acres
APPLICANT Donwood, lnc
502 North Glenn Road
Spokane, WA 99206
(509) 928-0600
ASSIGNED PLANNER Stacy Bjordahl
~
PAM 1 _oF
APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE AND DESIGN REVIEW
SPUKANE COUNTY PLANNIIIIG DEPARTMENT
DePartment
Deparnnent Contact Person:
Action:
APP`LICATIQN ACCEPTANCS AND DESIGN REVffsW MEEIING:
-ftm to 4tiho Plgnning.~~~
Note-, The following infozmation is tio provide the praposal sponsor with primary agency
comments tio assi.st the sponsor and aid the processing of public hearing items heard befome
the Hearing Examiner Commitbee. The following info~mation does not provide a camplete
or bindi.ng final review of the pzvposal. This will ovcur only after the proposal is acceptied
and placeci on the Public Heazing Agenda. The areqtance of the annlication and
aoDeati-on on the Public Haring Agenda is the primary function of this
schedulin
meeting. A secondary function of this meeting is to provide a vmlunina-► r+eview of the
This will provide a fonim for the sponsor and other departments of what to
expect as standard develapment conditions and design recommendations.
The comments received are based on a preliminary review of the application fonn and site
plan by the Deparmnents and Agencies which have been circulated the information (not all
agenciesJdepmmmnts have been contactied--only those who have been determined m have
pritnary interest.
,
1. a. Does the application (or can the development) meet requirements to be placed
on the Public Heazing Agenda? ❑ YES ❑ NO
b. If no, what is lacking?
c. To schedule the next public hearing, a complete applicatian must be r+eceived
no later than or before the agenda is fnll.
The next public hearing is
2. After a p,oliminarv review of the 4MlicaLdon what "Conditions of Appmval" would
be required of the development? (Auach conditions if necessary)
trEg
PAGE ) OF j
/ cf q,1l , rf '
ii ,,,k,. .s-6175:oj1t,
i„r~~s7dre 90
3vo
0 ~
o0
4r 3 ~ Lor2
,(or 5 h
~
o Lor
~~1 0
r---
' Aros✓.uayl y I
~ - ~
D ~
!ar ~ ~G ` ,ZD. oao ~ <Br9
~
~ . .~a ooa ~
TRUCK STOP PflOPERTY
r
Legal Lota 2- 3- 4- 5 sud 9, Corbin Addition Co 41
Creeaacres, Approximately 10 acrea North of Bruadway
and Approximatelq 10 acrea Soutb, Broadway has a 60
rightrof-vay , Tha lcts will range in eize from
approximately 1 acrea to approximaCely 5 acres, all '
set back from property lines will be to code, Land- ~
scaping will be provided for each Lot Also, provis-
ioas for 208 drainage will be desigaed Water from ~
Consolidated is on the property, Electricity from
Washington Water Pover is oa the eroperty, Gas from I
Washin$ton Water Power will come from Barker Road,
Sewer is available across rhe AppleWay Road approxi- .Y ~
mately 100 feet
SITE PIAN
OF RECORD
Lr Er l3I rl r7IG7
,
" . 7..~. •w~..~w+.. 4-.~ _ _ i~3~~• «f..~~ r~lr'IYT' r!.' 1 r~ - ~f" / ~ w...•.rL~.~i1+~ ►.ev~ w ~ ~ "'uy~IfNF!~1~~~~`~i . ~ ~ » ~ ~E ~i~
~ r .._..L.~~. 1....,~...,,.,,. ~'►ti+t,' _ ~ . V„ ....r':. ~ ~ ti0 ~ _ . r .p
, ~ r` ~ ~ . ~ 4 . ` ' -
la►T l~► - - . ~a ' ''o r~a 0 - V . 4~ ~ac. ~ ~ , 4 37 9 99 . _ - - - - ~ ~ ~ _ _ .,s ~ - - - ~ ~ r ,
~r . ~ ~0 r ~ . .
~ ~
~ . / r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r
\ Q ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~`j 4 ~ ~ ~ ~
rn ~u~l r t++ d~in ze r.~~// d~ E,l~ ~w ~ r ~ ~ N / rY~t~vl^~..n~ D/'~ fJCedi /
~ ~ ~ ?'iM e . r .~~.r.i/din v~.~#. t , L ~r~ ,~✓i// f~ ~ r~ y✓i/~ .6.~.. u~ ~ LtS~Y
' ,r a e~ x , ,r~ r// ~ c~ ~ 1 a.N~Sc~pI u~ ~ p A
. ~ / / ~ r, . <l+~GC ~e.~ rass and' srn , r~ ea,~.,ti ~a y-, s 9 c~/74 S/7r7c~/! .'~1"BBS~
~ • fi der [3 ~-.3
~ '4 ~ p ~ ' n ~~r ~ ~3 C all,wabf~: . ~ ' .~~e r 1a ~ • ~ivr'1~ 1 n4~ fLie . ~ • 1 1 D ~ ~ ~ ~ .
- . ~ od~ c~r ~:e.5. r Connsc.-I~'o►'~b ~~.c.~i L.oT ~ 81/a~.cle,d ~ ~ r ~ ~ ParYin I Y t • > 9 ~I~. 4~13 • . or 1~~.55
_ ~ r~ ~ o cr ~ ~ ~~,~~d, ~t~. ~A ~ , Dpan Sp I a
~ 1 ~ d OG G o G e ,~,G ~ cd1 f ' II 1 c G o dG or rr! vre ,
Bu.r l~d ~ n ~ _...__.__T q
' Zorrc J r x I STin ~ r 9 3A ~n A 8 S~w4 l,n~.
. ~ asco~ Zo~ ~ ~ro r~~ ~
~ ~ ~ : , L.~ rs u.i1~ ta / o ~ }~~*fp . ~ [7 ~Y~,~
, , S ,f'f1'° _ ~ ti ~ ~ ~ • r'y M ~ L
, ; rr~~,/ ,/L~ J i / ~ ~ ~ 1.ti I/ / ~ ~ ti 4 i Y
~ M~ ~ y~• ~ - ~ ~ ' . ~ :r F r 1 ~ ; • ' t ~ • ~ f ' ' ~T'/7e
A' I, ; ~ I 3,.'~ ,'rU.. 5; ~ ~ ~ ,~~nc ~ ; L'.,a • r*'r-. ~ r
. . ~ .
. ~ ~ ~ S r - 1 , /2 _ !dD ~(o81°J 3 ~ , , + r o
. . . . . . + . ~ ' . . I ~'G c
, ~ .ALK1 r ' G1 n. ti. .r , t S ~ ~ 3 ~.,~q ~ / r
~ `-P Q , r I "'f,~ ~ . .Z', ~ ~ ;r"
, ~y ~ ,e.. ~ ~ ' '•.r ~s
J 7 ~ ` ti . b v t ~ .r- , ~ r ~ : ~ ~ y r
r ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~t, ,~5
_ 0 . . D 4 x . ~ 4 I•« M~ 1~
i i ~I ~ - ~ '`r~► ~ ~ 9` , ~;i ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ f F~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . - '
, , ~r ..f ~ ~ . , . ~ . ~ # • e ~ ~ , ' - ~ , . ~
~
, 'r 439A ~ 7Co
~