Loading...
2003, 05-09 Painted Hills Golf Course Sewer Connection Permit & CorrespondenceSpoKAK COIJRTY SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT 1026 WEST -BROADWAY AVENUE • SroxANE, WA 99260-0050 Site Information Project Information Site Address: 4403 S DISHMAN MICA RD SPOKANE, WA 99206 Parcel Number: 44041.9089 Subdivision: RANGE Block: Lot: Zoning: UR -3 Urban Residential 3.5 Owner: SENSKE, MICHAEL Address: 5103 E WILLOW SPRINGS RD. SPOKANE WA 99223 Building Inspector: BOBBY STONE Water Dist: Project Number: 03003219 Inv: 1 Issue Date: 5/9/2003 Permit Use: SEWER CONNECTION - DIS.HMAN MICA VII Applicant: RED DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION PO BOX 14806 SPOKANE WA 99206 Phone: (509) 922-6674 Contact: RED DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION PO BOX 14806 SPOKANE WA 99206 Phone: (509) 922-6674 - Setbacks - Front: Left: Right: Rear: Group Name: Project Name: Permits Sewer Connection Permit Contractor: RED DIAMOND CONSTRUCTION License #: REDDICI105K4 SEWER CONNECTION 1 $85.00 PROCESSING FEE Total Permit Fee: FOR SEWER INSPECTIONS CALL (509) 477-3604 UTILITIES 8:30-5:00 PM MONDAY THRU FRIDAY $15.00 $100.00 Call for inspection prior to cover. ONE WORKING DAY NOTICE REQUIRED. Contractor or applicant is to field locate and confirm the elevation and position of sewer stub prior to any other excavation. Sewer stubs are to be checked prior to connection to ensure that they have acceptable grade and are clear and unobstructed to the main sewer. Sewer lines should be constructed to allow for gravity flow from the lowest level of the structure. This permit must be presented to the job site inspector for Verification. To locate buried cables, gas piping, water lines, etc. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG, (509)456-8000. STATE LAW RCW 19.122 REQUIRES THAT PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION THE "CALL BEFORE YOU DIG" CENTER BE NOTIFIED. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG AT LEAST 2 WORKING DAYS IN ADVANCE, (509)456-8000. Spokane County Code requires the installer comply with all requirements of the Washington State Dept of Labor and Industries, including those related to trench safety. Payment Summary Total Fees AmountPaid AmountOwing $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 Tian Date Receipt # Payment Amt 5/9/2003 2917 $100.00 Processed By: SHATTO, JULIE Printed By: WENDEL, GLORIA Page 1 of 1 PERMIT FILE NOTICE It is the responsibility of the applicant/permittee, not Spokane County, to see to it that the use described on the front of this permit complies with applicable codes and requirements and that required inspections are requested. Failure to request required inspections and obtain the necessary approvals prior to progressing beyond the point where inspections are required may necessitate removal of certain parts of the construction at the applicant's/permittee's or property owner's expense. At a minimum, the following inspections ARE REQUIRED by County Code: 1. FOOTING - when forms and reinforcement are in place and prior to placement of concrete—all structures, including manufactured homes. NOTE: This inspection includes review of the structure's setbacks from property lines. Minimum setbacks are established by County zoning regulations. Typically, side and rear yard setbacks are measured from property lines, while setbacks for yards abutting streets are measured from the property line or the center line of the roadway right-of-way, whichever provides the greater setback from the center line of the roadway right-of- way. Curb lines and fence lines are not necessarily indicative of property lines. In some residential areas, the County can own as much as 20 feet of right-of-way between your property and the actual improved street/curb. The responsibility to comply with applicable setback provisions lies solely with the permittee—neither Spokane County nor its authorized representatives assume any responsibility for the verification or location of your property lines. Please verify their location prior to locating your structure. Failure to properly locate the structure may require its relocation at the owner's/permittee's expense. 2. FOUNDATION - when forms and reinforcement are in place and prior to placement of concrete. 3. FRAMING - after all framing, bracing and blocking is in place, and prior to concealing. 4. INSULATION - prior to the installation of drywall. 5. PLUMBING - after rough -in, before covering, and final. 6. MECHANICAL - rough -in of piping, before covering, metal chimneys before concealment, and final. 7. FINAL - when complete and prior to occupancy and/or use. Please provide 24 hours notice. All permits require final inspection. NOTE: In addition to inspection of the structure, this inspection includes review of site improvements (typically depicted on the approved site plan) required by ordinance or as a condition of approval of this permit. Items such as the installation of fire hydrants, fire department access, on-site drainage ("208 swales"), road improvements, parking, and landscaping are common requirements of a permit/site plan which must be com- pleted prior to final approval of a building or issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 8. MANUFACTURED HOMES - Final inspection required when complete, stairs, handrails, skirting, etc. installed, and prior to occupancy; completed inspection record card must be available on site. 9. SEWERS - prior to cover 10. RIGHT-OF-WAY/APPROACH - prior to placement of concrete, or, if gravel approach, after completion. In addition to the above, any plumbing or mechanical systems or material which would be concealed by framing, drywall, concrete, etc., must be inspected prior to cover. Check with the department for "special inspections" in conjunction with commercial projects. FOR INSPECTIONS: TO INSURE PROMPT SERVICE, PLEASE GIVE ONE WORKING DAY/24 HOUR NOTICE . PARTS OF YOUR PROJECT MAY REQUIRE PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS FROM MORE THAN ONE AGENCY. • Building, plumbing, mechanical and fire inspections, Division of Building and Code Enforcement 477-3675 • Construction in a flood plain, Division of Engineering & Roads 477-3600 • Electrical wiring, State Department of Labor and Industries 324-2640 • On-site waste disposal system, Spokane Regional Health District 324-1560 • Road cuts for utilities or driveways, Division of Engineering & Roads - 48-HOUR NOTICE REQUIRED 477-3600 or State Department of Transportation 456-3000 • Sewer connection, Division of Utilities 477-3604 or City Public Works Department 625-6300 PERMIT EXPIRATION AND REFUNDS Unless otherwise noted, this permit will be considered null and void by limitation if the work authorized by the permit is not commenced or is stopped for a period of 180 days, unless a written request for an extension of the permit is received and approved by the Building Official prior to expiration. At a minimum an inspection should be requested at least once every 180 days to assure the validity of the permit. A permit may be renewed within one year of the date of expiration for one-half the original fee, subject to certain limitations—please call us if you have any questions. All refund requests must be made in writing by the applicant/permittee (shown on the reverse) no later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. Refunds of not more than 80% of the permit fee paid may be authorized when no work has been done under the permit. No refunds may be authorized more than 180 days after fee payment. MISTAKE? If you think we've made an error in processing this permit or in conducting inspections pertaining to it, or find erroneous information in the permit, please bring it to our attention immediately by filing a written request for correction within 10 working days of discovery. All such requests should be directed to the Division of Building and Code Enforcement at the below address. Spokane County Division of Building & Code Enforcement 1026 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA 99260 Phone: (509) 477-3675 Fax: (509) 477-4703 TDD: (509) 477-7133 Manson, James From: Sent: To: Subject: I have none. have a good day JIM From: Sent: To: Subject: Manson, James Tuesday, August 01, 2000 6:01 AM Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary RE: Public Records Request Oberg, Gary Monday, July 31, 2000 5:00 PM Needham, Michael; Manson, James FW: Public Records Request Michael and Jim; Would you please check to see if you have any of these petitions. I doubt you would have very few if any. Thanks From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Boxer, Francine Monday, July 31, 2000 3:31 PM McCaslin, Kate; 'Mike Senske' Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Skaggs, Demeris; Beach, Sandie; Voermans, Nancy; Fuqua, Leslie; Oberg, Gary; Emacio, James RE: Public Records Request Certainly Kate. Staff: Please check and see if you have any correspondence with the signatures on the petitions. check with Planning. Please forward all copies to Sandie Beach. She will coordinate with Jim Emacio for review of the giving them to Mike Senske. Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 1:31 PM To: 'Mike Senske' Cc: Boxer, Francine; Harris, Phil; McCaslin, Kate; Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Public Records Request Gary: Would you petitions prior to We will have our staff begin compiling the information. Fran would you please coordinate with the other staff to comply with this request? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin Original Message From: Mike Senske [mailto:mikesPieway.com] Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 1:25 PM To: PHIL HARRIS; KATE MCCASLIN; JOHN ROSKELLEY Subject: Public Records Request 1 On behalf of my Pam Senske and Mike Senske, I hereby request copies of any petitions received in the past month or so referring to Painted Hills Golf Course, Chester Creek Par 3, or Mike or Pam Senske. Our intent is to notify all petitioners of the errors and misrepresentations that we believe were included in the petition prepared by and distributed by Sylvia Riddle. Our attorney may also be contacting the individuals signing the petition to inquire about possible oral misrepresentations of the facts. It is our understanding that we will be charged a fee of $0.175 per copy. We request only the copies of pages with names and signatures, not the other supportive information that Ms. Riddle submitted. Please contact me if this request will represent more than 100 responses. Michael L. Senske 448-8908 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills Michael, I have looked into this issue a little more and have reviewed Francine's letter to Commissioner Roskelley. As you may know the Zoning code does not specify four parking spaces per hole. As I understand, we, the County, have customarily applied that number per hole over the years, although I do not belive it is by written policy. Section 14.802.160 allows you to vary this requirement should you choose to do so. In this case, it may be an option for you to consider. In addition, Mr. Senske asked me to convey his proposal to mark the parking on Thorpe to require "back in" parking to alleviate his concern of the golfers standing in the road while unloading their cars. Would that negate our zoning code issue of backing into the right of way? have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:14 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: Painted Hills I have contacted Mr. Senske regarding the "parking" issue and he has agreed to attend our meeting on Tuesday the 25th at three PM in conference room 1A. Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM 3 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:14 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: Painted Hills I have contacted Mr. Senske regarding the "parking" issue and he has agreed to attend our meeting on Tuesday the 25th at three PM in conference room 1A. Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM 4 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:38 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Holman, Mark; Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course yes have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:34 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library99''» bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 5 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:35 AM To: Needham, Michael; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills Pam has reserved 1A for our meeting. have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary 6 Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation carne about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. John Roskelley Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:33 AM To: Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills thx have a good day JIM From: Knutsen, Pam Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:29 AM To: Manson, James Subject: RE: Painted Hills The room has been reserved for your meeting. From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. 8 THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John; Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. John Roskelley Manson, James From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Manson, James Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM Needham, Michael Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam RE: Painted Hills 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary 11 Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. John Roskelley Manson, James From: Holman, Mark Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:22 AM To: Forry, Jeff; Manson, James Subject: RE: Painted Hills The situation came about as a result of a couple of actions: The first was in early April when a flood plain permit was issued. Use of the County Project Review Group (email) as a notification system to the rest of Public Works for project permits and other actions which cross divisional lines should help bring others into various projects earlier in the process. Preapplication meetings on larger flood plain permits would also be of assistance. The second was uncoordinated review and uncoordinated site development plans with regards to parking in the right of way. We have taken steps to assure all the divisional sign off's are located on a single 'master' site plan in addition to the individual site plans (landscaping, drainage, etc.) approved by the various divisions. At this time, correspondence has been drafted to go to Mr Senske with regards to rectifying the issues associated with the permit. I intend to review it with both Francine and Jeff prior to mailing. A meeting with Planning staff, and and other divisions typically involved in the review process to provide an overview of expected signoff proceedures on permit/site plans could be beneficial. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 6:34 AM To: Holman, Mark; Forry, Jeff Subject: FW: Painted Hills Let's discuss and then meet w/planners. have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley 13 Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. John Roskelley 14 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. 15 John Roskelley Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 6:34 AM To: Holman, Mark; Forry, Jeff Subject: FW: Painted Hills Let's discuss and then meet w/planners. have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hilis Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation carne about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or 1 to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hilis Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. 17 John Roskelley Manson, James From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:59 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. John Roskelley Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. John Roskelley 19 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:19 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. John Roskelley Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls 1 I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 2 , Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:07 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. John Roskelley Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hills I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 3 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:52 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, PhD; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. John Roskelley Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, PhD; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 4 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 3:22 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Senske Golf Course - Flood Plain Thanks Gary. We're familiar with this one. have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 3:18 PM To: Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Cc: Johns, BiII; Manson, James; Rawis, Bruce; Gemmill Gerry Subject: FW: Senske Golf Course - Flood Plain For your information From: Darrell, Virginia Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 1:36 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Rawis, Bruce; Williams, Tammie; Sims, Brenda Subject: Senske Golf Course - Flood Plain received a phone call this morning from Mrs. Cooper, one of the neighbors in the Chester Creek area. She called with questions about Mr. Senske's parking lot expansion (golf course at Dishman-Mica Rd and Thorpe Rd.), . specifically about his paving in the flood plain. The neighbors are very sensitive to changes in the flood plain and specifically threats to the access in and out of the Forest Meadows area during flood conditions. She explained that Sylvia Riddle is writing a letter to the Commissioners and organizing neighborhood action to protest this project. After talking with Tammie Williams about the project, I returned Mrs. Cooper's call. Essentially Mr. Senske has fulfilled the requirements for, and obtained a flood plain permit. In addition Sylvia Riddle has requested, and been given a copy of Tammie's file on this project. Mrs. Cooper was satisfied with this information, and did not feel that a letter to the Commissioners was warranted. However, I thought you might want a heads -up on this issue. It may still be an issue for Mrs. Riddle. If you need some additional information, please let Brenda or me know. tinny 20 Manson, James From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 3:18 PM To: Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Cc: Johns, Bill; Manson, James; Rawls, Bruce; Gemmill Gerry Subject: FW: Senske Golf Course - Flood Plain For your information From: Darrell, Virginia Sent: Monday, June 19, 2000 1:36 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Rawls, Bruce; Williams, Tammie; Sims, Brenda Subject: Senske Golf Course - Flood Plain I received a phone call this morning from Mrs. Cooper, one of the neighbors in the Chester Creek area. She called with questions about Mr. Senske's parking lot expansion (golf course at Dishman-Mica Rd and Thorpe Rd.), specifically about his paving in the flood plain. The neighbors are very sensitive to changes in the flood plain and specifically threats to the access in and out of the Forest Meadows area during flood conditions. She explained that Sylvia Riddle is writing a letter to the Commissioners and organizing neighborhood action to protest this project. After talking with Tammie Williams about the project, I returned Mrs. Cooper's call. Essentially Mr. Senske has fulfilled the requirements for, and obtained a flood plain permit. In addition Sylvia Riddle has requested, and been given a copy of Tammie's file on this project. Mrs. Cooper was satisfied with this information, and did not feel that a letter to the Commissioners was warranted. However, I thought you might want a heads -up on this issue. It may still be an issue for Mrs. Riddle. If you need some additional information, please let Brenda or me know. ginny 21 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 1:01 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course I'll give him a call. From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:59 PM To: Manson, James Subject: RE: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course Jim, Were you or someone from your staff going to contact Mr. Senske? From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:42 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate Cc: Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course I do not know what Mr. Senske's problem was/is. We issued him the building permit the same day he was in which was either Monday or Tuesday of this week. I thought we had responded rather timely and productively. It would be helpful if he could clarify his statement in order that we might identify any problems he may have encountered with us. From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:21 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: FW: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course Has anyone forwarded this information to you for comment? If not would you please comment, and if so what is your response? Thanks. Kate McCaslin From: Mike Senske[SMTP:mikes@ieway.com] Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2000 6:46 PM To: Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course «File: chester creek drainage-parking.doc»«File: chester creek-manson.doc»«File: chester creek- nunnery.doc»«File: chester creek -pat harper.doc» Attached are recent communications with your staff with regard to improvements at Painted Hills Golf Course. The Engineers office, specifically Tammie Williams, has been most helpful, but the building department has not. Mike Senske 22 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:42 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate Cc: Harris, PhD; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course I do not know what Mr. Senske's problem was/is. We issued him the building permit the same day he was in which was either Monday or Tuesday of this week. I thought we had responded rather timely and productively. It would be helpful if he could clarify his statement in order that we might identify any problems he may have encountered with us. From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:21 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: FW: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course Has anyone forwarded this information to you for comment? If not would you please comment, and if so what is your response? Thanks. Kate McCaslin From: Mike Senske(SMTP:mikes@ieway.coml Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2000 6:46 PM To: Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Chester Creek Par 3 at Painted Hills Golf Course «File: chester creek drainage-parking.doc»«File: chester creek-manson.doc»«File: chester creek- nunnery.doc»«File: chester creek -pat harper.doc» Attached are recent communications with your staff with regard to improvements at Painted Hills Golf Course. The Engineers office, specifically Tammie Williams, has been most helpful, but the building department has not. Mike Senske 23 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 8:28 AM To: Holman, Mark; Binger, Robert; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Riddle's Public Records Request Just change the 'requested' to request in the first sentance. From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 8:25 AM To: Manson, James; Holman, Mark; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Riddle's Public Records Request This draft will work for me. Does anyone else have any concerns? From: Binger, Robert Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:06 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Riddle's Public Records Request Please review this draft for accuracy. It should go to the Riddles by May 11, 2000. May 8, 2000 Warren & Sylvia Riddle 11410 E. Dishman-Mica Road Spokane, WA 99206 Re: Public Records Request Dated May 4, 2000 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Riddle: In your public records requested dated May 4, 2000, you made the following four (4) requests, which I have followed with the County's response. 1. When was chapter 14.806 adopted by Spokane County? I have enclosed a copy of the face sheet of the Zoning Code, to include Section 14.806, indicating its date of adoption was October 22, 1985. 2. List the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard. The County does not have a database with this information. In order to determine the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard, is will be necessary to review approximately 6,910 commercial permits to determine which ones were required to comply with the Type I Standards. You may contact Pam Knutsen, Office Administrator of the Building and Code Enforcement Division at 477-3675 to make arrangements to view these 7 files. 3. Provide copies of the Type I screening plans for that property which seems to be the most similar to the Riddle property at 13711 E. Mt. Spokane Park Drive. The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. If you can clarify and narrow this request to identifiable properties, the County will reconsider the same. 4. For the following addresses please explain why these properties were not required to comply with the Type I screen standard: cc: Rob • Painted Hills Golf Course - Dishman-Mica Hwy. • Haase Landscaping - Thorpe Rd. • Environment West - N. 7015 Argonne Rd. • Spokane Valley Seventh Day Adventist Church - S. 1601 Sullivan Rd. • Valley Bible Church - S. 3021 Sullivan Rd. • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - E. 13608 40th The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. Very Truly Yours, Gary Oberg Director of Public Works 8 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 12:58 PM To: Binger, Robert Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: Public records request from Riddles In conjunction with item # 2 of their request we have issued 6910 commercial permits since the adoption of the landscape standards were implemented. We have estimated it would take one full time employee one to two years to review each of the files and make a determination of whether or not type I landscaping was required. 9 Manson, James From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 11:40 AM To: Forry, Jeff; Williams, Tammie; Nunnery, John Cc: Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Gemmill Gerry; Durkin, Tim; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Riddle meeting FYI From: Binger, Robert Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 11:09 AM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: Riddle meeting Gary: I received a copy of a letter from the Riddles to their attorney, Brian McGuinn, where they stated that they do not want Brian to meet with us to resolve this situation. As a result, the meeting scheduled for tomorrow at 9, is canceled. Rob 10 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, April 10, 2000 5:41 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Meeting with Riddle Attorney HAVE A GOOD DAY Jim From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 3:57 PM To: Forry, Jeff; Nunnery, John; Williams, Tammie Cc: Binger, Robert; Johns, Bill; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Gallarda, Dorothy; Durkin, Tim Subject: Meeting with Riddle Attorney Please schedule your calendars for a meeting on Thursday, April 13, 9:00 a.m. in conference room 4A. We will be meeting with an attorney representing the Riddles. Please be prepared to again reiterate what is required of your particular division. Thank you 11 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 9:57 AM To: Holman, Mark Cc: Knutsen, Pam Subject: FW: painted hills FYI - I showed Gary the provision of the zoning code that discusses the 50% rule. He said he would discus tw th Michael and that agreed with me on it. We'll see what Michael does. have cr good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 8:51 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: painted hills I was merely questioning whether or not the landscaping rquirements applied because the 'addition' to the golf course may not equal 50% of the value of the facility. have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 8:40 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Harper, Pat; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: painted hills Hi all, I have reviewed this section many times and my interpretation is that landscape plan modifications that may be permitted by the Planning Director only include those development standards of that particular section/Chapter, 14.806. Section 14.802.220(3) addresses landscaping for parking lots and is not included within the development standards for landscape screening and buffering identified in Chapter 14.806. This section specifically states, "Unless otherwise stated herein, a parking area or outdoor display area fronting a street right-of-way shall provide a landscape planting are of as Type IV of at least three (3) feet in width along the entire street frontage ...". I believe the intent of this regulation is to assure, at a minimum, that three feet of landscaping is provided between parking lots and adjacent rights of way. I also believe the landscaping standards for parking lots are separated due to the unique impact parking has on adjacent development. We should not compromise the ability of staff to enforce landscaping standards as they are written. The decision made here will have impact on our ability to enforce the standards within the entire County. Whatever Michael's decision may be regarding this issue, enforcement of the regulations should be consistent from project to project. We may be opening Pandora's box. I hope that we don't compound the past error's made in the review of this proposal by covering them up through inappropriate enforcement of Zoning regulations. Just my opinion, Francine. From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: painted hills Michael, I have thought about our meeting yeaterday and where we left things. I'm concerned that we will subject this project to yet another public hearing if it isn't absolutely necessary. Please review section 14.806.020 of the Zoning code. I believe this provision may let you make a determination to approve an alternate design and allow the 'required' parking across Thorpe to the south, or elsewhere on the existing facillity, and still allow for the 'public' parking on and adjacent to Thorpe with minimal, if any landscaping. Let me know your thoughts on this. THX have a good day JIM 1 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills Michael, I have looked into this issue a little more and have reviewed Francine's letter to Commissioner Roskelley. As you may know the Zoning code does not specify four parking spaces per hole. As I understand, we, the County, have customarily applied that number per hole over the years, although I do not belive it is by written policy. Section 14.802.160 allows you to vary this requirement should you choose to do so. In this case, it may be an option for you to consider. In addition, Mr. Senske asked me to convey his proposal to mark the parking on Thorpe to require "back in" parking to alleviate his concern of the golfers standing in the road while unloading their cars. Would that negate our zoning code issue of backing into the right of way? have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:14 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: Painted Hills I have contacted Mr. Senske regarding the "parking" issue and he has agreed to attend our meeting on Tuesday the 25th at three PM in conference room 1A. Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM 3 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:14 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: Painted Hills I have contacted Mr. Senske regarding the "parking" issue and he has agreed to attend our meeting on Tuesday the 25th at three PM in conference room 1A. Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM 4 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 9:46 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Cc: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi, The meeting has been set for tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. in the planning library. See you there, Francine Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 8:05 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Shaw, Francine; Manson, James Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course works for me Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:38 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Holman, Mark; Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hilis Golf Course yes have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:34 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hilis Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 6 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:38 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Holman, Mark; Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course yes have cr good dray JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:34 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, BHI Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 7 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:35 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library?7?7' bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tamrnie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right- of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine Holman, Mark From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 9 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:29 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 10 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:35 AM To: Needham, Michael; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills Pam has reserved 1A for our meeting. have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills 11 Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. r oitri.I of/el(ny Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. oltn. .0:1/01:} Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or Ito be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Ga She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really 13 like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. dolt.rt �Cvdlzel6e(/ Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. olria f<o: 2e/ ed Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:22 AM To: Forry, Jeff; Manson, James Subject: RE: Painted Hills The situation came about as a result of a couple of actions: The first was in early April when a flood plain permit was issued. Use of the County Project Review Group (email) as a notification system to the rest of Public Works for project permits and other actions which cross divisional lines should help bring others into various projects earlier in the process. Preapplication meetings on larger flood plain permits would also be of assistance. The second was uncoordinated review and uncoordinated site development plans with regards to parking in the right of way. We have taken steps to assure all the divisional sign off's are located on a single 'master' site plan in addition to the individual site plans (landscaping, drainage, etc.) approved by the various divisions. At this time, correspondence has been drafted to go to Mr Senske with regards to rectifying the issues associated with the permit. I intend to review it with both Francine and Jeff prior to mailing. A meeting with Planning staff, and and other divisions typically involved in the review process to provide an overview of expected signoff proceedures on permit/site plans could be beneficial. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 6:34 AM To: Holman, Mark; Forry, Jeff Subject: FW: Painted Hills Let's discuss and then meet w/planners. have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Ga She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. C7)0In. /e_/ Ontte/ Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills 15 Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further foliowup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. otrtt iems nf.lczf 16 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 6:34 AM To: Holman, Mark; Forry, Jeff Subject: FW: Painted Hills Let's discuss and then meet w/planners. hcive a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. �.rb t\ ll9 v o:S ze; 1.le t, Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. dokt. f\O iWf1l� 17 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:14 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: Painted Hills I have contacted Mr. Senske regarding the "parking" issue and he has agreed to attend our meeting on Tuesday the 25th at three PM in conference room 1A. Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 8:05 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Shaw, Francine; Manson, James Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course works for me Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:38 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Holman, Mark; Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course yes have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:34 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, BiII Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham,Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course 5 Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:38 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Holman, Mark; Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course yes hcive a good dray JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:34 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 6 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 7:35 AM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Johns, Bill; Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Lets set the date tentatively. Michael, Jim and Mark, will this date work with your schedule? Francine From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2009 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bili, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right- of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine Holman, Mark From: Johns, Bill Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 5:09 PM To: Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Shaw, Francine Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course 9Am on Friday the 21st in the planning library????? bill johns From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:28 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine 7 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 4:29 PM To: Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat Cc: Needham, Michael; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi Bill, I am not sure if your staff has had an opportunity to discuss with you the recent petition received by the Board regarding the new development for the Painted Hills Golf Course. If not, please contact either Tammie or Pat. The Board has asked us to meet with Michael Senske to discuss resolution for parking lot design violations to the Spokane County Zoning Code regulations. Before this meeting is held, Michael Needham, Jim Manson, Mark Holman and myself would like to meet with you regarding your involvement in a waiver to allow parking in the right-of-way. Can you meet this Friday morning? Please let me know what time will work for you. Thanks, Francine Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:35 AM To: Needham, Michael; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills Pam has reserved 1A for our meeting. have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, 8 Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hilis Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hilis Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. / LL� 7 ol.fr. /jos/ei.' ey Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. Bohn RasheCerf 9 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hilis 3 is fine with me. Conference room 1A OK? Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM From: Needham, Michael Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2000 11:06 AM To: Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good Morning Jim, Francine returned from a short vacation this morning, I've reviewed the situation with her. She received a draft of an intended letter from Mark Holman to Michael Senske, which we discussed. I'd suggest we hold on any letters or phone calls to Mr. Senske at this point. Apparently, Jim Emacio has also advised a staff meeting with Mr. Senske ASAP. We'd like to meet with you and any of your staff today, from 3:00 pm on. How does that sound? I've begun my responses to Gary Oberg's request to answer Commissioner Roskelley's concerns, and we can go over those as well. After our session today, I believe we should brief Gary, then invite Mr. Senske to meet with all of us, including Gary, on Friday, July 21st. Thanks, Michael From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 7:50 AM To: Needham, Michael; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Good morning, Michael. Let me know when you and Francine would be available to discuss this issue. THX have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hilis Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills 10 Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. ��oltn I\oofzel e f Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 8:22 AM To: Forry, Jeff; Manson, James Subject: RE: Painted Hills The situation came about as a result of a couple of actions: The first was in early April when a flood plain permit was issued. Use of the County Project Review Group (email) as a notification system to the rest of Public Works for project permits and other actions which cross divisional lines should help bring others into various projects earlier in the process. Preapplication meetings on larger flood plain permits would also be of assistance. The second was uncoordinated review and uncoordinated site development plans with regards to parking in the right of way. We have taken steps to assure all the divisional sign offs are located on a single 'master' site plan in addition to the individual site plans (landscaping, drainage, etc.) approved by the various divisions. At this time, correspondence has been drafted to go to Mr Senske with regards to rectifying the issues associated with the permit. I intend to review it with both Francine and Jeff prior to mailing. A meeting with Planning staff, and and other divisions typically involved in the review process to provide an overview of expected signoff proceedures on permit/site plans could be beneficial. Thanks, Mark 11 From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 6:34 AM To: Holman, Mark; Forry, Jeff Subject: FW: Painted Hills Let's discuss and then meet w/planners. have a good day JIM From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hills Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or I to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hills Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. Alta J9 / Ol.tt. /\ O SIU i(I/ Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Ga Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. (o12n. 1/:.0:140/411 12 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 6:34 AM To: Holman, Mark; Forry, Jeff Subject: FW: Painted Hills Let's discuss and then meet w/planners. have o good day Jt From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 4:58 PM To: Manson, James; Needham, Michael Subject: FW: Painted Hilis Jim and Michael, Will each of you and your appropriate divisional staff meet to describe how this situation came about. Please respond in writing to Commissioner Roskelley and described what post changes have been done to insure the situation doesn't happen in the future. If you wish Mr. Gemmill or 1 to be part of your process please advise. Thanks From: Roskelley, John Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 3:41 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Painted Hilis Gary: She did speak with me and having staff sit down with Mr. Senske is a reasonable start, but I would really like to know more about the in-house mistake and how we can prevent it in the future. How is it that so many things were overlooked? Why didn't the permit section pick up on some of the problems? How is it Jim Milgaard didn't know about the parking lot issues and landscaping? Thanks. /�ot7.ez. fosfat v Original Message From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Monday, July 17, 2000 1:58 PM To: Roskelley, John Subject: RE: Painted Hills Commissioner Roskelley, I was out of town since last Wednesday afternoon. This a.m. I spoke with Mr. Michael Needham. He has indicated that a meeting took place with Commissioner McCaslin, staff, Mr. Gemmill and himself on Friday concerning this matter. He further indicated that Commissioner McCaslin was going to update you on what had happened and current plan of action. If further followup should be needed please advise. From: Roskelley, John Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2000 5:03 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Shaw, Francine; Gemmill Gerry; McCaslin, Kate; Harris, Phil Subject: Painted Hills Gary: Please get with Michael Needham and Francine and quickly get to the bottom of the problems at Painted Hills. How did it happen? What's our best recourse? The commissioners would like to know A to Z. Who, what, where and when. Please get on this ASAP. Thanks. �oh.rr. ( oo e11etj 13 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 3:21 PM To: Holman, Mark Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course Most parties have committed to meeting on Monday. See you then, Francine From: Holman, Mark Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 1:21 PM To: Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course is on my calender Thanks, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 11:11 AM To: Holman, Mark; Millgard, Jim; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Forry, Jeff Cc: Needham, Michael Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi, As most of you are aware, there has been a petition submitted to the Commissioners office asking for answer to questions regarding the Painted Hills Golf Course. The issues concentrate on construction/filling of the floodplain and parking lot design. Commissioner Roskelley has asked staff to address these issues and provide response to him (by Tuesday, July 11). I would like to meet with all of you to discuss this issue and develop a group response for Commissioner Roskelley on Monday, July 10 at 3:00 p.m. in the permit center west library. Please let me know if this date works well with your schedule. Thank you, Francine 19 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 1:21 PM To: Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Golf Course is on my calender Thanks, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 11:11 AM To: Holman, Mark; Millgard, Jim; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Forry, Jeff Cc: Needham, Michael Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi, As most of you are aware, there has been a petition submitted to the Commissioners office asking for answer to questions regarding the Painted Hills Golf Course. The issues concentrate on construction/filling of the floodplain and parking lot design. Commissioner Roskelley has asked staff to address these issues and provide response to him (by Tuesday, July 11). I would like to meet with all of you to discuss this issue and develop a group response for Commissioner Roskelley on Monday, July 10 at 3:00 p.m. in the permit center west library. Please let me know if this date works well with your schedule. Thank you, Francine 20 Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 11:12 AM To: Holman, Mark; Millgard, Jim; Williams, Tammie; Harper, Pat; Forry, Jeff Cc: Needham, Michael Subject: Painted Hills Golf Course Hi, As most of you are aware, there has been a petition submitted to the Commissioners office asking for answer to questions regarding the Painted Hills Golf Course. The issues concentrate on construction/filling of the floodplain and parking lot design. Commissioner Roskelley has asked staff to address these issues and provide response to him (by Tuesday, July 11). I would like to meet with all of you to discuss this issue and develop a group response for Commissioner Roskelley on Monday, July 10 at 3:00 p.m. in the permit center west library. Please let me know if this date works well with your schedule. Thank you, Francine 21 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 1:08 PM To: Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills just looking for a coordinated response Thanks, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:54 AM To: Holman, Mark Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert; Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate Subject: RE: Painted Hills Mark, I will get together with you at the end of this week or on Monday, July 10th prior to sending the comments over to the Board. What is it that you are concerned about? I get the feeling there is an underlying reason you want to see these comments that you haven't disclosed. Francine From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:43 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. 22 Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. /ohfl PO:ir4e/ ,?y Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, BHI; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:55 AM To: Holman, Mark Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert; Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate Subject: RE: Painted Hills Mark, I will get together with you at the end of this week or on Monday, July 10th prior to sending the comments over to the Board. What is it that you are concerned about? I get the feeling there is an underlying reason you want to see these comments that you haven't disclosed. Francine From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:43 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills 24 I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have et good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. �7O/.;1. 1\O.i/ Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:08 AM To: Shatto, Julie Subject: FW: Painted Hilis Thanks, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:43 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hilis Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hilis have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hilis Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. 26 have a good JIM y From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 27 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:44 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills 28 Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. Pi rt Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllis I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 29 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:19 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good fiery Uvl From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day ,JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. l o�.Ea kosiellec� Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted HIlis I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! 30 Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 31. Holman, Mark From: Binger, Robert Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:42 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills Petitions FYI From: Binger, Robert Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:34 AM To: Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate Subject: Painted Hills Petitions John and Kate: I understand that petitions have been submitted to the Board relative to the Painted Hills Golf Course and its compliance with county regulations. This issue has also been raised in the Writ of Mandamus action filed by the Riddle's relative to their golf course. Whether or not the writ will issue will be argued next Fri. in front of Judge Cozza. Please coordinate with me any response to the petitions so I can ensure consistency with the lawsuit 1 am defending. Thanks. Rob 32 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:07 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good dciy JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good cicry JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. dol n /\s4e/lel Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 33 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 11:02 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Riddle's Public Records Request looks ok -if they want to review any of the 6910 permits, we'll need to talk further thanks, Mark From: Binger, Robert Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:06 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Riddle's Public Records Request Please review this draft for accuracy. It should go to the Riddles by May 11, 2000. May 8, 2000 Warren & Sylvia Riddle 11410 E. Dishman-Mica Road Spokane, WA 99206 Re: Public Records Request Dated May 4, 2000 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Riddle: In your public records requested dated May 4, 2000, you made the following four (4) requests, which I have followed with the County's response. 1. When was chapter 14.806 adopted by Spokane County? I have enclosed a copy of the face sheet of the Zoning Code, to include Section 14.806, indicating its date of adoption was October 22, 1985. 2. List the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard. The County does not have a database with this information. In order to determine the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard, is will be necessary to review approximately 6,910 commercial permits to determine which ones were required to comply with the Type I Standards. You may contact Pam Knutsen, Office Administrator of the Building and Code Enforcement Division at 477-3675 to make arrangements to view these files. 3. Provide copies of the Type I screening plans for that property which seems to be the most similar to the Riddle property at 13711 E. Mt. Spokane Park Drive. The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. If you can clarify and narrow this request to identifiable properties, the County will reconsider the same. 34 4. For the following addresses please explain why these properties were not required to comply with the Type I screen standard: • Painted Hills Golf Course - Dishman-Mica Hwy. • Haase Landscaping - Thorpe Rd. • Environment West - N. 7015 Argonne Rd. • Spokane Valley Seventh Day Adventist Church - S. 1601 Sullivan Rd. • Valley Bible Church - S. 3021 Sullivan Rd. • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - E. 13608 40th The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. cc: Rob Very Truly Yours, Gary Oberg Director of Public Works 35 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 8:28 AM To: Holman, Mark; Binger, Robert; Oberg, Gary Subject: RE: Riddle's Public Records Request Just change the 'requested' to request in the first sentance. From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 8:25 AM To: Manson, James; Holman, Mark; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Riddle's Public Records Request This draft will work for me. Does anyone else have any concerns? From: Binger, Robert Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:06 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Riddle's Public Records Request Please review this draft for accuracy. It should go to the Riddles by May 11, 2000. May 8, 2000 Warren & Sylvia Riddle 11410 E. Dishman-Mica Road Spokane, WA 99206 Re: Public Records Request Dated May 4, 2000 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Riddle: In your public records requested dated May 4, 2000, you made the following four (4) requests, which I have followed with the County's response. 1. When was chapter 14.806 adopted by Spokane County? I have enclosed a copy of the face sheet of the Zoning Code, to include Section 14.806, indicating its date of adoption was October 22, 1985. 2. List the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard. The County does not have a database with this information. In order to determine the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard, is will be necessary to review approximately 6,910 commercial permits to determine which ones were required to comply with the Type I Standards. You may contact Pam Knutsen, Office Administrator of the Building and Code Enforcement Division at 477-3675 to make arrangements to view these files. 3. Provide copies of the Type I screening plans for that property which seems to be the most similar to the Riddle property at 13711 E. Mt. Spokane Park Drive. 36 The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. If you can clarify and narrow this request to identifiable properties, the County will reconsider the same. 4. For the following addresses please explain why these properties were not required to comply with the Type I screen standard: • Painted Hills Golf Course - Dishman-Mica Hwy. • Haase Landscaping - Thorpe Rd. • Environment West - N. 7015 Argonne Rd. • Spokane Valley Seventh Day Adventist Church - S. 1601 Sullivan Rd. • Valley Bible Church - S. 3021 Sullivan Rd. • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - E. 13608 40th The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. cc: Rob Very Truly Yours, Gary Oberg Director of Public Works 37 Holman, Mark From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2000 8:25 AM To: Manson, James; Holman, Mark; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Riddle's Public Records Request This draft will work for me. Does anyone else have any concerns? From: Binger, Robert Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:06 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Riddle's Public Records Request Please review this draft for accuracy. It should go to the Riddles by May 11, 2000. May 8, 2000 Warren & Sylvia Riddle 11410 E. Dishman-Mica Road Spokane, WA 99206 Re: Public Records Request Dated May 4, 2000 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Riddle: In your public records requested dated May 4, 2000, you made the following four (4) requests, which I have followed with the County's response. 1. When was chapter 14.806 adopted by Spokane County? I have enclosed a copy of the face sheet of the Zoning Code, to include Section 14.806, indicating its date of adoption was October 22, 1985. 2. List the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard. The County does not have a database with this information. In order to determine the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard, is will be necessary to review approximately 6,910 commercial permits to determine which ones were required to comply with the Type I Standards. You may contact Pam Knutsen, Office Administrator of the Building and Code Enforcement Division at 477-3675 to make arrangements to view these files. 3. Provide copies of the Type I screening plans for that property which seems to be the most similar to the Riddle property at 13711 E. Mt. Spokane Park Drive. The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. If you can clarify and narrow this request to identifiable properties, the County will reconsider the same. 4. For the following addresses please explain why these properties were not required to comply with the Type I screen standard: 38 cc: Rob • Painted Hills Golf Course - Dishman-Mica Hwy. • Haase Landscaping - Thorpe Rd. • Environment West - N. 7015 Argonne Rd. • Spokane Valley Seventh Day Adventist Church - S. 1601 Sullivan Rd. • Valley Bible Church - S. 3021 Sullivan Rd. • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - E. 13608 40th The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. Very Truly Yours, Gary Oberg Director of Public Works 39 Holman, Mark From: Binger, Robert Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:07 PM To: Oberg, Gary; Manson, James; Holman, Mark Subject: Riddle's Public Records Request Please review this draft for accuracy. It should go to the Riddles by May 11, 2000. May 8, 2000 Warren & Sylvia Riddle 11410 E. Dishman-Mica Road Spokane, WA 99206 Re: Public Records Request Dated May 4, 2000 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Riddle: In your public records requested dated May 4, 2000, you made the following four (4) requests, which I have followed with the County's response. 1. When was chapter 14.806 adopted by Spokane County? I have enclosed a copy of the face sheet of the Zoning Code, to include Section 14.806, indicating its date of adoption was October 22, 1985. 2. List the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard. The County does not have a database with this information. In order to determine the property addresses of any property which has been required to comply with the Type I Screen Standard, is will be necessary to review approximately 6,910 commercial permits to determine which ones were required to comply with the Type I Standards. You may contact Pam Knutsen, Office Administrator of the Building and Code Enforcement Division at 477-3675 to make arrangements to view these files. 3. Provide copies of the Type I screening plans for that property which seems to be the most similar to the Riddle property at 13711 E. Mt. Spokane Park Drive. The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. If you can clarify and narrow this request to identifiable properties, the County will reconsider the same. 4. For the following addresses please explain why these properties were not required to comply with the Type I screen standard: • Painted Hills Golf Course - Dishman-Mica Hwy. • Haase Landscaping - Thorpe Rd. • Environment West - N. 7015 Argonne Rd. • Spokane Valley Seventh Day Adventist Church - S. 1601 Sullivan Rd. • Valley Bible Church - S. 3021 Sullivan Rd. • Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - E. 13608 40th 40 cc: Rob The Prosecuting Attorney's Office has advised me that this request is not for "identifiable public records" and therefore not subject to the Public Disclosure Act. Very Truly Yours, Gary Oberg Director of Public Works 41 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2000 7:31 AM To: Larson, John; Forry, Jeff Cc: Benish, Bill; Manson, James Subject: FW: substation Importance: High John/Jeff will you guys please check out the substation as described below?? If you could get to it today 'twould be great. Is it the one we already reviewed? Even if it is, we should probbly check out once more. Is it something the area inspectore could do or would John be doing the field investigatinon? I'm not sure what is meant by "they are required to obtain a building permit for this type of construction" Can we contact the Utility and discuss with them what is/is not 'being constructed?". Can we determine when/where the fence was built and whether or not it needed a permit, and if so straighten it out now? Is landscaping required? parking? drainage? etc., etc., thanks, Mark From: Oberg, Gary Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 4:24 PM To: Holman, Mark; Manson, James Subject: FW: substation Importance: High We would need to reload and find out if there is construction/building going on in this area. Please let me know. Thanks From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Tuesday, April 11, 2000 4:18 PM To: Oberg, Gary Subject: substation Importance: High Hi Gary. More on the substation. Apparently this is fairly far south on Dishman Mica. specifically to get there one would go south on Dishman Mica past Painted Hills; take the first right after Painted Hills, which is Hallet rd. Proceed right on Hallet road, up the hill, across the RR tracks; once past the RR tracks there is a driveway on the right, which is the driveway to the substation. It is known as the Hopkins substation. As a substation there is no building per se, there is just a fenced enclosure with the equipment etc. However, they are required to obtain a building permit for this type of construction. Call if you need more info. Thanks. Kate McCaslin 42 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 1:08 PM To: Shaw, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills just looking for a coordinated response Thanks, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:54 AM To: Holman, Mark Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert; Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate Subject: RE: Painted Hills Mark, I will get together with you at the end of this week or on Monday, July 10th prior to sending the comments over to the Board. What is it that you are concerned about? I get the feeling there is an underlying reason you want to see these comments that you haven't disclosed. Francine From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:43 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised andrecent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. 4 Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. i)hfl (`n_s�al�ay Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted HIlls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin Holman, Mark From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:55 AM To: Holman, Mark Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert; Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate Subject: RE: Painted Hills Mark, I will get together with you at the end of this week or on Monday, July 10th prior to sending the comments over to the Board. What is it that you are concerned about? I get the feeling there is an underlying reason you want to see these comments that you haven't disclosed. Francine From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:43 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Miligard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills 6 I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have cx good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday; June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last Week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 11:08 AM To: Shatto, Julie Subject: FW: Painted Hills Thanks, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:43 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have p good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. 8 have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. d0h.rt /� a f�etft>y Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 9 Holman, Mark From: Holman, Mark Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 10:44 AM To: Shaw, Francine Cc: Manson, James; Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Francine - With regards to the issues raised and recent permitting activity at the site, our records reflect: -a flood plain permit issued 4/3/2000, and -a building permit issued 5/9/2000 for a "12x16 starter building w/9hole par 3 golf course". The permit application was signed off by Building staff (Shatto, Forry), Planning staff (Millgard, Nunnery) & Engineer staff (Harper, Roth, Williams). It would be appreciated if you would please circulate any draft responses for comment prior to forwarding them to the Board or others. Thanks, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:18 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have c good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills 10 Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. an i\ vsfzet tf<zy Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 11 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 9:19 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Shaw, Francine Sent: Monday, July 03, 2000 7:43 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James Cc: Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: RE: Painted Hills Jim, The petition that I received from the Commissioners' office addresses two issues, primarily parking lot design, and filling and construction in the flood plain. Tammie Williams is looking into the flood plain issues and I will be reviewing plans to determine the accuracy of parking lot design. If you have anything that you can add, please review a copy of the petition that I will be provide you this morning. I am planning on providing a set of comments to the Commissioners next week, on July 11. Let me know if there are items in the petition that you can help explain. Have a Happy Fourth of July, Francine From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills • Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. dol.. Ica:, elCr;� Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllls I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! 12 Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 13 Holman, Mark From: Binger, Robert Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:42 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills Petitions FYI From: Binger, Robert Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:34 AM To: Roskelley, John; McCaslin, Kate Subject: Painted Hills Petitions John and Kate: I understand that petitions have been submitted to the Board relative to the Painted Hills Golf Course and its compliance with county regulations. This issue has also been raised in the Writ of Mandamus action filed by the Riddle's relative to their golf course. Whether or not the writ will issue will be argued next Fri. in front of Judge Cozza. Please coordinate with me any response to the petitions so I can ensure consistency with the lawsuit I am defending. Thanks. Rob 14 Holman, Mark From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 11:07 AM To: Holman, Mark Subject: FW: Painted Hills have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, June 30, 2000 10:51 AM To: Oberg, Gary; Gemmill Gerry Cc: Shaw, Francine; Williams, Tammie; Forry, Jeff; Binger, Robert Subject: FW: Painted Hills I was unaware of any petitions on this -we should probably get together once Francine gets a preliminary response together as I believe it will probably involve all the divisions. Concerns regarding this golf course have also been raised in the Riddle's action against the County. have a good day JIM From: Roskelley, John Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 4:19 PM To: McCaslin, Kate; Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Boxer, Francine Subject: RE: Painted Hills Kate: I asked a draft to be put together at the end of last week and is being done as we speak. Francine Shaw is coordinating a response, which will be sent to my office and drafted into an informational response to the petitioners. I can sign it as Chair or the entire Board is welcome to sign. dOhn. ife0 2C3/i Original Message From: McCaslin, Kate Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2000 3:52 PM To: Oberg, Gary Cc: Gemmill Gerry; Manson, James; Johns, Bill; Harris, Phil; Roskelley, John; Boxer, Francine Subject: Painted Hllis I am not certain if I requested this earlier, however since we are now getting a considerable number of petitions outlining concerns about the Painted Hills Golf Course changes, could someone please address the issues on the petition? Thanks! Sincerely, Kate McCaslin 15 Manson, James From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 11:15 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat; Manson, James Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: RE: Painted Hills Michael, I have looked into this issue a little more and have reviewed Francine's letter to Commissioner Roskelley. As you may know the Zoning code does not specify four parking spaces per hole. As I understand, we, the County, have customarily applied that number per hole over the years, although I do not belive it is by written policy. Section 14.802.160 allows you to vary this requirement should you choose to do so. In this case, it may be an option for you to consider. In addition, Mr. Senske asked me to convey his proposal to mark the parking on Thorpe to require "back in" parking to alleviate his concern of the golfers standing in the road while unloading their cars. Would that negate our zoning code issue of backing into the right of way? have a good day JIM From: Manson, James Sent: Friday, July 21, 2000 10:14 AM To: Needham, Michael; Johns, Bill; Williams, Tammie; Shaw, Francine; Harper, Pat Cc: Oberg, Gary; Holman, Mark; Knutsen, Pam Subject: Painted Hills have contacted Mr. Senske regarding the "parking" issue and he has agreed to attend our meeting on Tuesday the 25th at three PM in conference room 1A. Pam, please schedule accordingly. THX have a good day JIM vt p s c,t A471(.._ iS6Lv Page 1 July 13, 2000 Mr. Michael L. Senske Route 3, Box 634A Spokane, WA 99223 RE: 4403 S Dishman Mica Road—Permit #00-3275—Golf Course Dear Mr. Senske: It has been brought to our attention that the parking provided in referenced permit does not appear to be consistent with applidable County Zoning Code, sections 14.802.060.14:8O22O;and 14. 02 tP,+ In addition, the two parking areas existing on site do not provid tie minimum required off- street parking stalls. The original Conditional Use Permit approving the golf course (CUE -26-85) required a minimum of 65 off-street parking stalls for the 9 hole golf course proposed at that time. The new 9 hole par 3 golf course requires 36 off-street parking stalls. This equates to a total of 101 off-street parking stalls required. Only 80 stalls have been provided. Copies of the referenced code provisions are enclosed for your review. Options available to address the above would include relocation/reconfiguration of the parking to be consistent with the Zoning Code or approval of a variance(s) through the Spokane County Hearing Examiner. In either instance, Francine Shaw, Senior Planner, is familiar with the particulars of this project and can assist you in addressing the above issues. We recognize that permits have been issued and work is progressing in development of the course. This work can proceed during resolution of the above, however we will be unable to authorize any final approvals pending resolution of these issues. wou G C '"?' 6 unction with the above - pro s of the Spokane i July 13, 2000 Mr. Michael L. Senske Route 3, Box 634A Spokane, WA 99223 RE: 4403 S Dishman Mica Road—Permit #00-3275—Golf Course Dear Mr. Senske: It has been brought to our attention that the parking provided in conjunction with the above - referenced permit does not appear to be consistent with applicable provisions of the Spokane County Zoning Code, sections 14.802.060, 14.802.220(3), and 14.802.200(5). In addition, the two parking areas existing on site do not provide the minimum required off- street parking stalls. The original Conditional Use Permit approving the golf course (CUE -26-85) required a minimum of 65 off-street parking stalls for the 9 hole golf course proposed at that time. The new 9 hole par 3 golf course requires 36 off-street parking stalls. This equates to a total of 101 off-street parking stalls required. Only 80 stalls have been provided. Copies of the referenced code provisions are enclosed for your review. Options available to address the above would include relocation/reconfiguration of the parking to be consistent with the Zoning Code or approval of a variance(s) through the Spokane County Hearing Examiner. In either instance, Francine Shaw, Senior Planner, is familiar with the particulars of this project and can assist you in addressing the above issues. We recognize that permits have been issued and work is progressing in development of the course. This work can proceed during resolution of the above, however we will be unable to authorize any final approvals pending resolution of these issues. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact either Francine Shaw at 477- 7200, extension 7218, or myself at 477-3675, extension 7120. Sincerely, Mark Holman Assistant Director Enclosures c: Francine Shaw, County Planning Division 6:./-737 waives all landscaping. Landscaping that can be waived pursuant to Section 14.806.020(2) of the Zoning Code only pertains to landscaping standards 'dentif -. '. ha •ter 14.806. Please -see -en -GI -Gs mi F The parking lot location and design are in conflict with t Zoning Cod [ ems listed within Section 14.802.06 pokane County he parking lot lacks landscaping as provided in Section 14.802.220(3) which requires parking lots to provide a three (3) foot -wide strip of Type IV landscaping along street frontages when the r quirant f ection 14.806.040(2) cannot be enforced. The parking lot i ection 14.802.200(5) which requires all parking stalls to be seated within 60 feet of a landscape feature (including combination of trees, shrubs • round cover, etc.). Pleed zoning regulations. U oM I'The o parking areas e do not provide Vie_ off-stree arking stalls. As per Section 14.802.160 of the oning ode the r [vision ✓t as determi ed that 4 off-street parking stalls are required for each hole. The original Conditional Use Permit approving the golf course (file no. CUE -26-85) required a minimum of 65 off-street parking stalls for the nine hole golf course proposed at that time. The new nine hole par 3 golf course requires 36 off- street parking stalls. This equates to a total of 101 off-street parking stall required. Only 80 stalls have been provided. There are options for correcting the deficiencies in parking lot design and location. However, none of these options come without consequences to the County. These remedies include (1) the property owner requesting and receiving Hearing Examiner approval of several variances to allow the new parking lot to remain in its current location within the Thorpe Road right-of-way and allow deviations to the Zoning Code standards identified in Section 14.802.060, Sections 14.806.040(2 & 5) and Section 14.802.160, (2) requesting the property owner to relocate the parking lot based on his May 5, 2000 letter agreeing to relocate the parking lot at his expense, or (3) the County relocating the parking lot at our expense due to approval of the new parking lot within the County right-of-way. If the property owner chooses the variance route, I believe it is the -responsibility of the County to waive processing fees and pay for any mailing cost associated with the variance procedure due to our failure to process the permit accurately. No guarantee exists that the Hearing Examiner will approve the variances, so this is not the best solution. If during the variance procedure the Division of Engineering recommends as a condition of approval that Future Acquisition Area be required for the widening of Thorpe Road, an Interim Conditional Use Permit must also be requested and approved as per Section 14.710.1000 of the Zoning Code. With regard to item 2 noted above, the applicant may have legal standing to require the County to pay for the relocation of the parking lot. This is because the agreement between the County Engineer and the property owner to relocate N\SA Mr. Michael L. Senske Route 3, Box 634A Spokane, WA 99223 RE: 4403 S Dishman Mica Road—Permit #00-3275—Golf Course Dear Mr. Senske: It has been brought to our attention that the parking provided in conjunction with the above - referenced permit does not appear to be consistent with applicable provisions of the Spokane County Zoning Code, sections 14.802.060, 14.802.220(3), and 14.802.200(5). In addition, the two parking areas existing on site do not provide the minimum required off- street parking stalls. The original Conditional Use Permit approving the golf course (CUE -26-85) required a minimum of 65 off-street parking stalls for the 9 hole golf course proposed at that time. The new 9 hole par 3 golf course requires 36 off-street parking stalls. This equates to a total of 101 off-street parking stalls required. Only 80 stalls have been provided. Copies of the referenced code provisions are enclosed for your review. Options available to address the above would include relocation/reconfiguration of the parking to be consistent with the Zoning Code or approval of a variance(s) through the Spokane County Hearing Examiner. In either instance, Francine Shaw, Senior Planner, is familiar with the particulars of this project and can assist you in addressing the above issues. We recognize that permits have been issued and work is progressing in development of the course. This work can proceed during resolution of the above, however we will be unable to authorize any final approvals pending resolution of these issues. Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact either Francine Shaw at 477- 7200, extension 7218, or myself at 477-3675, extension 7120. Sincerely, Mark Holman Assistant Director Enclosures c: Francine Shaw, County Planning Division 6:1737� Pt( a;e,eN2 c 1�-�a ? DIVISION OF PLANNING MICHAEL V. NEEDHAM, DIRECTOR MEMO A DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT GARY OBERG, DIRECTOR DATE: July 11, 2000 TO: John Roskelley, County Commissioner FROM: Francine Shaw, Senior Planner RE: Petition Regarding the Painted Hills Golf Course Public works staff has had an opportunity to review concerns of the residents of the Chester Creek neighborhood regarding requested flood safety changes and traffic safety changes to the Painted Hills Golf Course as identified in their petition to the Board of County Commissioners submitted on June 25, 2000. In order to assist you in your response to the petitioners, please find below a list of relevant facts pertaining to the development of the site. A. The Division of Engineering has issued two permits for development within the Chester Creek flood plain. The first permit was issued on April 3, 2000 for grading and filling related to the development of the new nine hole par 3 golf course. The second permit was issued on May 9, 2000 for the construction of a starter shack and new 15 stall parking lot. B. A letter titled "Developer Agreement (for) Alternative Off Street Parking" was submitted to the Division of Engineering on May 5, 2000 by the property owner, Michael Senske. This letter consents to the relocation of the 15 stall parking lot in event Spokane County should widen or need the use of the Thorpe Road right-of-way presently encompassed by the parking lot. Please see enclosed letter. C. Mr. Senske's May 5, 2000 letter was accepted and approved on May 9, 2000 by the County Engineer, Bill Johns. Division of Engineering staff indicated Mr. John's acceptance of the letter also acts as a written release of liability for possible damages that may be caused to the parking lot due to its location within the Spokane County right-of-way. D. RCW 36.70B.180 addresses developer agreements. You may want to consult with legal staff to verify applicability of RCW 36.70B to this project. Please find RCW 36.70B.180-210 enclosed. E. Division of Planning staff released the building permit for the starter shack and nine hole par 3 golf course on May 9, 2000. The sign -off incorrectly 1026 W. BROADWAY • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260-0220 PHONE: (509) 477-7200 • FAX: (509) 477-2243 • TDD: (509) 477-7133 waives all landscaping. Landscaping that can be waived pursuant to Section 14.806.020(2) of the Zoning Code only pertains to landscaping standards identified in Chapter 14.806. Please see enclosed building permit. F. The parking lot location and design are in conflict with the Spokane County Zoning Code. The new parking lot has been constructed in violation with all items listed within Section 14.802.060. The parking lot lacks landscaping as provided in Section 14.802.220(3) which requires parking lots to provide a three (3) foot -wide strip of Type IV landscaping along street frontages when the requirements of Section 14.806.040(2) cannot be enforced. The parking lot is in violation of Section 14.802.200(5) which requires all parking stalls to be located within 60 feet of a landscape feature (including combination of trees, shrubs, ground cover, etc.). Please see enclosed zoning regulations. G. The two parking areas existing on site do not provide adequate off-street parking stalls. As per Section 14.802.160 of the Zoning Code the Division has determined that 4 off-street parking stalls are required for each hole. The original Conditional Use Permit approving the golf course (file no. CUE -26-85) required a minimum of 65 off-street parking stalls for the nine hole golf course proposed at that time. The new nine hole par 3 golf course requires 36 off- street parking stalls. This equates to a total of 101 off-street parking stall required. Only 80 stalls have been provided. There are options for correcting the deficiencies in parking lot design and location. However, none of these options come without consequences to the County. These remedies include (1) the property owner requesting and receiving Hearing Examiner approval of several variances to allow the new parking lot to remain in its current location within the Thorpe Road right-of-way and allow deviations to the Zoning Code standards identified in Section 14.802.060, Sections 14.806.040(2 & 5) and Section 14.802.160, (2) requesting the property owner to relocate the parking lot based on his May 5, 2000 letter agreeing to relocate the parking lot at his expense, or (3) the County relocating the parking lot at our expense due to approval of the new parking lot within the County right-of-way. If the property owner chooses the variance route, I believe it is the responsibility of the County to waive processing fees and pay for any mailing cost associated with the variance procedure due to our failure to process the permit accurately. No guarantee exists that the Hearing Examiner will approve the variances, so this is not the best solution. If during the variance procedure the Division of Engineering recommends as a condition of approval that Future Acquisition Area be required for the widening of Thorpe Road, an Interim Conditional Use Permit must also be requested and approved as per Section 14.710.1000 of the Zoning Code. With regard to item 2 noted above, the applicant may have legal standing to require the County to pay for the relocation of the parking lot. This is because the agreement between the County Engineer and the property owner to relocate the parking lot is contingent upon the County widening Thorpe Road not because we failed to review the permit appropriately. In addition to the items noted above as "enclosed", I have provided you with copies of the approved site development plan for the proposal on which I have drawn the location of the new 15 stall parking lot and the design drawing of the 15 stall parking lot for your review. If you need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Enclosures c: Gerry Gemmill, Assistant to the Public Works Director Michael Needham, Director of the Division of Planning Mark Holman, Assistant Director of Building and Code Enforcement Jeff Forry, Division of Building and Code Enforcement Pat Harper, Division of Engineering Tammie Williams, Division of Engineering Jim Millgard, Division of Planning