I-10-80 CHAIRMAN - SV CITIZENS ZONING COMMITTEE 1 , d
�ra -,mac
1eaFe¢ Bouclew ownet
s e on
— 72/ fr9a e7c
- la -0-n- , 2OnL
PARK ROAD SUPER
PHONE WA 6 -4660
N. 2903 PARK ROAD
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206
�iY�ri�r� l D / 9s' a
ECEDUE1
NOV 14 1980
SPOKANE COUNTY
A ° /4 PLANNING DEPARTMENT
i-,7-et �J�(
.,,.p 6 - G[��iup� — +�N e t- 1 A7 2 -� -t- % �/ �- 4 /
„rice, ce, G s-K¢ 9 0��' l� O e r t.t.
62,,,
,:€164• ± / • Dom, *&`L /?7r 1- a e 4 /*
iesiz ) -0 -;,. .,LY CGC , 1 ? . /'1�`a-'�-L' --C W-n-r� E-A"e7 u-• -e e (
OS re- <-e —te .�-�i x -.E.� c- e- t- e_L > �R -L-4 ( ire - / 9.1— 7 -w aCCC
% w" .`' r � P te ' , ' " sr tasc< - Le-A, ,Q pr,
�� [.. p�I'� / /c p- K`tQe o--.� - iKj � ne" o
/ !-eAe n'�` ='may
e �R • _ E- 0- rats -t, - aL - 4J LL- a.--r( li i`X, VA
/ sc - / �/ a- dzLi- Gam- /t/ c<xfcc
4
°LC�.. 2 7 C- t 2-. • r L f c_C iG
,¢,7-e -eh •er",a- Liz -€./si-r
vv V /
D7
lee/1 .. - zees!
ce)/
r e-1-4-s-t w»ri 992.0
4€ /fir-r-
r icts"- 2
7a/
1 0-r-itat
awn-rob.'
,...4 31)luTTER ; OF i 2011E
cC f SSl_; TIC:'
x 1
T'n0'r,TTIi Aim CJl 21.In11,. ).'
TJ IIAT ;,0 IC:., SIFESS ) .
.r r .t!mihrt cy"y_t'h•y' a. .e j � 'L'�:'9.,f t - .: :.•, te•f f "„r,. ''r _ r..•
Tne uovo t l eu. e t (r t c .11nt. 0 1 1 etul� r1y o *he 1 ins
1 F' A -.
of County Cwmni' t 1 u1 crq cf fy Soak .. B' GO':Slty o'i3 i� N� J '., '1C iI �
j + R.. 1 n t r 1...n1 1fis °Sl on. hl •ttsflf Clue.
o d rti E3t' 11P YSpoa... ��oun ,• o �v .y.
Ile r1nF O7' tl
e Vilna ttei ":in tine manner .2i1rt ° for tau' e' 0 ,9iuG ii:
S °; CTn Ca ,,.5 e. 0110;1 as ,Pid a1 it'blJcah8:3' Ln a ; . r 41uised.• 4. paa
fen c�+ uls`ln :he r ,1 r to zo'le the fo`]le J1 dre.'� be9 410i'n
• 3 ihes Zone Di tlict q,*, �
• w
x`+,:` F r- y � M•.�i � � . K
', t:�"'g < lldl' � tiJrt�`t r ,� y �a Lotss'i °, tOSA 1I nc + -,'t inrfBioca A'^of.,�,4 9rf1^J ,°,bt 4 ,1„
GI'_l.�i e - Zli7 :C ?fllt i'o , n %y
a,ouP . t JA ulcn 2 r » on IIl�:: 4 "!
Nortn, Ran LLir, . v W I , Sp oil+ e A 3 M +
Iii Ytif J' a ,� 0oui , , 1 t1 et, 1 on 12. .' V •1 e .
of- Unxter eit y`& ;36tr rXveutP
Pu: ,a ,Y" f, .1 , •,° tl Y {tp ,i, a� d; •! 4 ! h f ,r,4 y S.F. .•
s' Y
' .
'�'! °x�•,6 - , u i s t x ,_r,A , f .: I .W 3 ..."J. 'r
k Sri ° °r. .•,� '
y , ,s,DTO', , ^lliF FFOn p ` � IT S R COL that ,tre„ab de, o� er,�t,,:,b
iheµel s "si icat o± 1 Bas_n ..
rend ire ,.11e ner by mss, zo J,,T.n1f � I+!��
2 f ied i '1C n -- . t ' rii4 21ast Zo te,.Crill;lance, of Spor Coun y,
++ ° c f " ", v- . *i o ' 4 , ... - iii,;r F., ,
O, t14g'u t o 19 r3 r f r , ` J f�r>w � '� 9 .\ - r. , .
s Tt�r"'T) fT S ITF.,` =•ygcT;I G"'Q &T'Y l;li
G:. '.ISSICIItPS; OF,. SPOKANE ,
wB)41SD,OP COUNT'_✓ C'0i4MIczcTO?1
GFtSPOKANE 00TJ1yTi,ti1AS1,T CT1 Si
•
J =_ -T
04
I Yn eby..cer'ti
.;�.: true •coi;rect {. Copy if
Resolut pn pas' ea._b; t -h:c.
• 0 anfiissiG; Sribk
=•!'t on
for
n 2oii`� District,
Bg_:rd, Count y
`...:11 to . :a
i
•
NO
BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF THE APPROVAL )
OF TfIE FINAL PLAT OF CHESTER )
HILLS ADDITION, BEING 'iIIE E , ' )
OF NEk EXC. THE 1i. 30' THEREOF ) R E: S O L, U, T I 0 N
AND THAT PORTION OF Nz OF SE , )
LYING EAST OF 'DISIMAN -IICA ROAD)
IN SEC. 29- 25-44.
51'1 7
BE' IT RESOLVED, by tha Board of County Commissioners of Spokane
- County, Washington, that the Final Plat of Chostor Bills Addition, being
the.EQ of NE* Exc. the N. 30' thereof and that portion of We of SE* lying',
east of Dishman -Mica Road in Section 29, Township 25 North,' Range 44. E.11
Spokane County, Washington. 2
PASSED BY TILE BOARD, the 62 - day of
1951. a.i: :
BOARD OF COUNTY COAMISSIONERS
OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ATTEST:
FRANK J. GLOVER
C1er o e Board
Yr' ' ==1'i .. s•
CHESTER HILLS PLAT -- Continued
have Mr. Allen of`the Washington Surveying and Rating Bureau.' He might '
be able to tell you about the hydrants in there a little better than. I can:
Mr.. State: I think we should hear from him. At the last meeting.it was:-r"
brought out every emphatically regarding the statement of the Washington.iC
Surveying and Rating Bureau.
Mr. Myhre: This was regarding fire protection.
I4r. Christie: In. regard to the hydrants, Mr. Allen, you and I went over
that last week and they are all within the 320 feet, is that correct2.
lir.. Allen: Yes, we will grant a zone f1, provided the supply and pressure
is adequate. We will grant a zone nl, normally of course, with 300 feet .
spacing but in order to make a continuous district we will go 33 feet. It '
is preferable to have the hydrant on the corner rather than in the middle ..
of the street, so they wouldntt have to lay the hose around the corner to
get down the other street. For that reason we will permit 660 feet. I
think they are within the bounds of Zone #1, with the understanding the
supply is adequate:
14r. Fosseon: Who determines that supply, do you?
Mr. Allen: Our Engineer in Seattle is the one who passes on it.
Mr. ideigs: Did you approve that 4 --inch line? The main supply line starts
out here with an eight –inch, then it splits into two six- -inch mains, then
the four –inch. Do you approve of that four –inch line — is that supply.
enough for a water hydrant?
idr, Allen: Yes.
ldr. Weigs: i1hat.pressure will you have to maintain on that four –inch line
to give you sufficient water?
Er. Allen: I'm not familiar with that. Our standard is usually 50 pounds,
but we do go lower. They have pumpers that will boost the pressure. But
they will approve, especially in a Residential district, a 4 –inch main,
providing it isn't more than 1,000.feet dead end. Beyond the point of
1,000 feet we feel the pressure is reduced by friction, etc. As long as
it is within 1,000 feet or fed both ways it would be O.R.
Mir. Meigs: Does your office prepare the flow charts? Or, do you have the
Engineer prepare them and you approve them? ,
Mr. Allen: Our Engineer, when he checks the system, actually makes flow
tests.
Mr. Excell: The State Department of Health still has to approve the distri–
bution system.
Mr. Myhre: In other words, the only thing we know here for sure is that we
have the well site and the right size fire hydrants.
lir. Christie: We had a State man here, Mr.. James, but he has gone now. He
has looked into this and he thinks it is all right.
Idr. Weiss: I move we take it up in Executive Session
Mr. Mynre: I second the motion. Motion carried.
ACTION Executive Session reports that the Final Plat of Chester Hills
Addition be approved provided that Section "f" in the dedication is amended
to read as follows: No lots in this addition shall be offered for sale or
sold until water mains to provide adequate pressure and water to make this
plat conform to a fl Fire District as approved by the Washington Surveying
and Rating Bureau, have been laid in the adjacent roadway and connected to
an operating water system.
PRELIMIiARY PLAT OF BASCETTA'S ADDITION
Mr. Graham: Mr. Christie has a preliminary plat also.
1ir. Christie: .This plat will be known as Bascetta's Addition. This is in
Section 18, Township 25 =forth, Range 44. He has owned this piece of ground
for some and I think it is an Assessor's Plat. He has sold 5 pieces .4
and they won't let him sell any more. The lots are above the average the,",
-3-
FINAL PLAT OF TRACT 121, OPPORTUNITY
Idr. Graham: We have another Final Plat of C: V: Pu; -r e, Engineer for the
adoption of the Final Plat of the Subdivision of the E. 1/3 of8lock 121j:
Opportunity.
tir. Cameron: This is the preliminary plat that was approved last meeting:;',
This is the same exactly as on the preliminary plat. I have filed the
letter with Mr'. State regarding the water from Modern Electric.' Mr. Evans,
who•is the owner of this property, planned on having this small in
here graded, but the cat man couldni,t get over but he would eethe as soon
as he could and grade it satisfactory to Mr: Chaffins. ^ • ,
NT. Meigs: What is the width of this street? `
Mr. Myhre: Fifty feet.
Mr. Meigs: Have you checked that Mri State?
Mr. State: Yes, we discussed that at the last meeting. There was some
discussion whether it should be 50 feet or 60 feet. It seems At goes back
there only the depth of one lot and it was accepted as a 50 foot street.
idr. McClure: Does this meet all the requirements, Mr. State?
Hr. State: Of course, Mr. Chaffins will have to inspect it because the
street hasn't been graded. It can be accepted subject to the approval,
of the County Road Engineer, and of course he won't sign it until he
inspects it.
Mr. Meigs: I move that we accept it subject to the final approval of tho
County Engineer.
.Idr: Myhre: I second the motion: Motion carried.
ACTION ?: Accepted subject to the final approval of the County Engineer.
CHESTER HILLS ADDITION FINAL PLAT
• pa Graham. We have now the Final Plat of Chester Hills.Addition. .Verne
Christie will speak.
Mr. Christie: This came up last time and we didn't have the dedication on
it or we didn't have, the Water mains on it and we wanted it passed on
approval of the County Engineer. So at this time this ie what is proposed
for the water plan. At the present time they are going to put a 35,000
gallon reservoir. And they are going to put a turbine here, driven by
15 H.P. motors that will feed these two pressure tanks. This is laid
out by a water machine man. He claims that will give us plenty of water
for what we want at the present time. In the future they are going to put
another turbine here right into the main which will draw 500 gallons per
minute.
Mr. Excell: The well site has been approved by the State, but not the
distribution yet.
Mr. Christie: We have a letter here from the State Health Department
approving the site. (MMlr. Christie read the letter.)
Mr. Myhre: That is the well site only?
Mr. Christie: Yes. What we would like to do now, we have taken this up
with Mr. Chaffins and NT . State, is get this reservoir and pumps and
everything complete. A 8 —inch line to this point here, 6 —inch around to
here, 6 —inch around to here and 4 —inch in here. (Pointing on map.) That
'would be project #1. They would put that in right away. The well is being
drilled now. Tract D will be finished first. Then they can sell lots
around there and not wait for the rest. Thor, would you read "K" in the
dedication?
i-ir. Myhre: °K° — No lots in this addition shall be offered for sale, or
sold until water mains have been so laid in the adjacent road —way and ,•r•
connected to an operating water system.
Mr. Christie: Of course this plan in here isn&t. complete. I have in my ,
pocket here a bond for $15,000, which Mr. Chaffins approved as sufficient '.
for the first unit. The pumping will take care of the second unit. We''
—2— •
CHESTER HILLS FINAL PLAT • :ontinued
• for this system. We are cooperating through the Assessor's office and>
everybody else to the fullest extent possible. :.
Mr. Walker: Now far down is the water?
Mr. Reed: It is'approximately 100 feet down to the water.
Mr. Walker: How big a well are you going to .put in? '
Mr. Reed: It will either be a 12 —inch or a 16 -inch well.
Mr. Walker: That is going to cost you some money. It is going to cost
you from 4 to 6 dollars a foot to lay that main past your property.' You
are going to have a 4 —inch main?
rr. Reed: 'Six inch, I presume.
Mr. Walker: You have to have a reservoir of at least 20,000 or more gallons.
Mr. Reed: Might I say this, that a 2,000 gallon pressure tank will do the •
job. This is a pressure system, hot the old fashion type with the tank'
up above the ground.
Mr. Walker: I move that we dis —allow it.
Mr. Anderson: In case the pump goes wrong you have no system for water.
Mr. Walker: You wouldn't get to first base the Surveying and Rating
Bureau or anything else.
Mr. Excell: I'd like to..mention, gentlemen; that the well supply and the
well will have to be approved by the State:Department of Health.
Mr. Reed: That is right. Wo.have that now
Mr. Walker: It should be approved by the Fire Underwriters and you should .
have sufficient water -- 2 days supply above ground: Say you have 172
lots there. The average water consumption of 50 gallons a day por person
.is 8600 gallons. You should have 22 days supply above ground in order to
get by the Surveying and Rating Bureau. I'm thinking about fire protection.
These electric systems go en and they go off. We had a similar system, in
a plat we approved and now that is all said and done, they have sold off
part of their loth, their . Water system and their storage have proved in—
adequate: I'm not going t� be a party to another inadequate water supply:
11r. Reed: We mean;te have the best water system available bar none — in •
the Valley. I not a water man, but the'new type as I understand it, has
not one pump but two pumps in case of a power failure. One is a gas pump .
then you do have water.; I happened to see a new water system just last
week, of this same kind, in one of the very best plats in Spokane. Brede's
plat upon the hill on Fifty — Seventh Avenue. That system is very similar
to what we expect to nut in. We will conform to any rules and regulations
.necessary to do it. I believe the day is passed when you have the over-
head water systems. Whatever is necessary, will be done. If we have to
have the other type, we will get it.
Mr. Anderson: You should have it tied into some other system too. In the
Valley they have.cne here and one there and when one breaks down, no one
can help them.
Mr. Reed: I understand that if you have two pumps with the pressure system,
you have a far greater system than the old one. Is anybody acquainted with
Mr. Brode's system over there?
Mr. Meigs: I am. At the present time he has two electric pumps. Possibly
he may have an auxiliary gasoline motor to operate one pump. But he doesn't
have any water upon the hill. Suppose the power goes off, it takes the . •
same electricity to run one pump as it dons the other. He doesn't even
have a gas pump.
Mr. Meigs: His pressure tank is clear down below the grade. The minute
his power goes off, he doesn't have pressure. Until he does put in an '
auxiliary and hook up to the same pump — it doesn't matter how many pumps
you have if you don't have power to run it, you don't have water.
Mr. Walker: Where is the location of this?
Hr. Reed: This, sir, is 1 miles southeast of Dishman. It is all clear.
There are no trees and no rock in there.
tfl �1
b±OKAiTE COUNTY PLANNING 001114ISSIou
M I N U T E S
October 31, 1951..
MEETING: Called to order by Chairman, A. B. Fosseen,. in Judge Goodsell's court
room in the County Court House, at 2:00 P.M.
MINUT2S: The minutes of the meeting of September 26, 1951, were approved as sub
mitted.
MEMBERS: Present: Messrs. Fosseen, Anderson, McClure, Meigs, Mix, Reasor, State,,
Walker, Chaffins Excell.
CHESTER HILLS ADDITION
Mr. Graham: The first thing on the agenda is the Final Plat of Chester Hills
Addition.
Mr. Fosseen: Are you ready to address the Commission, Mr, Christie?
Mr. Christie: This plat was brought up at the last meeting for a preliminary
hearing. We would have had it completed, including the dedication, but
the owners, one of them :-rho is here now, wanted to make smaller lots. They
wanted to sell the N of the lot and then sell the S. Then we talked to
Mr. State about it, and he and the Assessorts office recommended that we
cut the lots in two and make a new plat. That is the reason why the dedi -•
cation isn't on here. We didntt have time to put it on as we had to go
out in the field again, and I think that was .a week ago Monday, and you
know how it rained all week. The streets are graded and all the stakes
are in except part of the white stakes that have the numbers on, but all
the iron pipes are in, the monuments are in and everything else. It took
a little more time than what we thought it would. What we would like to
do is have thi plat passed as a Final Plat subject to the approval of I4r.
Chaffins, so it wontt be held up another month. They want to put this
through because they have their water system to put in. Mr. Chaffins has
agreed that he will set the bond to take care of the water system, .which
will be an entirely new water system.
Mr. Fosseen: We might as well get the opinion of the Board first, on what
they want to do.
Mr. Anderson: Do you have any connection with any other water system in
your community except your own there?
Idr. Christie: No.
Mr. Walker: How many lots are you going to have?
Mr. Christie: Originally we had 98 lots and now we have 172 lots.
Mr. State: It is just like he said. They had in mind that some people
would want the large lots and those people who didn't want so much could
buy half a lot. That was kind of incomplete way of doing it I would say.
If they know in advance that they were going to sell half lots, we recom-
mended that they re-draw their plat and lay out smaller lots. The streets
are-60' wide and they are the same as the original.
Mr. Christie: Every lot has over 100 foot frontage.
IIr. State: The streets are just the same as in the preliminary plat, but
they have created almost twice as many lots as they had in the first place •
I think you should hear the dedication. It isn't on the tracing and I
think in accepting the plat you certainly should hear that. That is the
only thing we have to check.
Mr. Christie: Mr. Reed is here, he can tell you about the water. I think.':
they have a little financial difficulty there, but it will take just a few
more days to get the rest of the money for it.
Frank Reed: We have to raise some more money, but we will have a good water
To do so, we would appreciate if this could be put through as
quickly as possible because time is the essence to us in securing the money:.`;
I
.", 11.101fl Lti
Id •01 T 1
. sr, 1, i
1 1
i ... _ _ It! . .." ' 2 . ' E . T1.
.7
5. !
1 t
t
I 2 I
i i 1
" NO; - : : ! ! !... ' ' "!'• %!!-- ! : 1 1 I
5 6 ; 1 . j 0 ; 15 1 : 1 ' ,5 5.] ; / 1 r '
A l .. i _ j_.** 1•••::)LI ' /!.. 4 '''.. 'I 5 II t• ;I ' ;', r:c . • ; • ; 1 ; 9 ; 0 - 0 12 ; I, 2 0 ' II S 0 ! Z 2 ' 22 '2 29 .../ 9 9 99 0
- 2 71.... ‘. I . I 2
... p
,
17 - 2 " °I I " SI NI I N'9I J I
; • ;•••• `''''' '‘'''' ' T. " -- " C iT :2 7 - :•" 4 :-- / •••••• - e' ''''' 3 ' ....- b. ' ."•"• • I ' -- - " n • - • ' ; ' I '''" "" 7: ' '''' -- ' t ' 4 1
ttz / 1 ; : • 1,•1 . I :. ''' ... - ' '''''' I:T:1 •.: ;r-.... '-' ---.1
- .- 2 7
- ° 2 1 9 t II2I
r r, ... t ir . ,. .. ;.:Er , i E. . ,..; r: , I 03 ; ..,„_, \ .,_\_:;:-,. 1 ‘21 ;;, ■ li
LT:, .,.___Itk-.
•-...-i.... ..., _„ •
.,.. . . ...,, ,, i , , 1, ....__. ;; . ';-- ' - ... -,f q . -.. i i ir
• .•
.•- r, L. ,.. • , .,, , F 11 1: F : • • -, ! li n ".!: l'. ' n. . .I; ' ,, T. 1
. :. r. .
- -------... ' • ' -.' . n r.-- ...---* • ' ' : • •... i. 1. I. -,..1.....?'";:y.,7Z-.?7,-..:;s:[..14 \ . V. - I 1 1 1
' - - - ----
, 4 , I , T
--- :17 i i. IS :l l : t - I ::1 •" ‘!:',, -1 1.c
•:C . ..• , : O. !! r ' T:' , T \ ' . a .2 - n r ,...). -,:: -- - -
r -• : ..1 7 :, 2 .2.•.. . ,41l. .. t 2 9 I
- -"-- -- ' 1 i ll i '...':::,:... ,.._, .,
" I
.., -. • .- .... - .
I • ., r i ). 1 ...!. • •••••."‘ •-• .2' --
' - ,, - ': ; -.--; tr• :::-- -
i •• r n I. • ,......- 42--
i I 1 ;":"'s „-•
nor rnrrt
DEDICATION
......
.. •43 0 NJ. ors En t•CW ze.Oln sal vans. cleta eye Lyn.. •.,,,...,„ sa Jct. 4. Pz.r.o reose....on ro.,14 oristS nazi - • tine,
v.. , . .. .
enz , • t z : • tra !o,,,te 1 .ne 1 3,3 VS" SW st SS. lo N NINn CI. Csti 03.53 A 02a3IN ars; , toe 1.2 3. Ns ni ,,, ,,,,cr , , ccell., !...,.. fling"... . .e ..' ..''
ol - . • r - u 2 s 17.• SC C.I I, et E,P 0 thi 7 ..ssn- soPeop.:111 ZS. Ts. 25N Ps 1 2..•
•). St, , vs., • II , 1114 i4 It ..13. 4,,........ vs 3.04,13 Ns • p. & ^ • ,'''.:9''
Is. "IS S 14,, 2. ts al 0 SY " No ECI, !LIU Cd .c.4 :,,,,, 21, 32 Setts, ....-• YE 0,4.1 y st x Is ,... c. .7.......... y N. v ...s... _
r. • "I", a 10414 It ,..s. 3 0 ., 14.1• soca . s3.."3.54. 3rt II li -.vs 5 31 it - I4C / • ..... ... • , • '
k• • 50 5 .• • , 2 <AG i I. en.-.; 44 It et Is, crt-z-1 Greta. 25.ra 1 prsi al 47, Cass 4 . 3 . 5 . 7, C. sts t Y. 2 ,3 2 2 , 1 "r a .. con'. d
‘o•o• • Ton 0 "too:on .4 NO at 147,, au,K WS to ty tsb's, Is 1St "I el rrt FS. , PsY,c, St use" $. a" to.3•4, Sr --.4 MISS. 9 7 ' 9
....,1 ..f • ,, 0 .33014. O, t, trean ONO Ons, , 416s4 1St FS •17y,•w, 1,7 , •4.... an 0 SS 7 • • " 9 79
4.3 air. s 4, a cry "a laYe, •
I -Is Ns 2 Sat 4 4 7 . 3 N 4 • 4. Is St yl. 0.4, ... ,
sett t sopa C34 SYS DO tyntsti • .", soy C. vs ..i ',,,,r .,:, '''• ''' ..* #' it R.'" W'P''''''' 1 '....".C. ,.. t
n t , ,Ne 0 s Sa.,• , es Ns, ta ...cs lava Comma, al IOnst
I • .......,. v... b.; ...led en on, lad s .7 363 en mat. IN" 72 NO 03 an 1. , 371 vl 1". no. Ian, II, ao Mei Nes .7, f-ss kits ..47•44 n,
3, .." SO v .1 i Ise, no. Nu at IN, 15 / • cm ar, vt• ka I. " hist, •4•0 • 6444 r4 tan.• e• ea,sw.n. lecree trait • -4, 17■4
is Wei" Ness ran* NV M1 on Md. k h.
C. c•MC NI nn. d.Slosts "Yalta pormaNS "Rs cpleals4. , .
2 99 9 "" st s , SSN's •••• S a‘ SYS Worn:nor ',OF. or." is .4. as 41 No Sot any,ep la Vsa noner vest ...., Scott en aleseps 47 "se
... N.
1.-Zr ril7 9 4 9 1 11 ,7r 3 se
multe4sPO011.
b."'N inet‘c icdFrrin. n'sw.'.1'.a n
`•••••=5.7:.=•:,71,=;',;°:: rgo.axn:rroic-blicIs1".T hp'
7 d..3:::";.`c•32:,: 1 7`firc=r3L:.'" 1 " °"" %PI " .....
rs,714 •• odoc, cso, ocid,"N,11, .4.0041 as so niv,loteac401.•,,drifewesa t4.7,4•43-322"s9999
9." tls,117.141. tstS•stssl tts"-SIss.
:9.--1,1•T'st'''V9094919.929.j922•9•!1"!+9,9:49!,Iallre!IZ raTIIIVI!,9=4Mtnetrtee■rt g:9;3199.!;;•2!1!9;211491Ve99,9,3-.9199
• y. L , Sy," S.C.-n.4740 w San Los. *els 34.,43 odequon sow, irn "se, 4 t•'' ° r""Pad
R c t' G.'"nr cut `uuuR •• • .,... Fr! oraoer.. rn•ree. rr'e•-
•••• • Fon !,,.0)0I .1 600hol cen ..rennonenr eon poln We nen Wenn mat rent:tarp en001•Ntenwere
• cc.. •
• :-T
c'• • '-^.°‘ r•-• '""`". °•."•••..-"• ••••I' • '""'"
'
• ,..„...e.,..,,,,••••••cs,..•-•••••■••••••...•........•..••• •
• • • ,.;•••....•-•••••••••• •••
tow, odds Ns over roves, rel•Ilacw• 1,•5, "4. rev "s ssoM /et
44 a •
99 " 555,N4r•N 5•17t eeorre woe o 11 croonnnor__I.L._sar a_ta.ml-ner
r - .2 • 7.
To. r .'res
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
n'L $) H. : 7 4-1 4; • 7 95' 9 . L4 - C r l r• :24 ;4 rs 9 11;
Ng 44 ninon:on
oo erre ern nt oronn nmionre.
nna 1C,,,..ss re, uot tat ut.
• .
want,/ Rt&#•'
L MEND
S1403,4 COCOf 0.000.0
••••;.../ • • T
rya enmeno-P- 15 ---GS•
to--nee on +trout
CarS,I,Snrs Isnrenc•
• s -
t41 LSD lAPtc"
COJsyt DVS"! " 32st• tat, •SI
4.5
1•0414
101,L, 3,4 CO MS-Tr
1 e
•-.
7374311
INAL 33.3 07
Oats
"•.` 'c •
(*.:•.,t,
..•.:1/4;:: • ..,...
r,:
....t
. C . :GI i N E: , S ! ,..C.EP.,TliliwC,A1,,E-0,,.. - i
0.3
ctL
,...,c„,,,......L.,,,...:.,...,.....oR Lc. '---; "
( • : . 1
1 du reu•, :cm Us rant Putt cc VS Gen , put 44 tvel:;
e ::.-1.a..g.......r .-._
r.........-. 2 ork• *flan
C.;47
7 0,1 0,
CHESTER HILLS AL0111014
Et" G THE 0.31 In Or TUE RI 1/4 Sta-PT Tag
P•0 72F1 TnElitCf RID T•e PORTON OFT(
NOR', 1217 T.t 51 L•t-G EAST OF TUE Cc9.116101
- RC& RCAD, Ca 01 SECT lato T 11101.44D111.
:flits Kt CAST/. VeY444
a
.
SUBJECT: County Engineer's Recommendations
DATE:
VN- 207 -80
VN- 206 -80
WVE -10 -80
1-10-80
OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER
.:: .
. Spokane County, Washington
Zoning Adjustor
Bob Brueggeman, Engineer's Office
October 31, 1980
If approved:
Applicant shall execute notice to the public that this
property is served by a private road.
Same conditions as stated for October 29, 1980 agenda.
If approved:
Applicant shall have setbacks sufficient to allow for
county roads and improvements adjacent to this property.
VN- 208 -80 If approved:
Applicant shall execute notice to the public that this
property is served by a private road.
VE- 209 -80 •If approved:
Applicant shall execute notice to the public that this
property is served by a private road.
Conditions to be determined at the time of a building
• permit application.
R
OCT 31 1980
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Recommendations are as circled.
14EMORRNDUM
TO: Spokane County Planning - Zoning Adjustor Hearing
FROM: Spokane County Utilities
DATE:
SUBJECT: r -10 -t° APP0.4 -1
(1) Pursuant to the Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 80 -0418, the
use of on -site sewer disposal systems is hereby authorized. This authoriza-
tion is conditioned on compliance with all rules and regulations of the
Spokane County Health District and is further conditioned and subject to
specific application approval and issuance of permits by the Health District.
(2) The owner, his heirs or successors shall join and participate in any peti-
tion or resolution which purpose is the formation of a utility local im-
provement district (ULID) pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94, as amended. The
owner, his heirs and successors shall further agree not to oppose or pro-
test any legal assessments for any utility local improvement district (ULID)
established pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94, as amended.
(3) Any water service for this project shall be provided in accordance with the
Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County.
(4) There are no recommendations concerning the method of sewage disposal as the
project is outside of the 201 sewer study area.
(5) Water service as approved by the Spokane County Health District and /or the
Washington State Department of Social and Health Services.
(6) Each dwelling unit shall be double plumbed for connection to future.area-
wide collection systems.
(7) A dry sewer connection to the future North Spokane Sewerage System is to be
constructed. Plans and specifications for the dry sewer connection are to
be reviewed and approved by the Utilities Department prior to construction.
(8) Located within the Critical Water Supply Service Area but not within any
purveyor's district. May be serviced by an individual well owned and oper-
ated by lot owner.
0 N recaN. J,,J'aR.
RECEIVED
C C T 31 1980
SPOKANE COUNTY
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
/fOUSES__( NO VOCANTL. OTS) _ _
- (KO 1/17cRivt Lars)
ilOCASES (IVO VACONF 'LOTS)
!`Y
} .r3
a I r
NOT rINri D
rE/VCE
UVo_ VACANT _LOTS
PLRW VIEW OF art, "ND umveRSITY OR 9
G.; YLSS ..
. A107' Fe- NC
Red circles =
B &e c roles
G rr . en frlangc Ie =
Cur /oca
Fool 5
20 0 0 .4 and
/5, CU() -if and
Barbey S fC
of rea, i s 3recn Sr.care 5 Era cue 0.3Rna
L
(Ai) ve r s �f fo Pines
above
he /ouj
(gc0001.. commaNtry) _PLI7Y APER_
W
Ffiof UNIVERSITY ELEMENTRRY SCHOOL._
NOTES
_5LL FA' TIRI7PleL5 P.ROX t-. NO SIDE 1�VAi KS FAIsr
_OIVIVE:1251TY RO4D__1 1GYLI. 17VE 1.7RE fRRoX._ao r1-.:.: .SC1M.7 S1=R1a
9NP PPROX._3G_' (FULL_ YVI.DTH, NO Sl -P VYI7LIfS LICIST 11; \\ -C. 'ILP/?E /V I7ND
tjS J30711. SIDES OE 14Th _k71V0 ON ; •\ ;'I-Y ?sIT%.
_DI_Y_RAINY_Dfl_.ys _PgREIVrs._..or_sruor P13Rn IIvplsc; ; , N77 7— LY
Z!Y__O_RjJrR :.017D I I- INLORD. THERE 15 OIYL i p FOU„s- 4 \NY STOP
117 __1-6_711 $ UNIYERs!7y.`,'vo srop LIGHTS) ..
/c /1 ] /2o/2?
EANIVERSITY Ell-EMENT1MY
_ scemo
CL S5 ROOM S
PA
13.asinz-r_sao_ cociRTI.
1-71\1cE •
CLI7SS ROOMS,
GY1k)N19J
_ • _
- • -
bCt
t
EivrRfiNcE 1N.
ot
2
T
. • "
■
.1.
. . - ';`.•
. .
ZONING ADJUSTOR HEARING
NOVEMBER 5, 1980
1:15 p.m.
Application No. I -10 -80
Jerry Litt, Representative of Warehouse Foods
Litt: My name is Jerry Litt, with Diversified Planning Development, East 9822
Sprague.
First, there are a couple of points that were brought up; one - by
Mr. Adams as far as contacting Frank Shadek. Mr. Shadek was on the
Planning Commission for Spokane County from 1952 until he retired a
few years back. Mr. Shadek was a professor at Eastern Washington
State College when I was there and we of course, became.,fairly good
friends and did find out a little bit about his past history so he
was on the Planning Commission during the time that these agreements
that were brought up were formulated. We are not going to go into
those agreements, but we are going to stay to the facts with the
Zoning Ordinance. Another fact that does exist out there though is
this site was zoned before the school was built. It was a part of
a planned community. That planned community by not restricting that
site you would have to assume that all the uses of the local business
zone at the time could have been contemplated for this site. There-
fore any of those uses that were identified earlier could have been
put in this. Another thing I would like to bring up is the point was
brought up about the agreements with Central Valley School District.
While I was in the area in 1978, a proposal for the Homestead and the
Highlands Planned Communities at Liberty Lake were proposed. Within
the planning work for the Highlands proposal at Liberty Lake there's
a 55 acre reserved area that was requested by the Planning Commission
for schools. This reserved area which was reviewed by Central Valley
School District in 1978 that they would accept this as a possible
school site in the future is located adjacent to a restricted industrial
zone. There are several points that my prepared statement brings up
which I'l1 leave a cony with Mr. Adams. Because this site is or be-
cause this proposal is on an interpretation and the state environmental
policy act is under the lead agency of Spokane County Building Codes
Department, the last page of the statement I will not go into. It goes
into the traffic generation and I believe that will be brought up
during the time of the checklist review which is requested additional
information. I also have a set of site plans or building plans to sub-
mit and the reason for doing this is that we do need to establish that
this store that is proposed is different from warehouse food markets
that were used as examples earlier. This food store is 21,000 it shows
on here 780 SO. ft. These are the plans that were proposed or given to
the Building Codes Department. It shows the improvements around the
site, it shows the parking lot, landscaping, the concrete sidewalk on
the west side of University and additional pavement for another lane
of traffic on the west side of University that sponsors for this would
have to improve along with the building permit. I also have a couple
of letters that referrs to on the prepared statement that will show that
University and 16th is not necessary or that the intersection is not
necessary to be used for the large tractor trailer delivery trucks.
The first paragraph of this statement shows that...
Just very briefly I might... Thank you. We did sit quietly through
their presentation.
The reason we were retained by Warehouse Food Markets is we are a
planning firm and we were retained to develop facts to support their .
purchasing of this land. They are in essence, if you want to put it
this way an innocent purchaser. That they looked for a niece :of land
that was already zoned that they could locate their building in without
going through the procedures of buying a piece of raw land and taking
a chance on getting it rezoned. The first two, or the first paragraph
of the statement basically things you've heard before but I will go
through them once again. The Spokane County Zoning Ordinance defines
a Local Business Zone as and this is Section 4.02.110 Local Business
Zone. The Local Business Zone is a land use classification for a
zone suitable to serve the commercial and personal service needs of
the home. And then the rest has been read before, its the zoning that
are adjacent that are normally found. Chapter 4.09 Local Business
Zone of the Zoning Ordinance under Sections 4.09.030 Uses Permitted,
Paragraph D1 states food stores such as grocery stores, meat market,
retail bakeries. While this proposed use is a warehouse market, it is
not a warehouse as defined in Websters Seventh Collegiate Dictionary.
And I quote from the dictionary - Under Warehouse the first - "A
structure or room for the storage of merchandise or commodities; two
deposit store or stock in or as if in a warehouse." Warehouse markets
is a name for retail outlet for the purchase of goods normally associat-
ed with a food store. This particular food store will have a bakery,
double the produce, and double the meat of the typical warehouse market:"
Therefore, this store is not catering to the same market as the typical
warehouse market in though the names are the same. This store will
cater to secondary market, much the same as EXCELL, IGA, THRIFT, or
ALBERTSONS. While Albertsons builds large stores they are by in large
a secondary market unlike a Safeway or Roseaurs. The proposed store
is designed to market approximately 55 % the volume of the warehouse
market on Adams Road which is within 6 blocks of two elementary schools.
Saint Mary's Elementary School is a Klock away on Adams and Adams
Elementary is less than 7 blocks away. Examples of other stores in
Local Business Zones - Albertsons at Sprague and Pines, portion of
the Safeway Store at Sprague and Pines, EXCELL Foods on Sprague and
McDonald two blocks from Keystone Elementary School and 14 blocks from
McDonald Elementary School. At least two examples of similar zonings
and conditions exist within the city limits of Spokane. The EXCELL
Foods at Nebraska and Maple across the street from an elementary school
and a daycare center, an EXCELL Food on Francis and Crestline two
blocks from an elementary school. Addressing this issue whether a
particular store is *permitted use in the Local Business zone. It
would appear that the proper interpretation was made by the Zoning
Administrator. From the facts presented above it has been the policy
of Spokane County to approve grocery stores in the Local Business zone.
It has not been injurious to the public health, safety and welfare
even if they are in, in close proximity to schools. Further information
supporting the Local Business nature of this zone is the following trade
area used to establish the viability of this site for a secondary use
grocery store. Now the trade area that I'm going to mention here is a
trade area they used in their awn feasibility work to see if this store
would work on this site. That area is 8th Avenue south to the Ponderosa
Area, the Dishman -Mica Road east to Pines Road. Within the trade area
there are 5,208 households. 17.4% of those households are south of 8th
and north of 18th. It can be assumed that a major portions of those
households south of 18th are now using University to travel to
Rosauers at University City or to Sprague to reach other primary
grocery stores. Increased traffic at 16th and University will draw
from the area which contains increased traffic now the 17.4% of the
homes. The other cars that would, can be assumed that at least a •
major portion of those are using this route now. And by the traffic
average day traffic counts that were brought up earlier, it is, it
can also be assumed in my estimation that a traffic light is probably
necessary at the corner of University and 16th at this time and I
think that should be checked out with the Spokane County Engineers
Office.
All cars in route to the proposed store will be terminating their
trip at this store, thus assuming at a slow rate of speed. Those
leaving the store will also be traveling slowly because they must
stop at the afore mentioned intersection. Large trucks making de-
liveries to the store will be committed to not using the 16th and
University intersection. Letters are attached supporting this commit-
ment. The trucks will use Dishman -Mica Road to 16th then east to
Oberlund and into the site. The reverse will be used when leaving
the store. And the rest, I have a feeling it gets more into the
environmental impact issues of it and I don't think we should address
those at this time. The two letters that I have that will be attach-
ed, this one is from Roundup Company, its addressed to Mr. Jim Manson,
Building Codes Director. Dear Mr. Manson with reference to the retail
grocery outlet planned by (inaudible) Buchanan at 16th and University
we willi to the following delivery and return routing. South on
Dishman -Mica Road east on 16th south to Oberlund to the receiving dock.
As you will see in the plans the.receiving dock is located so it can
be reached off Oberlund Road. The other letter is from Warehouse Food
Markets, from the district office. It's also addressed to Mr. Jim
Manson. Dear Mr. Manson, pertaining to the truck deliveries at Ware-
house Food Market to located (inaudible) to the road up 16th Avenue
to Oberlund where our loading dock will be located. The return route
will be the same. All other tractor trailer deliveries will be in-
structed to use the same route. We feel this is to be the most feasible
route to completely avoid the intersection of 16th and University.
I'll submit these letters also, to go with the prepared statement.
I believe we don't have much more to say because what we have is an
interpretation of the zoning ordinance, we do have emotional factors
that set in, _I realize that. My own children go to University Elementary
School and I drive the road every day myself. We do feel that the
interpretation was properly made based on the zoning ordinance and
I think the site plans that we have submitted, the letters which would
mitigate a problem that I feel is crucial to keep the tractor trailers
off of 16th and, or the intersection of 16th and University is a miti-
gating measure that normally wouldn't be required of something that is
already a permitted zone. I think the crucial issue here is that alot
of the comments made earlier were addressing'a primary market similar
to those stores which are in existence by Warehouse Foods now. In fact,
this store will not be a primary market, it is catering to a secondary
market. It was intended to be that way and that's the way it's going
-to be built: This would be the only Warehouse Foods in Spokane with a,
bakery, and again it has double the meat and double the produce of a
normal store.
ADAMS: Mr. Litt, could you explain the difference between a primary and secondary
market?
— .DAVIS:
LITT:
LITT:
DAVIS:
LITT:
Basically, what your doing is where a person in a primary store
does the bulk of their everday needs for their shipping. In other
words, they make, may make one trip a week to a primary store where
a secondary store they may make two or three trips to that store
for smaller orders and I guess the more service needs. Also this
store, one thing we might add as far as school kids using the store
Warehouse Foods don't sell single pop, they don't, everything is
by a 6 -pack or larger and they don't have a candy counter so there's
really no need for the children to be there at that time. Any
questions?
Mr. Litt, most of your testimony is based on the letter that you
submitted to the file. And in that letter you did described the
trade area of the facility. And it does described the need or the
purpose of locating there as a service. Okay, and also that you
generally described the types of food that would be sold, normally
the grocercies, you indicated a bakery, it there any other types of
things that might be sold out of this store?
There wouldn't be anything that would be different from a normal
store much like the IGA, the (inaudible) store on 16th and Blake,.. :.
or the EXCELL Food stores that are located in Local Business stores.
The big difference I think between the stores is we have a mis-
conception in the name of Warehouse Foods and what is there now.
They are looking at doing different stores and this is the first in
Spokane of this nature. Also that they don't put items on the shelves
the same way as they do in other stores. They're broke out in case
lots, you can take one item out of the case or you can pick up a
whole case. But, we do have the feature of a bakery which would
really not be in the type of store that they have most anywhere else.
So, and we're also looking at just a little more than 1/2 the traffic
what was . stated on the Albertsons store.
So you feel from your testimony that the provisions that you cited
within the ordinance.is more than justified the action of the Zoning
Administrator.
Yes, and we feel that our client properly applied for the building
permit and that the zoning ordinance allowed them to do that and to
do anything other than that at this time, the original owner, there
is a question of adverse condemnation for not allowing a permitted
use inside a zone that has been zoned for twenty -eight years.
•
■
slue to receiving clock. reverse used when leaving stare.
li:av would commit to that for heir trucks.
il'ehouue foods: AJ.l meat and produce deliveries mode by our GrucKs
dill Le routed t.y way of 1ii:i -;Rica Au. to loth
Go j};-1'j i.n ,more receiving dock is. all tractor
trailer oeliveri.es are instructed to use same route.
Javoi° intersection 01 li x Univ.
Keecir: .. tractor- trail, r„ oil Univ. -16th intersection is a miti
ne'iisurt normally not
Clubi
Termite° In already permitted zone.
-:ir• --lot _ai com :Went:: nPide earlier addressed r'i aar'' !li'+1'Ket
sin i. Ir' G6 ;w0E'e °topes which are in existence
x _..�l.y.:.e.tl,uus_e..�'..�uu:. 1r';?,Yi.•
In lace tide .:;ru1•e .v i.l . not be a ilnary market,. IL is caterin•'
o s :,.ro•i lary env :cet intended to he that wav and that's trio•
's ;ain,: to be t;uilt. Ji11 be only jarehousF• loons iu Spokane •
with a b - :tri 1nu :again i t n s double the .neat and double ..... .., . :..........� � rue, produce
of Urn +li more. nr: Adams interjec "ivir._1itt,er lain rite dill,ere,nce
P 3
between primary and secondary ;aarka "
....
,::r. Litt-- ;.asicai lv what yon are 0O..liv iu ''Were a nerson in a nrinlary
store does tLe hi.ilk of their everyday needs for. their sho�,n;
other words they ma, 'Hake mainly one trip : a . :reek to, a prirnary_ store
where : a secondary s :::nee they i nlay .;rake 2 or j trips to that store
for :;rnalJer order:; and I V - guess their more service needs.
cnoo kids using : -don't sell sin le pop. Lverythin6 by
6 -pack or larger. Don't have candy, counter so really no need for
children to be where at Gnat time.
What sold -- nothing diiievent than nur:aai stare- -like Capp's SGA- 16th
and Flake or Fix'Ce11 food :stores locate° in local business zones.
Ei , ii1'ference- -case lots .
Bakery uiflerent. Looking at lust a
liLG.le none than Y traffic o: chat
was stnteci on i‘drdms store.
:Jr' feel that our client pro'erl applied lot the building permit
,and that the zoning; ordinance allowed them to do that and to do any-
thing other than that at. this time the ori„inal owner there is a
question of (adverse condemnation 1o:• not allowing a permitted use-
by
TcKR L.1 Tr
LANDUSE ANALYSIS
The Spokane County Zoning Ordinance defines a Local
Business Zone as: 4.02.110 Local Business Zone (LB)" The
Local Business Zone is a land use classification for a zone
suitable to serve commercial and personal service needs of
the home. The Local Business Zone is normally located adja-
cent to Two - Family Residential, Agricultural Suburban,
Multiple Family Suburban, or Agricultural zone." Chapter
4.09 Local Business Zone (LB) of the zoning ordinance under
section 4.09.030 Uses Permitted paragraph d. 1. states: " Food
stores (such as grocery stores, meat markets, retail bakeries).
While this proposed use is a "Warehouse Market" it is not
a warehouse as defined in Websters Seventh Collegiate Dictionary:
1. a structure or room for the storage of merchandise or
commodities" 2. "to deposit, store, or stock in or as if in a
warehouse." Warehouse Markets is a name used for a retail
outlet for the purchase of goods normally associated with a food
store. This particular food store will have a bakery, double
the produce, and double the meat of a typical warehouse market.
Therefore, this store is not catering to the same market as the
typical warehouse market even though the names are the same.
This store will cater to a secondary market much the same as
an Excell,I.G.A., Thrift or Albertsons. While Albertsons
builds large stores they are by -in -large a secondary market unlike
a Safeway or Rosauer store. The proposed store is designed
to market approximately 55% the volume of the Warehouse Market
on Adams Rd. which is within six blocks of two elementary schools.
St. Mary's school is a block away and Adams Elementary is less
than seven blocks away.
Examples of other stores in the Local Business Zone are:
Albertsons at Sprague and Pines, A portion of the Safeway store
at Sprague and Pines, Excell Foods on Sprague and McDonald, two
blocks from Keystone Elementary school and 14 blocks from
McDonald Elementary school. At Least two examples of similar
zonings and conditions exist within the city limits of Spokane:
Excell Foods at Nebraska and Maple across the street from an
elementary school and a Day Care center, and Excell Foods on
Francis and Crestline, two blocks from an 'elementary school.
Adressing this issue of whether a particular store is a
permitted use in the Local Business zone, it would appear that
the proper interpretation was made by the zoning administrator.
From the facts presented above, it has been the policy of Spokane
County to approve grocery stores in the Local Business zone and
has not been injurious to the public health, safety and welfare
even when they are•in close proximity to schools.
Further information supporting the local business nature
of this zone is the following trade area used to establish '
the viability of this site for a secondary use grocery store:
Eight Avenue south to the Ponderosa area, Dishman -Mica Rd, east
to Pines Rd. Within the trade area there are 5,208 households.
17.4% of those households are south of eight and north of 18th.
It can be assumed that a major portion of those households south
of 18th are now using University to travel north to Rosauers at
University City or to Sprague to reach other primary grocery
stores. Increased traffic at the intersection of 16th and
. University will draw from the area which contains 17.4% of the
houses. All cars enroute to the proposed store will be '
terminating their trip at this store, thus, assumably travelling
at a slow rate of speed. Those leaving the store will also
be travelling slowly because they must stop at the aforementioned
intersection. Large trucks making deliveries to the store will
be committed to not using the 16th and University intersection.
Letters are attached supporting this committment. The trucks
will use Dishman -Mica road to 16th then East to Oberlain and
into the site. The reverse will be used when leaving the store.
Thus, posing no hazard to pederstrians at the intersection of
16th and University or University along the school. property.
This will also mitigate any potential noise problems associated
with any large trucks. Large trucks will also be restricted
to non- school hours for deliveries.
TRAFFIC GENERATION
Assuming that this store will draw 30% of the available .
customers in the market area this would equal 1 customers
per week. (worse case assumption, at least initially this
will more than likely be lower) Customers normally make two
trips per week, thus raising the total trips to 3,124 trips
per week. During school hours, the present store at Adams
Rd. does 57% of its business. During school hours children
should not be using the roads as pedestrian walkways. There-
fore, 1781 customers per week will shop during a period not
affecting pedestrian traffic. Assuming again that those South
of 18th are using this route to go shopping now, 1 of the
total volume will create 310 additional trips per day. Because
a customer must come and depart the store, average daily traffic
must reflect two trips for each customer or 620 additional
trips per week during school hours for this area. During the
week this will mean 124 vehicle trips per school day. This will
leave 43% or 1,343 customers per week during non - school hours
of which 17.4% will be additional trips which computes to 234
additional customers or 468 additonal trips. Therefore, total
impact on the intersection per week will be 1088 vehicle trips
per week or an average daily traffic count of 155 which is
additional traffic created by this store.
BEFORE THE ZONING ADJUSTOR OF
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF:
APPLICANT: Spokane Valley Citizen Zoning) DECISION
Committee - Michael H. Saad, ) FINDINGS OF FACT
Chairman ) CONCLUSION OF LAW
REQUEST: Appeal of Zoning Ordinance )
Interpretation )
FILE NUMBER: I -10 -80
PARCEL #: 29541 -0103 to 0108
DATE OF HEARING: November 5, 1980
DATE OF DECISION: November 19, 1980
APPELLANT: Spokane Valley Citizen
Zoning Committee
RESPONDANT: Warehouse Foods Market,
Jerry Litt, Consultant
DECISION
THE APPEAL IS DENIED AND THE DETERMINATION OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
IS AFFIRMED.
INTRODUCTION
This matter being the consideration by the Zoning Adjustor for Spokane
County pursuant to Chapter 4.25, Section 4.25.010, the Zoning Adjustor has the
authority to hear and decide such matters coming before him. After conducting
a publiC,heai J to receive all public testimony and after reviewing the public
record, examining available information, and visiting the property and surround-
ing area, the Zoning Adjustor in accordance with Chapter 36.70.810 Revised Code
of Washington, and Section 4.25.030 of the County Zoning Ordinance; hereby enters
his Findings and Conclusions hereinbelow.
The Appellants, Spokane Valley Citizen Zoning Committee, pursuant to Section
4.25.030 (c) of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance filed an appeal on September
26, 1980 requesting that the Zoning Administrator's determination dated September
22, 1980 be overturned. •I't is the Appellant's contention that the proposal for
a food store by the Respondant, Warehouse.Food Markets, Inc. is not consistent
with the intent of the Local Business zone. The subject site consisting of
approximately 2.13 acres is located on University Road.south of 16th Avenue in
Section 29; Township 25, Range 44.
The Respondant had applied for a building permit with the Building Codes
Department on August 27, 1980. .
The appeal letter dated September 26, 1980 and the testimony heard before
the Zoning Adjustor on November 5, 1980 . adequately set forth specific allegations
framing the issues. It was found that the Appellant did not provide argument
nor detailed evidence in support of the allegations that the proposed use is
not consistent with the intent of•the Local Business zone.
The opportunity was afforded to the Appellants to submit written evidence
to(support their contentions on,.or before Wednesday, November 12, 1980. Any
such submission would be(c P ed and sent to the Respondant for review and comment.
FINDINGS OF FACT
That it was reported at the appeal hearing before the Zoning Adjustor that
the rezone file regarding the subject property was missing. However, the Zoning
Adjustor finds that the Board's Resolution (No. 52 -228) is the legal and bind-
ing instrument. That rezone files dating ten (10) years or older may be dis-
carded. Therefore, it is found that the original zoning file is not a prerequi-
site in these proceedings. ..
•
II.
That it is confirmed that the subject property is zoned Local Business..
That Resolution No. 52 -228 and made part of this file was approved by the
Board of County Commissioners on the 14th day of October, 1952. That said
resolution did not place any restrictions nor conditions upon Lots 1 to 8
inclusive, in Block A of Chester Hills Addition. It was found by the' Board
of County Commissioners that due. notice was given by the Planning Commission
as required by law and a public hearing was held.
III
. That Spokane County Code; Section 4.09.030, presently provides that "On
any property of whatever size with frontage on a public street, the following
uses are permitted:" (Emphasis Added),.
The reference to "whatever size" may be construed',to mean that the Ordin-
ance does not attempt to regulate the maximim size of a particular permitted
use. The Respondant's proposal consists of one building within 21,780 square
feet of gross floor area. •
IV.
That Spokane County Code, Section 4.09.030 (d) (1) specifies that "food
stores (such as grocery stores, meat markets, retail bakeries) are permitted
land uses within the Local Business zone. The Respondant's proposal is de-
scribed as a food store and containing produce., meats, and a bakery. (Reference
is made to "Land Use Analysis" as presented by the Respondant and supported
through testimony at the public hearing).
V.
PAGE 2
I -10 -80
That Spokane County Code, Section 4.02.110, provides "the Local Business
Zone" is a land use classification for a zone suitableito serve commercial and
personal service needs of the home. The Local Business zone is normally lo-
cated adjacent to a Two - Family Residential, Agricultural Suburban, Multiple
Family Suburban, or Agricultural zone.
The site is located adjacent to a Residential zone and it can be construed
that food stores such as the Respondant's proposal does provide the needs of
the home.
VI.
That from testimony it was reported that the subject property was part of
the Subdivision Plat known as Chester Hills Addition which was accepted by the .
Board of County Commissioners on December 21, 1951. From examination of the
public record, Subdivision File No. PE -97 on file with the County Planning De-
partment, there was no•pertinent information relating to the issue of the
intent of the Local Business zone for this site. However, the recorded plat
of Chester Hills Addition does contain dedications including covenants regulat-
ing the use of thel_ots. within the Plat. These covenants are not forceable by
the county but rather are private covenants enforceable through civil proceed-
ings. One such covenant provides that all buildings. shall be of modern
design of architecture, and all plans of buildings to be constructed in this
addition shall be approved by a committee selected by the0'ffiZe•of Chester
Hills Corporation.
VII.
That it is found that no substantial evidence was introduced verifying
the allegations that an agreement exists between Central Valley School District
and Spokane County regarding commercial development near school' sites. In re-
ference to this issue the following facts are noted:
a) The subject property is located within the Chester Hills Addition, a
recorded plat finalized on November 28, 1951 by the Board of County
Commissioners.
b) The subject property was part of a rezone petition reclassifying from
Agricultural to Local Business. The rezone was approved on October 14,
1952 (refer to Resolution 52 -228).
PAGE 3
I -10 -80
c) The school purchased the present site of University Elementary School
on December 8, 1954 (Deed No, 283044B). A building permit was issued
for the construction of the school on February. 25, 1955.
d) The public record shows that Central Valley School Board at their
regular meeting on April 12, 1955 had requested that Spokane County
Planning Commission to prevent the establishment of commercial
sites in areas surrounding school sites including the "proposed
Uni Elementary School.
e) That a. Policy No. 1415 was adopted by the Central Valley School Board
of.Di,rectors on July 13, 1974 which states The Board of Directors of
Central Valley School District #356 requests the Spokane - County Plann-
ing Commission'to refrain :from.establiShihq'tocal Business;'Cofinercial,
Industrial; or Limited Industrial zones adjacent'to established schools,
existing school::sites, and projected school sites. (Emphasis Added).
In the event that it becomes necessary for the district to purchase
school sites in the of ture, the Board will make every effort to work
cooperatively with the Spokane County Planning Commission to avoid
selecting sites next to areas already zoned Local Business, Commercial,
Industrial, or Limited Industrial. Emphasis Added). ..
It is clear that the Board of Director's intent is to discourage commercial
zoning adjacent to existing and proposed school sites. The policy further states
that the Board will attempt to avoid selecting sites next to areas already zoned
Local Business, etc.
From these facts, the Central Valley School District acquired and construct-
ed University Elementary School after the subject property was rezoned to Local
Business in 1952. Further, the District's policy relating to Commercial zoning
was not adopted until July of 1974.
VIII.
That in support of the Planning Department's interpretation, similar rezon-
ing actions wereCTff6auced7jspecifically, file numbr ZE - 41 - 76 regarding a
zone change.to Local — Business adjacent to North Pines Junior High School. Corres-
pondence noting the school districts objections including the school's policy
number 1415 were made part of those proceedings. On appeal and on the 3rd day
of February, 1977, the Board of County Commissioner's approved the rezone to
Local Business (refer to Resolution No. 77 -105). This action supports the find-
ing that no written agreement exists between Spokane County and Central Valley
School District. However, the Board of County Commissioners obviously can con-
sider the position of the Central Valley School District relative to zone change
request.
IX.
That testimony regarding potential environmental impacts were presented to
the Zoning Adjustor. Even though, environmental issues were ruled as not rele
yant testimony regarding the interpretation, the Zoning Adjustor did allow some
testimony to be introduced regarding potential impacts. This testimony was
allowed on the basis of the appellant's claim that the size of the proposal is
not in keeping with the intent of the Local Business zone. The ordinance does
not place restrictions on maximum size of any proposed use. However the follow-
ing facts were noted at the hearing regarding environmental review procedures:
1) That the Respondant has .applied for a building permit on August 27, 1980.
2) That the proposal does constitute a major action as defined in WAC
197 - 10-170• 197 -10 -175, and 197 -10 -180.
3) That an environmental checklist' has been completed by the Respondant
and under review by the Director of Building Codes.
4) That further information is being required by the Director of Building
Codes regarding traffic and noise. (Reference a letter to the Respond-
ant from Building Codes dated October 20, 1980).
5) That no decision regarding threshold determination had been made by
the Director of Building Codes.
6) That this action (interpretation) by the Zoning Adjustor is exempt
from the (SEPA) requirements as defined in WAC 197 -10 -040 and by WAC
197 -10 -170 (3) (b) relating to quasi - judicial action to review a prior
administrative or legislative action.
X.
That information was presented by the Planning Department Staff relative
to the County's program to update the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, refer-
ence was made to the Major Commercial Report Suitability Phase. This report
provides information relating to major commercial areas .including a description
on neighborhood centers. As a means of classify centers, the report defines
the neighborhood center of having an average gross leasable area ranging from
30 000'square feet to 100,000 square feet. The site area should be four to
ten acres. The center provides for the'sale of convenience goods (foods, drugs,
and sundries) for day by day living needs of an immediate neighborhood. A
supermarket is the principal tenant.
XI.
•
That the Appellant•cited the proposed Comprehensive Plan and its purpose
to promote public health, safety; and general welfare., and argued that the pro-
posal sought by the Respondant would be incompatible with the intent and pur-
pose of the Proposed Comprehensive Harr—
From the above noted Finding of Fact, the Zoning Adjustor enters these:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
I.
That the Zoning Adjustor. of Spokane County has jurisdiction to review ad-
ministrative action pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 36.70.810 RCW and
Section 4.25.030 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.
II.
• That the Appellant submitted an application to the Planning Department re-
questing a public hearing before the Zoning Adjustor, and that pursuant to
Chapter 36.70.840 and Section 4.25.040 of the Zoning Ordinance, notice for a
public hearing was given through the United States mail to all property owners
within a radius of 300 feet from the subject property.
That all citizens notified and public agencies having jurisdiction were
afforded the opportunity to testify or submit written comments on the proposed
project.
IV.
As confirmed in Finding II the subject property is located within an area.
zoned Local Business.by the Board of County Commissioners as adopted in Re-
solution No. 52 -228. The proposal is found to be consistent with the rezone
and . permitted uses identified in the Zoning Ordinance under the Local Business
zone.section, enforced in 1952 as well as the existing applicable section.
V.
PAGE (4)
I -10 -80
Based on Finding III hereinabove, it is concluded that language found in
Section 4.09.030 of the Zoning Ordinance does not restrict the maximum size of
any permitted use. This interpretation does not destroy the effect of the
state Environmental' Policy Act (Chapter 197 -10 WAC) and the County Environment-
al Ordinance (Chapter 11 of the Spokane County Code) as tools for control of
the size and intensity of a proposal and its potential impacts on the environ-
ment and surrounding neighborhood. The review of this interpretation was
taken with full consideration of the above Findings of Fact.
VI.'
The interpretation by the Planning Department is merited in the instant
case because the Respondant, Warehouse Foods Market, as shown in Finding IV
that the proposed food store is specifically permitted in the Local Business
zone. That foods, meats, and bakery goods will be offered for sale to con-
sumers.
The Zoning Adjustor concluded that the Major Commercial Report for the
suitability phase as discussed in Finding X is a tool to aid in the develop-
ment of the Comprehensive Plan and •therefore.is not necessary binding nor con -
troling to this action. It is.noted that "shopping centers" are permitted
land use in the Local Business zone. Section 4.09.125 (6) makes reference to
shopping centers regarding sign requirements.
It is further concluded that the reference to the •proposed Comprehensive
Plan as noted in Finding XI is not sufficient grounds to argue that the Plann-
ing Department errored in its interpretation. The plan is not an adopted policy
and therefore cannot be used as a basis for the issuance of the interpretation.
The Zoning Adjustor also finds that public safety considerations are valid con-
cerns in interpreting the Zoning Ordinance:. However, such concerns will be more
properly protected under the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act
WAC 197 -10.
Having reviewed the oral and written arguments, no substantial evidence
presented in the November - 5,.;1980 hearing nor any written evidence submitted
prior to November 12, 1986 as allowed warrants 'a change in the interpretation
by the Planning Department. The Appellant's appeal rest upon the claim that
an agreement With Spokane County was executed prohibiting:commercial develop-
ment of thiVsSubject property.
THAT FROM THE ABOVE CITED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, SUBSTANTIATED BY THE:= FINDING
OF FACT,_IT IS ORDERED THAT THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AND THE DETERMINATION
OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT:TS
ENTERED THIS 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1980, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY GRANT-
ED UNDER SECTION 4.25.030 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
ATTEST BY:
VII.
IX.
PAGE 5
I -10 -80
/
ZONI ADJUSTOR .FOR SP KANE
COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Spokane unty P annin�
Pursuant to Section 4.25.090 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance, this
Order constitutes the final decision of the Zoning Adjustor, appealable to the
Board of Adjustment of Spokane County within ten (10) days of the date of the
written decision by the Zoning Adjustor and shall become effective at the end
of the appeal period.
At said time and place any interested person may.- appear for or against, the granting of
this application.
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ZONINGG ADJUSTOR HEARING
TIME:
PLACE:
INTERPRETATION APPEAL
I- 10 -80, APPEAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE INTERPRETATION.
. Location:
b. Appellant:
c. Existing Zone:
d. Interpretation Requested:
e. Application of Zoning Ordinance: 4.25.030 (c)
TELEPHONE NO: 456 -2274
Wednesday, November 5, 1980 1:15 p.m.
N. 721 Jefferson, Broadway Centre Bldg.
Conference Room, 2nd 'floor
Section 29, Township 25, Range 44 EWM
Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,.and 8 located at the SW
cor of University and 16th in the Chester Hills
Addition. Parcel #'s: 29541 -0103 to 0108.
Spokane Valley Citizen Zoning Committee
10805 E. 19th
Spokane, WA 99206
Local Business
The Zoning Administrator found that the proposed
use of the property was consistent with the Zoning
Ordinance provisions and therefore was a permitted
use within the Local Business zone. Objectors
have appealed this determination stating generally
that the commercial use of the property is not con-
sistent with the intent of the Local Business zone.
S9' °S 2200 9 �t
R
Appieox /7 pzrk,
AgtaM.I.iatt
L 1 t 1 •.1 iL
\tL. /991
TH AVE
COUNTY ROAD N9 2312+
sr. c 4 0S R cGS
.EL. /98
MILWAUKEE RAILROAD
514 T
5EVENT
EIGHTH AvE
fP11 UUH ITY
SCHOOL -
CLf N
W CIRCLL
NIXO•'��,
AIN 'it AVE
1 =1000
+�
FOURTH AV
10TH
7'
0•
l
a• ii :� n �.
�� fOO9C
ft
FAL I\-. H
r , /3r :en 4- „
•
■ '>
•
■ 4 1
• •
May 1 iptroduce myself—I'm Terry Lundin, narratOrspokdsMan
ourpitizen committee comprised of neighbors, parents and taxpayers)
• who share a common cancerf“for children !and the safety and integrity
• e)
- of Ulir school and neighborhood.
nu-need to know the history anU background of our area to understand
-our concerns as to the ramifications of the abrupt proposal to olac'e'
•,
d 21,1)00 sq. ft. steel warehouse market with parking for 116 care
in a local business zone within 50 ft. of our elementary school' '
-property and 50 ft. from some of our residences. We do not believe
this size commercial use of the property is consistent with the' peSt.
• .
••
•
intent of the planning cemmission.
Nor do we believe that this interpretation carries out two basic
values expressed in the 1980 Spokane County Comprehensive plan
1. The Comp. Plan muse protect the public health, 1, .
safety and general welfare of citizens. _ -e
2. ?bhe Corno.Plan should 'reflect intefligent -
of land with compatible oruerly transition. "
•
This -is University Elem. SchobLlocated at S 1613 UniVersity,TyRd)'''',1..-
navell been strong supporters of Our schools. MothersOrwerkng
on pUr committee put in many hours of volunteer service at this
school, Bowdish Jr. High ant University High close by. Our UniVer7 ;
sity iillemehtaf'y P.T.A. was judged second in the state lust Year :and .
committee-member Diane Schneider was voted the Golden Acorn award.
unlveri.ty Elementary is valued as an extended serviceischool with'
a number of recreational grOups and teams using itth'facilities'all
v yedr• long. Our children consloer the playground' their park, as we
nnve Ho public park' in our school area.
Directly across the street od university lies the local business
zone in duestion. Chester Hills Addition was developed in the:ek'ly
IT50's. A portion of the development was zoned local busineSaby
the developer in 1952 for the local needs of the Chethter Hills planned,
community which included a common pool and lots:large enough to •
have horses. Tne original developers' intent 28 'years ago could
not nave
teen a large commercial warehouse sunermarket of 21,600 sq.
ft. with parking for 116 cars because the existing ordinance language
in 1)22 speciiied the following ratio: FAHKIHii biiUJi. HE
1i0h IsJOD STUAiES riiiV11U m6llE_rdflii 5,000 sq, it. of gross floor area:
"2 parking spaces for each 250 sq. ft. of grosSjloor
of the building."
i'hat mould mean 174 parking spaces lor , a'21,660 sq. ft. grocery,
which is an impossibility on a less than 2: acre parcel of land such
as this and points out the size or scale of the permitted u.ses thought
of at that time for a retail food store ih a local business zone.
They had no way to envision 28 years ago how the area would develop.
In late 1954 the University Elementary School was 'built. The -
Central Valley School District took very seriously its charge.to
provide for the safety and learning of children. Even in that day .
when the area looked about like this (1957 aerial map) and the
traffic +Jew on University was so small it wasn't counted; CV Supt.
GilbeLt Jills'and the school board wanted Lo insure a sale and quiet
.learning environment for une children so the tllowing steps were
taken and precedent established:
Mr. Ail's' testidionv He tells about the vacation of 17th,
the minutes and action ut school meeting 4-12-55, the
letter written to the county and the ce.unty'S subsequent
actions.
E.V.. Fates, past member of the CV School Dst. Board of
Directors will testify that che agreement has always existed.'
NE , would also like to rear a letter written by Board Member,-Helen EIix
Pre Shohaee County Planning Commission shared the coneern oi the
school district and residents lur the safety and eeneral pellute
of small school citizens as this testimony shows. Their actions
proved that . CV policy 1415 Of 7/25/74 states the folloWing:'RE40
Central Valley is not alone in cc:tic:sin lbr safety of children and
their learnirm,. It is the main emphasis of every school district:.
it
5.
The ia in con State Environmental Policy r.ct of 19']1, chapter 43.
EGw, requires all state and local governmentui agencies to consider
environmental values both for their own action and when licensing•.
private Proposals. The hob also requires that an Environmental' Impact`
Study be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the
quality of the physical environment. Spokane County has an environ -•
mental checklist required of each proponent of a building proposal.
Way 1 read from the checklist for the ;larehouse Industries' proposal.,
• in our neighborhood opposite our school. Keep in mind that the intent, •
of the checklist is to provide an over -all view of the impact o
proposed business on the area.
"The 1o11o,in questions apply to your total proposal,'not to'the
license for which approval is suugnt. Your answers should include:
the impacts which ' *ill be caused by your proposal when it is completed..
1 . Haile _l nropone,it: ;larehouse Industries, Inc.
' . Address of proponent: P.O. Box 1t302 301 Orchard Lane
Fillings, `dontana 5 105
Location «0 Proposal:
Property located 10:5' from Lnr•u St. and faces a thru
Ave. Land is currently vacant. 1 tr•ee,.•scrub. grass
and weeds, 'hesi'dential back and one side, commercial
one side...PERIOD
Ey definition a resnonsitle reply is expected from the pr,ononent.
de, do not feel the proponent 'Wade a responsible reply -the school
rw k c t s - i L t r .,y .
No mention was made of that important te us fourth sideTHE 'SCHOOL.
l �•''!: even 'n°n1:1One.:1. No thbu;7,!iu i'1as given to these other i::ip cii'tant
,'Jill the proposal resole i;1:
a) Air erni.ssi<,i::: or deeer:i.or'atiorr of amhient air (:lual.ity? 140
b) The creation of objectionable odors? NO
/,le Noise.
a) ':Vill the proposal increase existing noise levels? MAYEE
Cars in Parking Lot
' #12 ;fill pile proposal affect existing housing... NO
/713 'Jill the proposal result in
Generation of additional vehicular movement? - YES
BUT
lipact upon existing transportation system? NO
alterations to present tatuorns 01 clr'c ulati_on or move—
ment of peonl.e and /UL' goads! 11
Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists
or pedestrians! NO
TO summarize:
1. Che concept of a warehouse supermarket or area's growth was
not envisioned in 1952 when local business zoning was done.
2•i year time lapse is justification for review of an un
developed site such as this.
2. Orisinal local business zoning did not intend a store of this..
size as evidenced by the 1952 ordinance's requirements for
food store parking.
The local business zone in question has had a unique ,precedent
because of its proximity to University Elem. school acid past:
county and Central Valley policy.
5. This size market will draw from many. residential'communities.?
Therefore it will transcend local' needs.
4. This proposal has not considered environmental impact or proximity
to school. Thus the interpretation does not carry out 2 basic
values expressed in the Spokane County. Comp. Plan.
a) to protect the public - ealth, safety and gen.
welfare of citizens
b) reflect ,intelligent use of land with compatible
orderly transition. •
The noise and visual effect of this size market and parking ldt
cannot be adequately or safely buffered on this size site and
location.
It was never the intent of the Planning commission to slue a
business of a si that would be a hazard to surrounding roads,
school and residences.
S. Zoning; ordinance section 4.J identifies business related
land uses intended to serve the local needs of a residential'
community. i+ lare warehouse food-market at bhis site is n6t,
our local need. petitions of thousands of residents and lett
support this .feeling. �..
.f
Mn.. Jim Manaon
Bditding Code D.ucectot
Spokane, WA
Dean Mt. Manaon:
/ / WAREHOUSE
FOOD MARKETS
October 28, 1980
Pehta.ining to the muck de Lvet.i.ea oU Wanehouae Food Market to be
Kocated at 16th and Un,ivehs.ity:
Att meat and produce de.Pivetu.eh made by out trucks w U be
touted by way o6 D,bhman Mica Road, up 16th Avenue to Oberon wheke
out £oad.%ng dock wilt be .toeated. The &etutn route witt be the
4aine.
Att ()theft macron- tnaitek daUveniea w tt be .ivustnucted to uae
the name route. We beet this to be the moat 6ea4.ibte toute to
comptetety avoid—the .intvt ectLon at 16th and UnLvensdty.
SJM /bw
(509) 928 - 7480
S.ineeteey,
Mac. Jack Heuston
Geneh.at Manager.
WAREHOUSE FOOD MARKET
EAST 12704 NORA ROAD, SUITE F SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99216
Mr. Jim Manson
Building Codes Director
Spokane County
Spokane County Court House
Spokane, Washington 99201
Dear Mr. Manson:
October 23, 1980
With reference to the retail grocery outlet planned by Tidyman-
Buchanan at 16th and University, we will commit to the following
delivery and return routing:
South on the Dishman -Mica Road
East on 16th
South on Oberlin to the receiving dock.
Sincere
R. Radfor
General Manager
ROUNDUP CO.
'R o u n d u p c o. E. 11016 Jackson, P.O. Box 2808, T.A., Spokane, WA 99220 ��
SE[.
S 4
r. K. O.
l .
eLK -WT
10 13
' 1 0 :0 1
2 4 -020
4 -• :
61_14.-LOT
10 I
r
all
K
co OE
t. ♦
SEC.
S 1,
T.
17
61_14.-LOT
10 I
49 ta
0,16.I
691
,111 I0 ,I0.
6 9 1
, 1
i l 011,0
691
, ,
, , I- 0,1,0,4
691
, 1
1 1-0 1 ,C?`
G e 1
,,
I 1 1-O,l .o,(c
G 9 1
,
1/a / ,0,7
, 691
. ,I, 1/- 0,1,02
691.
, 1 1 / -0,l ,09
6 9 1
i i , l -D, i, /,D
691.
.,,,
/-(2,/, /,/
691
1 1 1 /- O, /, /0
I / Q,/,)13
____1
69.1
, 1 1 1/- 0,, /, /,S/ i
9 l
11 i , /- 0,0,/ V
691
11 1 , / o,0 '✓
69 1
. 1 1 : , /-(2.S,nR ,/
'
691
, 1 1 1 l - ,0,9
691
1 11 1: / - 4,-O, /
6 9 1 1 . (,/ 1 l - o,a, i �
69 I
; ,S r4,3\4,0,c,4- v
'G91
,,I, 4,1,o; Y
5 9 1
, 1 , , 4,3,0; ii./
'
691
, 1 , t cz 4;3,0,9
'
691
I , ,x 1 ,D �
'
6„, 1 , 1 1 �-`4,`�-,0,(0 1
L-
6 691» , {I , a 4,410,
G 9 11 . , ,5
i / .g.-4-,4,v
,
V
691~
691 . 11
-4
m
6 9 1.
6 91' . -.
'
.A91
..
691
A 9 ]' .
691 . , ■ ; - , , 1 1
,
691
,
.1 I ; -,
691
.. ' 1 l • „ 1
C, 9 1
1
, 1
1 691
691.
,1
691
1
, , , 1 - , , ,
•
1
1 1 1 1 ,
CHARGE TO 590301
mina examples
OCT-2
1980
V41 sx to OP
AND FILE POLL CARDS P.33
REQUESTED BY
PRONE a61)OS
DATE
Paw=
Charge to 590301
Keypunch instruction
col. 1 is a quote mark (numeric "H").
cols. 2 - 4 is constant '691 ".
cols. 5 - 13 is numeric with blanks acceptable
Do not zero f111.
col. 14 is a quote mark (numeric "H").
Identify and separate batches for computer room.
This job is scheduled to run on Friday in the computer
room.
Forward date to the computer room for processing.
Return these sheets to the Planning Department - Zoning
Section upon completion of Keypunching.
Parcel number 32541 -0801 only
Parcel numbers 32541 -0800 thru 32541 -0809
Parcel numbers 32541 -0800 thru 32541 -0899
NE 1/4 of sec. 32, twp. 25, rge. 44
A11 of sec. 32, twp. 25, rge. 44
All of twp. 25, rge. 44
All of rge. 44
Sections within
Quarter sections
within section
2 1
3 4
PROPOSED USE:
ZONE CLASSIFICATION:
a
DATE OF INTERPRETATION: September 22, 1
DATE OF APPEAL: September 26, 1980
REASONS FOR APPEAL AND PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE YOU FEEL APPLY:"
See attached paper.
rt ,/ r . J )
�� l 7.7
Chester kills Addition.
APPEAL OF ZONINGG INTERPRETATION
Local Business
-4
v
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY: Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 located
at the Southwest corner of University and 16th in the
(7 c (r•
Address
T lepbone Number
MR:ks
SPOKANE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
Mrs. Terri Lundin
E. 10722 20th Ave.
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mrs. Lundin:
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Sincerely,
An0UbCia -f /I;Q -0
Marcia Raines
Zoning Administrator
CIEDTagnr
BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING N. 721 JEFFERSON STREET
PHONE 956 -2205
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
September 22, 1980
In response to your letter of September 17, 1980, the zoning designation
for Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 located at the southwest corner of University
and 16th in the Chester Hills Addition has been verified as Local Business.
Section 4.09.030 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance indicates food
stores, such as grocery stores, as a permitted use in the Local Business
zone. Zoning Ordinance section 4.09.030 identifies business related land uses
intended to serve the local needs of a residential community. The Ordinance
language does not limit the size or scale of the permitted uses.
It is my determination that the issuance of a building permit for a
"Warehouse Market" facility is consistant with the County Zoning Ordinance
language. Section 4.25.030 of the Zoning Ordinance provides for appeal of
this administrative determination. Please contact Mr. Doug Adams of this
office if you decide to file an appeal. We will contact Mr. Jim Manson,
Building Codes Director, to coordinate details of this project.
Please contact me if we can provide any additional information regarding
this proposal.
l ip
A "Warehouse Market" composed of 21,600 square feet and an
adjoining L113 car parking lot does not represent the intent of
the current ordinance. Webster's defines "local" as "primarily
serving the needs of a.particiilar limited district."
a) Already existing in this zone is a retail grocery'
store with a facility to serve triple the present
population within the. locale. -
b) The Warehouse Industries recognize the above fact.
They plan to and will draw new traffic from a 10 or
more square mile area. Further research is needed.
They cannot be classified as a local business.
c) Nowhere in section 4.09.030 is a warehouse supermarket
specifically listed.
Original zoning of these lots was done. in 1952. The original
•
developers' intent could not have been`a large commercial
warehouse supermarket of this size and scope as they were not
in existence then.
The addition of a large elementary school in 1951 has created
a situation whereby parking lot entrances and volume traffic
generated by a warehouse supermarket will create.. hazards, to
numbers of children.
A 28 year time lapse is justification for review of an un
developed site such as this especially since current environmental
concerns have not been properly studied.
222
Minutes of Regular: .fleeting
April 12, 1955,
POSITION
Supervising Cook
Responsible for dining room
• and kitchen. .Makes menues, .
buys supplies, keeps records,
makes reports as required by
principal $224.00 $1.40
Assistant to Cook
One to a Building
Employed full time- Author-
ity delegated by supervisor •
or supervising cook
Additional Help
May be part time depending
upon situation and need.
Works where needed in
kitchen or dining room. Helps
prepare food and /or helps
with dining room. Helps "serve
when necessary 208.00 1.30
Supervisor of
shall receive
A supervising
A supervising
A supervising
A supervising
IV.
Beginning Second
Salary Year
Monthly Hourly Monthly
$248.00 $1.55
208.00 1.30 216.00 1.35
216.00 1.35
The help in the dining room and kitchen will be assigned duties and number of
hours employment . by the supervisor on approval by the principal
the lunch program or supervising cook where the two are combined
additional money and /or help according to the following schedule.
cook and an assistant serves up to 225.
cook, one assistant plus 4 hours help 226 -300
cook, one assistant plus 8 hours help 301 -400
cook, one assistant plus 16 hours help 401 -500
Hourly
In High school and Jr. High school an additional 4 hours help may be provided
if found necessary.in each of the above.
Supervisor of the lunch program or supervising cook in a building shall receive
additional money for serving.
501 - 600 add $4.00 per month
601 - 700 add $8.00 per month
701 - 800 add . $12.00.per month
800 - add $16.00 per month
For one or more additional buildings serving
0 - 150 add $4.00 per month) 4 -8 hours help
151 - 250 add $8.00 per month) •
251 - 350 add $12.00 per month) 8 - 16 hours help
351 - 500 add $16.00 per month)
A supervisor may qualify for both of the above.
BIDS ON FURNISHINGS AND EQUIPMENT FOR UNIVERSITY SCHOOL
Bids on school furniture and.equipment for the new University Elementary
school were opened by the secretary, Carl Lawson, who was instructed to tab-
ulate the bids and recommend the contract awards at the special budget hear-
ing on May 6.
ZONING OF AREAS SURROUNDING SCHOOLS
L. W. Ditlevson moved that the superintendent be requested to write a
letter to the Spokane County Planning Commission requesting that they -
prevent the establishment of commercial sites in areas surrounding the _
Progress and Broadway elementary schools, the Central'Valley Junior High
School, and the following proposed school constructions: University
Elementary school at 16th. and University, Central Valley High School at
8th: and Sullivan,. elementary school at 12th. and McDonald, and the elemen-
tary school at Broadway and McDonald. John D. Miller seconded the motion
which carried with a unanimous vote being cast.
VI. SALE OF SPORTS SHOW TICKETS
Mr. Mills reported that the promotors of the Sports Show had asked that
school children be given tickets to the show and be released from school
to attend. The County Board of Education disapproved of this plan and
recommended that children go to the sports show on their own time. John
D Miller moved that the Central Valley School District give an expression
of confidence to the County Board of Education in the position they have
I
.
1
7
MR:ks
SPOKANE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING N. 721 JEFFERSON STREET
PHONE 456 -2205
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
September 22, 1980
Mrs. Terri Lundin
E. 10722 20th Ave.
Spokane, Washington
Dear Mrs. Lundin:
In response to your letter of September 17, 1980, the zoning designation
for Lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 located at the southwest corner of University
and 16th in the Chester Hills Addition has been verified as Local Business.
Section 4.09.030 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance indicates food
stores, such as grocery stores, as a permitted use in the Local Business
zone. Zoning Ordinance section 4.09.030 identifies business related land uses
intended to serve the local needs of a residential community. The Ordinance
language does not limit the size or scale of the permitted uses.
It is my determination that.the issuance of a building permit for a
"Warehouse Market" facility is consistant with the County Zoning Ordinance
language. Section 4.25.030 of the Zoning Ordinance provides for appeal of
this administrative determination. Please contact Mr. Doug Adams of this
office if you decide to file an appeal. We will contact Mr. Jim Manson,
Building Codes Director, to coordinate details of this project.
Please contact me if we can provide any additional information regarding
this proposal.
Sincerely,
Marcia Raines
Zoning Administrator
Mr. Harry'Larned
County Commissioner's Office
W. 1116 Broadway
Spokane, Washington 99201
- ear ftr. Earned:
'We-are writing you as concerned citizens and parent's living
near the :University Elementary School at 16th and University Rd.
in the:Spokane lalley.
We'have j'ust: of the impending construction of a warehouse,
supermarket and mini- shopping center directly across' from our
: local elementary school.:
We.are_ greatly concerned about the environmental impact: this
`
will have on our school area and the streets the children trav:el`..
to and from school. Currently University Road south ; .of' - 76th
is. narrow with dirt shoulders and no sidewalks. We.have no
• traffic lights. With the normal traffic df resident's' it. is,
inadequate and must be approached carefully from :side streets
during biusy:;traffic.times. What will,. it be like when we have
a parking- lotifor 50 to 100 cars directly' opposite the elementary
school crosswalks and large trucks coming in and out to service
the warehouse market?
Ours is ai,community service school used for many otheractivities .
and recreational leagues after school. Parking is inadequate;,'.
• now What 'Will it be like with cars from outlying areas,congeting
the block`to"Come to the warehouse market?:
As taxpayers:;.and parents we originally chose Lilts area baCtiuHe
of .the, proximity to the 3 schools -- University Elementary, Nowdish
Junior'High and-University High School. We wanted a`nelthb,rhood
safe for .our children to' walk or bicycle; to, .school'.. •. i4ost route�e
traveled by_ students: coming and going from these : schools Will •
be affected by .the construction of this . center, its parking
and traffic plan. Noise pollution, congested and unsafe :roads:.,'
• and air pollution are all problems we will have to contend with'
.:/1.11 our formerly pleasant residential, area. We would ask that
further study be`cnade into this environmental impac.t•to our
neighborhood. PEOPLE Llvr. F.i;iE! We . would like an opportunity'
for discussion before it's too late.
Since the'cornpany building the store is located in Montana::;'.
they may not be -aware of or care about the impact on,tne`area
In writing this letter we feel that you as our county.. representative;,
must have concern for the welfare of citizens in your jurisdiction
and that you would want to know Of our concern and take steps
to protect your constituents.
Sincerely yours,
Concerned residents as signed
EUEvlEaa
0
September 24, 1980
Mr. M. H. Saad, Chairman
Spokane Valley Citizen Zoning Committee
10805 East Nineteenth Street
Spokane, WA 99206
Re: 7- Eleven Food Store - Sixteenth.and University
■ Dear Mr. Saad:
In response to your inquiry concerning market: data and future capability
for servicing our market area at the referenced location, the following
information should be of some interest to you.
Our store at Sixteenth and University serves a total neighborhood market
area of approximately two square miles. Originally, when this area was
being considered for new store, house counts and average daily traffic
through the intersection were studied and both met minimum site requirements
for a new store. Each of our new store locations are judged on this basis.
From our extensive experience in site study and selection, we know that we
don't create any new traffic patterns; and our shoppers consist of neigh-
borhood people within a one and a half mile square: radius. Since we have
developed our site into a successful location, the average daily traffic
past our site has increased. This has happened because of new development
and new houses in the market area. The fact that we are at the location
has not affected traffic in any significant manner.
The store unit consists of approximately 2400 square feet and has the
capacity to do three times as much local business as it is presently
doing without any physical changes. It is basically set up to serve the
present needs of the neighborhood shopper within the market area here
before described.
The proposed market which you have described to me would probably have
no detrimental effect on our gross sales and, in fact, would probably
create new business for us. In order for a warehouse market to survive
in such a limited neighborhood environment, they would need to draw
customers from an eight to ten square mile area, thus creating an entirely
new traffic pattern past our present location: Our experience has shown
us that the more traffic we have past our site, the greater the merchandise
volume in sales.
•
THE
a
a enconcnrmu
•
, 7- ELEVEN FOOD STORES • ZONE 2309
EAST 9514 MONTGOMERY • SUITE 26 • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99206 • PHONE (509) 922 -3711 '
•
1
ante. x
Ill
No. 3'56 in the Spokane Valley Schoo SOUTH 12.1 BOWDISH SPOKANE: WASHINGTON 99206
(.509) 922 -6700 .
istritt September 24, 1980
Mr. James L. Manson, Director
Spokane County Building Codes Department
North 811 Jefferson
Spokane, Wa. 99260
Dear Mr. Manson:
The Board of Directors of Central Valley School District has discussed
at length the proposed construction of a Warehouse Market on the southwest
corner of University Road and 16th Avenue in Spokane Valley. They wish
me, as Superintendent, to notify you of . their concern for the safety of
hundreds of school children who either ride bicycles or walk to and from
University Elementary School at that location. As you know, both Univer-
sity Road and 16th Avenue are currently hazardous for pedestrian use due
' to a•lack of sidewalks and adequate road shoulders.
It is the school board's belief that a bad pedestrian situation would
be made even worse by.the installation of a large commercial facility
close to University Elementary' School. •
Sincerely yours,
Richard C. Langton
RCL /m Superintendent
cc: Spokane County Engineering Department.
Spokane County Health Department
Spokane County Planning Department
Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney
Spokane County Air Pollution Control
• Spokane County Utility Department
Harry-Larned, County Commissioner
An equal opportunity employer .
DR. RICHARD C. LANGTON CHARLES G. STOCKER NEIL D. I'RPSCOTT, JR. EDWIN J. A1IKESELL
Superintendent Assistant Superintendent Assistant Superintendent Manager of Business
. Administrative Service.. Educational Services Services '
DIRECTORS
Cl,o...t r Mernrmark Dr Herbert H. Osborn Dr. Bruce L. Gellman Darrell A. Thompson . Janet E. Bastine
Mr. M. H. Saad
September 24, 1980
Page Two
My concern at the subject location is that present traffic on Sixteenth
and University has reached the point that the intersection in its present
condition, in my opinion, cannot support the volume of traffic needed to
feed anew grocery -type operation the size you have .described to me. Our
store has a franchisee who has concern about the children in the area and .
many times advises them about the traffic. I doubt that you would have
that type of personal commitment from the operation of a warehouse market.
I personally am committed to the development of new business. I feel that
for society to develop, free enterprise must be considered the best method
to attain successful development of our society; but I sincerely feel that
each new proposed commercial development must be investigated, and final
approval of'said development should be judged on the development's ultimate
value to that society.
If I can be. of further as;
Sincerely,
THE SOUTHLAND CORPORATION
Bob Harding
Real Estate Representative
blh