HEX Decision REZ-2013-0002 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEARING EXAMINER
RE: Rezone from the R-3 Zoning District to the )
R-4 Zoning District; ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
File No. REZ-2013-0002 ) AND DECISION
Applicant: Arger, Sparta, LLC )
)
I. SUMMARY OF DECISION
Hearing Matter: Application for a rezone from the R-3 zoning district to the R-4 zoning district,
on 1.54 acres of land.
Summary of Decision: Approve application.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The application seeks approval of a site-specific zoning map amendment (rezone), to
reclassify 1.54 acres of land from the Single-Family Residential (R-3) district to the Single-Family
Residential Urban(R-4) district of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC).
2. The site is located north of and adjacent to the improved one-half(1/2) right of way for Alki
Avenue, approximately 165 feet northwest of the intersection of Alki Avenue and Bannen Road; in
Spokane Valley, Washington.
3. The site is referenced as County Assessor's tax parcel no. 45143.1328, and is legally
described in an attachment to the zone reclassification application.
4. The applicant, and site owner, is Arger Sparta, LLC; with a mailing address of c/o Gregory
Arger, 300 N. Mullan Road, Suite 204, Spokane Valley, WA 99206.
5. On August 14, 2013, a complete application was submitted for the proposed rezone. On
August 21, 2013, the City Community Development Department ("Department") determined the
application to be complete. On August 30, 2013, the Department mailed notice of the application
to adjacent property owners.
6. On October 1, 2013, the City Community Development Department issued a Determination
of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the proposed rezone of the site, which did not include a specific site
development plan. The DNS was not appealed.
7. On October 24, 2013, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the application,
which hearing commenced at approximately 9:00 a.m. The notice of hearing requirements for the
application under the SVMC were met, by the Department and the applicant. The Examiner
conducted a site visit on October 24, 2013, prior to the hearing.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 1
8. The following persons testified at the public hearing:
Martin J. Palaniuk and Scott Kuhta Gene Arger
Spokane Valley Planning Division 300 N. Mullan Road
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Linda and Dan Lafser Loren Knapp
14010 E. Alki Avenue 14105 E. Alki Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Spokane Valley, WA 99216
9. The following exhibits were submitted by the Department, and admitted into the record at the
public hearing:
Exhibit 1: Vicinity Map
Exhibit 2: Zoning Map
Exhibit 3: Comprehensive Plan Map
Exhibit 4: 2012 Aerial Map
Exhibit 5: Application Materials
Exhibit 6: Determination of Completeness
Exhibit 7: Notice of Application Materials
Exhibit 8: SEPA Determination
Exhibit 9: SEPA Checklist
Exhibit 10: Notice of Public Hearing Materials
Exhibit 11: Agency Comments
Exhibit 12: Copy of power point presentation for Staff Report and Recommendation
10. The Hearing Examiner heard the application pursuant to Chapters 17.80, 18.20 and 19.30 of
the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC); and Appendix B (Hearing Examiner Scheduling
Rules and Rules of Conduct) of the Uniform Development Code (UDC) portion of SVMC (SVMC
Titles 17-24).
11. The Hearing Examiner takes notice of the SVMC, the City Comprehensive Plan, other
applicable development regulations, and prior land use decisions in the vicinity.
12. The record includes the testimony and exhibits submitted at the public hearing, the
documents in the application file at the time of the public hearing, and the items taken notice of by
the Hearing Examiner.
13. The site is approximately 1.54 acres in size, rectangular in shape, relatively flat in
topography, and unimproved. The property is covered with native or invasive grasses and shrubs.
See 2012 aerial photo in Exhibit 12.
14. The half right of way for Alki Avenue is improved directly south of the site, the half cul-de-
sac for Alki Avenue that lies directly southwest of the site is unimproved, and Alki Avenue east of
the site is paved within a full width right of way.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 2
15. The site and neighboring land to the north, south and east are designated in the Low Density
Residential category of the Comprehensive Plan, zoned R-3 and generally consist of single-family
homes and vacant land on lots of various sizes. The two (2) parcels located between the middle of
the site and Springfield Avenue to the north are improved with duplexes.
16. The neighboring land to the west and southwest, including the land lying along both sides of
Evergreen Road, are designated in the Office category of the Comprehensive Plan, zoned Garden
Office (GO), and consist of a mixture of commercial and residential uses, or vacant land. The
parcels lying directly south and southwest of the west portion of the site are undeveloped, and
controlled by limited liability companies (LLCs). See County Assessor's map and parcel
information in file, 2012 aerial photo in Exhibit 12, and parcel information in file.
17. The acreage parcel that lies between the site and Evergreen Road to the east is controlled by
the current site owner, and is improved with a vacant single-family home. The parcel lying
directly south of such adjoining parcel, abutting the east side of Evergreen Road, is being
developed with medical offices; and the house (shown in white on the 2012 aerial photo in Exhibit
12) located on such parcel has been removed. See testimonies of Martin Palaniuk and Gene Arger.
18. The large parcels respectively located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Evergreen
Road and Valleyway Avenue to the southwest, and along the west side of Evergreen Road to the
west, are developed with office uses. Commercial uses are located along Sprague Avenue to the
south. See County Assessor's map and parcel information in file, 2012 aerial photo in Exhibit 12,
parcel information in file, and Hearing Examiner site visit.
19. The land neighboring the site to the northwest, including nearby land located along both
sides of Springfield Avenue and both sides of Evergreen Road, and the land in proximity to the
intersection of Evergreen Road, is designated in the Community Commercial category of the
Comprehensive Plan, and zoned Community Commercial (C).
20. The large parcel located along the east side of Evergreen Road to the northeast, between
Springfield Avenue and Broadway Avenue, is developed with offices. The land located at the
westerly corners of the intersection of Evergreen Road and Broadway Avenue to the northwest, is
developed with convenience stores associated with gasoline pumps. See County Assessor's map
and parcel information in file, 2012 aerial photo in Exhibit 12, parcel information in file, and
Hearing Examiner site visit.
21. The land located further to the north along the west side of Evergreen Road, south of Mission
Avenue, is improved with office uses and assisted living and retirement housing developed by the
applicant. The land located along Evergreen Road in the area is generally in a slow transition from
single-family and other low intensity residential uses to office, multi-family or commercial uses.
See Hearing Examiner decision dated 7-18-12 in File No. REZ-01-12.
22. The City Arterial Street Plan designates Evergreen Road as a Principal Arterial, and
Broadway Avenue and Adams Road as Minor Arterials. Broadway Avenue and Adams Road are
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 3
improved to a 3-lane section, and Evergreen Road is improved to a 5-lane section. Evergreen
Road provides a route to Interstate 90 and the Spokane Valley Mall north of Mission Avenue.
23. The only public comments regarding the application were submitted at the hearing by Linda
and Dan Lafser, the owners of the residential parcel located directly south of the middle of the site,
across the half street of Alki Avenue; and Loren Knapp, the owner of the residential parcel lying
directly east of the site. Such owners expressed concerns regarding access along Alki Avenue,
rental housing such as duplexes, impacts on property values, and noise from ambulances if the site
was developed for retirement housing.
24. The applicant advised that City transportation authorities had given the applicant two (2)
options for access to the site, off Evergreen or off Alki, depending on the proposed use; the
applicant did not favor the development of duplex housing; the site is not part of the adjoining
single-family neighborhood, since it is currently vacant; and development of the site may enhance
property values in the vicinity.
25. The environmental checklist submitted for the proposed rezone by the applicant described the
proposed rezone as a "non-project action". This is an incorrect use of such term, since the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the environmental provisions of the SVMC define a
"nonproject action" as an action that involves decisions on policies, plans or programs; and define
a"project action" as a decision on a specific project, such as a construction or management activity
located in a defined geographic area, including a license or approval such as a rezone. See WAC
197-1-760, 197-11-774, 197-11-704, and SVMC 21.20.160.
26. The proposed rezone is more appropriately characterized under SEPA as a quasi judicial,
private "project action" without a specific site development plan. See Richard L. Settle, The
Washington State Environmental Policy Act(December, 2012), #11.01(2), at p. 11-6 and 11-7, and
#13.01(1), at p. 13-11 and 13-12.
27. The Staff Report sets forth relevant policies of the Comprehensive Plan for the application.
This includes Policy LUP-1.7, which states that zone changes should be allowed within the Low
Density Residential category of the Comprehensive Plan when specific criteria are met. This may
include substantial changes within the area, the availability of adequate facilities and public
services, and consistency with residential densities in the vicinity of the rezone site.
28. SVMC 19.40.040 and SVMC 19.40.050 describe both the R-3 district and the R-4 district as
low density residential development that is intended to preserve the character of existing
development, subject to the dimensional standards of SVMC Chapter 19.40 that are respectively
established for such districts.
29. The minimum lot size, width and depth in the R-3 district are respectively 7,500 square feet,
65 feet and 90 feet; and are respectively 6,000 square feet, 50 feet and 80 feet in the R-4 district.
The maximum lot coverage in the R-3 district is 50%, and is 55% in the R-4 district. The
minimum setbacks and maximum building height are the same in both districts.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 4
30. The R-3 and R-4 districts each permit single-family and duplex dwellings. The R-4 district
permits multi-family dwellings, townhouse dwellings, and certain institutional-type residential
uses not permitted in the R-3 district.
31. The Staff Report recommended no conditions of approval for the rezone application, because
there was no site development plan submitted with the application for review and approval by the
Hearing Examiner. The conditions submitted by public agencies and City departments will apply
to the site development at the time of building permit.
32. The environmental checklist submitted by the applicant, and the DNS issued by the
Community Development Department, properly addressed the environmental impacts of the
application. The DNS was not appealed.
33. The Staff Report and presentation by City Community Development staff at the public
hearing properly analyzed the consistency of the application with the Comprehensive Plan, and the
rezone criteria set forth in SVMC 19.30.030. This includes finding that the property abuts existing
and more intensive RO zoning on the west; the R-4 zoning district will provide a buffer and
transition between the eventual office uses that will be developed or are being developed
southwest of and west of the site and the single-family neighborhood to the east; the zoning
regulations in the SVMC, including setbacks and building height restrictions, will help ensure
compatibility between such office uses and the neighboring single-family neighborhood, the R-4
district is a similar zone to the R-3 district that applies to such neighborhood, except for allowing
multi-family uses and a somewhat higher housing density; and the rezone to the R-4 district will
provide greater opportunities for site development, and to achieve compatibility with the more
intense office uses that are or will be developed adjacent or near the site. The site abuts some
existing duplex uses to the north, and is also located near commercial zoning and office uses to the
northwest.
34. The concerns raised by neighboring property owners are generally unsubstantiated, and/or
are insufficient to provide a basis for denying the proposed rezone.
35. County Utilities, and Vera Water and Power, respectively certified public sewer and water
concurrency for the application. The rezone application itself is not subject to transportation
concurrency requirements, since it was not submitted with a specific site plan. The proposed
rezone to the R-4 district meets the direct concurrency requirements set forth in SVMC 22.20.
36. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; bears a substantial relation
to the public health, safety and welfare; is appropriate for reasonable development of the property;
is adjacent and contiguous to property of a higher zone reclassification; will not be materially
detrimental to uses or property in the immediate vicinity of the site; and has merit and value for the
community as a whole.
37. The proposed rezone is supported by a substantial change of circumstances in the area since
the site was zoned R-3 in 2007, including the recent development of office uses along the
Evergreen Road corridor in the area.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 5
Based on the above findings of fact, the Hearing Examiner enters the following:
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Any finding of fact above that is a conclusion of law of law is hereby deemed a finding of
fact.
2. The proposed rezone to the R-4 zone complies with the rezone criteria set forth in SVMC
19.30.030.
3. SVMC 19.30.030 erroneously states that site-specific zoning map amendments shall be
processed pursuant to SVMC 17.80.140, which section applies to Comprehensive Plan
amendments and area-wide rezones processed through the Planning Commission and City Council.
SVMC 18.20.030(A)(5)(h) expressly vests the Hearing Examiner with authority over site-specific
rezones that are not processed at the same time as an implementing Comprehensive Plan
amendment for the same site, such as the proposed rezone.
4. Washington case law requires the proponent of a rezone to establish, by a preponderance of
the evidence, that the proposed rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety
or general welfare; and that a substantial change of circumstances has occurred in the area.
However, proof of a substantial change of circumstances is not required if the rezone implements
the comprehensive plan of the local government. The applicant has carried such burden of proof.
5. The proposed rezone to the R-4 zone implements the Comprehensive Plan; and bears a
substantial relationship to the public health, safety or welfare.
6. The procedural requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act and SVMC Title 21
(Environmental Controls) have been met.
7. The approval of the rezone application, as conditioned, is appropriate under SVMC
19.30.030, and SVMC Chapter 18.20 (Hearing Examiner).
8. Any conclusion of law above that is a finding of fact is hereby deemed such.
IV. DECISION
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law above, the application for a site-
specific amendment to the City Zoning Map, to rezone 1.54 acres of land from the R-3 zoning
district to the R-4 zoning district under the SVMC, without a specific site development plan, is
hereby approved.
The map amendment applies to the real property currently referenced as County Assessor's
tax parcel no. 45143.1328, as more particularly described in File No. REZ-2013-0002.
The City Zoning Map shall be revised to reflect such map amendment.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 6
DATED this 12th day of November, 2013
SPOKANE VALLEY HEARING EXAMINER
Icica C
Mic Dempsey, WSBA#82
NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION AND NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Pursuant to Chapter 17.90 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), the decision
of the Hearing Examiner on an application for a site-specific amendment to the City of
Spokane Valley zoning map (i.e. site specific rezone) is final and conclusive unless within
fourteen (14) days from the date the Examiner's decision was mailed, a party with standing
appeals the decision to the Spokane Valley City Council pursuant to Section 17.90.070 of the
SVMC.
On November 12, 2013, a copy of this decision will be mailed by regular mail to the
Applicant, and to all government agencies and persons entitled to notice under Section
17.80.130(4) of the SVMC. THE APPEAL CLOSING DATE WILL BE NOVEMBER 26,
2013.
The complete record in this matter, including this decision, is on file during the appeal
period with the Office of the Hearing Examiner, Third Floor, Public Works Building, 1026
West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington, 99260-0245; and may be inspected by
contacting staff assistant Kristine Chase at (509) 477-7490. The file may be inspected during
normal working hours, listed as Monday-Friday of each week, except holidays, between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. After the appeal period (unless an appeal is timely filed),
the file may be inspected at the City of Spokane Valley Department of Community
Development-Planning Division, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA, 99206; by
contacting Martin Palaniuk at (509) 921-1000. Copies of the documents in the record will be
made available at the cost set by the City of Spokane Valley.
Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.130, affected property owners may request a change in
valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-2013-0002 Page 7