Loading...
VE-132-83 ~ :m_,.~~. . . . ~ . - ZONICJG ADJUSTOR SPOKAME COUNTY, IJGISHIN(;TOfJ IN THE MATTER OF: VE-132-83 ) RELAXATIOlV OF REAR YARD SETBACK ) FINDINGS OF FFlCT, DECISION HAGEN AND CONDITIOfJS , THIS f4ATTER, Being the consideration hy the Zoning Adjustor of Spoi:ane County, APPROVING the application (UE-132-83), for the purpose of establishing a zero rear yard setback foi- a commercial building, hereinafter referred to as the "Pr•oposal" and the Zoning Adjustor of Spokane County having held a public hearinq on July 27th and having fully considered all testimony presented thereat, and havinct rendered a decision on the 3rd day of August, 1983, APPROVING said proposal, does hereby make • the following: FIfJDIPlGS OF FACT l. That the prooosal is generally located.adjacent to and east of Arqonne Road approximately 200 feet north of Sinto Avenue in Section 17-25-44, Parcel Plo. 17542-1739, in Spokane County. 2. That the proposal consists of a commercial building with'in the Local Business Zone, to be located on the rear lot line, whereas, the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance requires a 15 foot setback in this zone. 3. That the adonted Spokane County Generalized Comprehensive Land Use Plan , indicates Commercial usage of the area encoiripassed bv the proposal. . 4. That the site is zoned Local Busin?ss. • 5. That the existing lanci uses in the area of proposal are predominani:ly connercial uses and office buildinas. ~ 6. That the applicant indicated a Farty Wall Aqreement has been established between himself and the property immediately to the"'east of this proposal evhich would be most affected by the rear yard setback requirement. 7. That the agreement betNieen the property owner is evidence that no rnaterial detrimenta is anticipated by the property owners most affected by the proposal. 8. That no written or oral testimony was i-eceived in opposition to the prnposal prior to or at the public hearing. 9. Tbat the site lies between two rnajor county arterials, Argonne and Plullen Roads and is an area which is intended to develop as a unified commercial complex. 10. That the applicant's pmposal is consistent with the overall development scheme of the area and serves to marimize development opportunity in the ai-ea :vithout adverse effect on ad,joining properties. ll. That the proposal othei'wise ineets all current standards of the Spol:ane County Zoning Ordinance foi• this use. 12. That the proper legal requir-ements for advertisinp of the heai'inn before the zoning Adjustor of Spokane County have been met. COPlCLUSION 1. That the proposal is compatible with existing uses in the area. 2. That the proposal is not detriinental or othei-viise harmful to the pudilic health, safety and welfare. DECISION From the for•egoing Findings, a review of the Planning Denai•tment File Ple. VE-13?_-83, testimony at the public hearing, and a site visit, the Zoning Adjustor hereby in APPROVING the proposal makes the following conditions: . _ u._ . ..M.. . . . FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION APID CGNDITIOPlS • VE-132-83 PI1GE A. COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTD1ENT 1) That the applicant develop the piroperty in strict confoi°mance with the plot plan on •file with the Spokane County Planning Department. 2) The applicant must comply with all conditions, otheY° than'the rear yard setback, established and cur•rently in effect at the time of the local business zoning of this pr-operty. B. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY 1) All buildings and structures require building permits as per Section 301 of the Unifonn Buildina Code. C. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1) Disposal of waste is subject to the conditions of the Spokane County Utilities Department and the Spokane County Heaith District. D. HEALTH DISTRICT 1) Water service shall be coordinated through the Director of Utilities. 2) Disposal of sewage generated on site is subject to the conditioris and liini±'s imposed by the 5pokane Coumty Health Distr•ict. E. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1) Access permits to the site inust be obtained from the Spokane County Enaineei4- inq Department prior to building permit release. DATED THIS 3RD DAY OF AUGUST, 1983. , . > STEVE 0 ROII6IOSKI, ACTING ZOPIIMG ADJUSTOi? SPOKANE GOUPJTY, WASHINGTON , ~ . r SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTUR PUBLIL HEAPING (continued) ~ TIME: 1:15 AGENDA: July 27, 1983 7. VE-132-83 RELAXATION OF REAR YARD SETQACK (Generally located adjacent to and east of Argonne Road approxiiTiately 200' north of Sinto Avenue in Section 17-25-44). PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes a zero rear yard setback within a local business zone for a commercial buildinq, whereas the Spokane County Zoninq Ordinance requi res a 15' rear yard setback for this use. SITE SIZE: 88' X 120' APPLICANT: Kim Hagen 8. VW- 155-82 (A-F) RELAXATION OF FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS (Prope rty is gene rally located adjacent to and north of Baker Road and lies southeasterly of Interstate Freeway in,Section 13-23-40). PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes establishinq 6 residential lots served by a 60' private easement within a 20 acre site, whereas the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance requires public maintained road frontage ~ in the Agricultural Zone. SITE SIZE: 20 acres APPLICANT: Kenneth B. Neu 9. VE-130-83 RELAXATJO~ OF SIDEYARO SETBACK (Generally located adjacen o and south of Sprague Avenue, approxi- mately 1,000' east of Evergreen Road in Section 23-25-44). PROPOSAL: To all'ow the construction of retail space and racquet club to be located , one foot from the westerly property line, whereas the Spokane County Zoning , Ordinance requires a 5' setback for each story of the structure. SITE SIZE: 62,100 S.F. APPLICANT: WAM Enterprises, Inc. C ~ • - 3 - • ' ^ _R CS4 ~ V r - ~riY•' ~ ~ "r I ~ ~ 8 *o', a f1 . "rr^+h • - -.y;, 'J.r t _ ~~,,,,~`r► -7 ~ J x ya Rn Alv '£L ` ~ , .,,..N►.~oN` cr x, c ~ r ~ y u - ~ 7 Mt~H~E,II 7 . a ' - j ~ + ~ . ~1 s I r~"~.~.►n , ~ `^r-~''" - ~e 7y, ~ vn.t~+1..~'~t`.~,+~A ~ •~V~r' a J ~ ~ 1~~~ j 3 W N % `i f ik 5*J70 ~ tK~ z , . • { • ~ • , ~ ''w' ~~li_` ~'"~~~~L•~~ 3 ~ ' Z t • ~.~~,r.r. ~ . Z,~ , J a _ i• ~ , ~ F ' ~ r,r, , ~ ~ AL. . S5 J i• 2 t y t l i . i ~ J 3j ~ ~ ~ • - p, rc 4 . • 1~ ~ ~',~:.;~.Y•,..-; : ~ Q ` ~ 1 4. j ~ i ~,~e' . , " ' ' -~~~``'y. ~ 1J t Y. C ~ r . . ' ~ t~ ; a • 7. = G . ~ h5 t`~ : `WMd S J ~ iy- yy ~A ~'i~~ _y~ ~W _Jy r ~ l J 1 . 1."s'~ ~ j . ~ ~ i ..~.;r~.•-'-r~~l..-. V'ofis• ~YL ~~~;NC,STIN i r}~ y ~ t c~4 i ~ r.• , •v,r, i 312 G U :;.~'lr%' ~ • u:;,. F ^l.~ , ~ • • ` SPOKANE COUNTY PLAhEIJING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE/WAIVER 0F VIOLATION Date: ~vtJ1y La, Appl i cati on No : 'VE /3Z'$3 f Name of Applicant: L/EM 9A ctEx Street Address of Applicant: • KbW A-314 City: '5QakA0E State: l✓~ • Zip Code: c1g~~ Tele. No: 3 2-7-7 7 S4 Name of Property Owner(s V~~►w) G KuK-P ( Ta HAJ 941L ,f MSVA) Requested Acti on ( Ci te Ordi nance Secti on 114 c,u ir.&- Ta ZET-+t A- Y4 RZ S~ r l3ac+~ r-b t1 c..co w 20 ►2-r--A-rz V4r-D Existing Zoning Classification: LIS Existing Use of Property: VA-e-- RxrW Proposed Use of Property : co 0" 1" Ee- << A-` 151-p-ini. _ Legal Description of Property (Include ?egal description of easement if applicable) - ~,eaGT .,4 g- aS K- . Comprehensive Plan Designation: rh ov+ • Section: 1-7 Township: Range: qy Source of Legal : J(~ . Ct Lt Assessor's Parcel No. (See tax statement) {"T SL( 2' a~ ~ Property Size: g$ X i'Zv Frontage: Feet on: A2.6owNE kp- , Total amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner or sponsor: o -F- ~ , ss Street Address of the Property : /v• ~'1-2-7- 4~~ " AJ'E If you do not hold title to the oroperty affected by this application, wnat is your interest in it? QV--qc.roA- zI A-e,~~u-r ~-ti'(Z ,l°D2cWasE~ Please list previous Planning Department actions invblvinq this proqerty: S P - "7 ~ - bSSATTACHED HeREWI7AHM OWNER tYEAC~TI0N5 ON HIS OR HER BEHALF. - (Signe ~/.Date: N V • ~ (Address) / .~Phone. Zi p . : ' ' NOTARY c , 5/ Date : NOTARY SEAL': u ;n SIGN ATURE OF APPLTCANT OR ArENT ~ r Date: ~ i : * * * * * ~r * * it ~r * Ac * ~c ~c ~r * Ir * ir * ~r ~lr * ~t dc ~t ~Ir 7F * ~c t t 9c * * yr FOR PLANNING E US ON Fees Receipt # ~~7~ Nearing Date• ~ Legal Checked by: ' _ 1 + ~ A. ALL APPLICATIONS 1. COUNTY HEALTH DISTRI-CT No ~ A liminary consultation has been held to discuss the oronosal. The ap i ant has been i ormed of requirements and standards. S. S IG ~ ~U E ) DAT B. AP~ICATION FO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ONLY This tion of the application will provide the Planninq Department's Staff with wri ten verification that the applicant has'had oreliminary consultation with the a ncies identified. Results of the preliminary consultation should be incorpora d in the proposal before final submittal to the Planning Deoart- ment. 1-1 1. COUNTY U7ILI ES DEPARTMENT A preliminary~isultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has bee\informed of requirements and standards. ~ (SIr,NATURE) ~ (DATE) . 2. WATER~~URUEYOR (N PM,h , a) The ,.oposal (is) (is t) located within the boundary of our service area. • b) Satisfact' arranqements ~iave) (have not) been made to serve this proposal. c) 6Je (are) (are t) a51e to serv this site with adequate water. (SIGNATURE) (DATE) C. APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE ONLY 1. In view of the above information, what special circumstance(s) (beyond vour . control or actions) deprive you of the same qeneral riqhts and privileqes of other prooerty owners within the same zone and vicinity? . ~4 . 2. If the Variance were granted, how would it affect eiqhbgq ropgrties ar improvements? l . ~ 'a f b [`e rw wt•~• ~ ~ m ~ ~ A ~'t ~ l ~•a,. ~ 3. Is the prooerty presently used, or can it be used in a manner similar to the uses within the vicinity without a Variance? (i.e. single-familv resi- dence or comnercial use). PLEASE EXPLAIN ~...t~.~ D. I,JAIV OF V I OLAT N ON LY 1. Ho or Why was e structure established outside tf~e provisions of the S4ok e County Zo ing Ordinance? . `y,• . . ~ - - . 2. What facts s port the apftlicant that a Waiver of Violation should be granted? ~ . E . ~ .%1,': . • i . . I•`',~ ~ •l~~. ,l . ~ . ZONING AGJl1STOR SPOKANE COUNTY, bIF;SHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF VE-99-82; ) FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISIOiI PRING . ) AND CONDITIONS THIS P1ATTER, 6eing the consider•ation by the Zoning Adjustor of Spokane County, approving the application (VE-99-82), for the qurpose of a rear yard setback variance and a oarking variance, hereinafter referred to as the "Proposal", and the Zoning Adjustor of Spokane Count,y having held a public hearing on June 10, 1982 continued to July 20, 1982 and having fully consider- ed all testimony presented thereat, and further having visited the site and vicinity in question, and having rendered a decision on the llth day of - August, 1982, approvinq said proposal does hereby make the follokaing: FINDIPlGS OF FACT l. That the proposal is generally located on the northwest corner of Sprague Avenue and Herald Road on parcel 417544-2611. 2. That the proposal consists of a rear yard setback variance from the required 15 foot setback to no setback and a parking variance from the re- quired 57 spaces to 44 spaces. ~ 3. That the adopted Spokane County Generalized, Comprehensive Land Use Plan indicates Commercial usage of the area encompassed by the proposal. 4. That the site is zoned Commercial by Qoard of County Commissioners decision of August 11, 1982. 5. That the existing land uses in the area of proposal include single . family residences, commercial facilities, and Lmdeveloped land. 6. That the proposal is coinpatible with existing uses in the area. 7. That the proposal is not detrimental or otherwise hannful to the public health, safety and welfare. ' 8. That the proposal is not totally inconsistent with the surrounding land use classification and does not grant a special privilege or rignt,s to the applicant different than those enjoyed by adjacent pr•operty owners. 9. That the proper legal requirements for advertising of the hearing be- fore the Zoning Pdjustor of Spokane Count,y have been met. 10. That a revised site plan was submitted to the Board of County Com- missionens on July 20, 1982. This approval is based on the revised plan. 11. That the applicant substantiated the reduced parking requirements for this specific use. • _ 12. That the propei-ty immediately west of this site is zoned for commer-r.ial development and under the saine ownership as this site. The rear yard setback, , in effect, then acts as a side vard. Current commerical zone standards do not require a side yard setback between conunei-cial developments. DECIS[Oi! Froin the foregoing Findings. a reviev, of the Planninq Departriient File No. VE-99-82, testimony at the public heariny, and a site visit, the Zoning Adjustor hereby in approving the proposal makes tfie follokaing conditions: A. COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1) The westerly wall of the proposed structure shall be an approved fii-e rated kqall as per the Uniform Building Code. 2) The approval of the parking va.riance is restricted to a single user of the same nature or land use type as that specified in the request. The approval of the parking variance is subject to a fabric wholesaler utilizing the entire 11,640 squar-e foot space. All other uses shall ~ . ~ ~ Y ~ • ~ NDINGS OF FACT, DECISION APlD COPJDITIONS ~ VE-99-82 PAGE 2- A. COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Continued) or combination of uses shall conFoi-m to Zoning Ordinance requirements. DATED THIS DFlV OF i;~-I,~.. lr.~:~ , 1982• ~7 . MflRCIA RAIPIES', 7_ONIPIG AOJUSTOR SPOKADlE COUNTY, WASHINGT0IJ • .(?'0{ ~ ~EuY1Pg: I\iiGf~,i3 `L90 1970 _ ' ,1 , . , 'ZUE~ ~ V1 rit:t2n: Apri? l l 0 19 i ~ _FIAP,IANC£ . . F✓'E-52-78. Rear Setback ZGNIIVG AIDjUSTOR DEGiSION: Ta appeove the aPplica!at's a•zqiest fcr a 15ft. t{arlanca s:o aliocv a srructure Yo be located to the rear proposcy line oi his cornmec,-,ial zoned pioperCy. A. REasows: 1. Because o-f speciai c+rcumstal-i;,es apalicable to the p.•c.,ertj, partfculatiy in respect to susrounding :,om;nercial uses, the striei applicnc?on of :he Zoniiig Ordinance 4vou2d doprlde YIie suh$ect property of Eighis ataa pa•iviiecres en}oyerl by radpaee~t loroperties. - 2. An adgacerzt comme!; taZ strucCure is c:urrenely by rig"r_t eiijoling tiha crivil.ege of having a siruc2uro wich a"0" 5eL'bdClC 117i iR Y.I1B jJ?'6psfi;) lin.s i.z que,tion. ThR applicant is desirous to have Lhe san:e p:ivileye aiid is tY:eseicre nc2 asking foe a spectai privilegs. 3. Eor higher intens+_ty land usss such a> commc-rcial a~d i.?cius+~~ faI entet-prises, the need is fox e:>gosure, parki:,g and r.irculai:_on. T?la appiicani,ix requif-QC1 Co - fo13oHd the sYricC applicacion of the zoaing ord!r.ance, urould ?aave creat2d llilUSeCl space be:vioen two buildlnr,s ancl 'Lhereby resaucinci the amcunc oE iz:ont yarei area needed ffer peeking, clrculabien aeid truclcdeliceFies. 4. T1ze Joinfny of itvo commercial sErucYu,es in the commerwiaa zone would prevent co1fleCtion of "jLri{:° a DSOJiflC' fOt rEitex security and c{e: te v rncre op°P.e3S B.jJgD°2EF3RcC' . S. FusePaetmore, the granE!ng of thls 4IGE'L-zizce wiii noC va maferialEy Letr+_menta.l ro the public Evaifare and to adjacont psc.~pert-ies. ' 3. CONAITi'ONS: , 1. T3ne applicant must demonstrate comp7i~n;;F; vr3fita the Short P;.a`c Orainance grior to 41se fssuance of a Luilding permiC. 2. 'th2 proPo3t.°Ci S$PllciUP'c S`I131: con7ply vii[3t &il f1re and safc?y uYe!'idaiC1S. 3. liie applfe;ant sha3P cievolop the site 2:r2 in Conformancs cviLh the ulei: plan en file croviCh this agplfcation. C. OBJ£CTOftS OF ftECORD: N'one (ConEd.} • , ~w~',_."',;r,,.a~`.., n . • . . • . . , . , ,4 v. °~S~f{:;..°l`~,. , . ' - . . , - . _ ' • - . _I IY • ! 1 i15RIANCE E-52-78, Rsar Yard SE~-bac;: D, G£NiRAL M1'A: -4!i E.4`Y.tJ[. a. Location: Seciicn %7e '.LGbJllsizip 25Pv, > ange I ThaL eortion o: 'tr.e SW 1/4 of Yhe SE 1.14 of ttze S£ 1/4 descrzbsl as sod:ewos: Eeg. 2t api. oi iii:essec+:lon wi:h tiie £ right°of.-way of B31£ous Rc+. a?ttl F.i?e 1\I C?ghi-of-way ?.ine of Che Spok«ne & i+.2lard Fmhire Railroad Co; t'i. N along safd E :igi?t-oi-viay li.ne o£ Baliour Rd, 200 rC. to~`Yi?8 ri:e pC. of beg; th. cor.tinuslg PI, alor.g said E liri.a, 130.,`t. to a gl•. on the S line oi• Tot 10; Block A of Opporiunityt, Plar 3, acc.orcl!ng Co a:at recoz•ded zn Look S of Pl.ats, page.. 15; Lh. N 830 37'50" E, alorg said S liiie ok LoE 10, :55;i; Lh. S on a Iine paralb.ei to the E riyht-oi=~aay line of 13aliour Pra, 55fe; th. S 8044'14" W„ 65.83 ii:; ch. S 8°°37°30° Wo 145 xk. to the Lrae pc. of beyirm,i:g. Parcel No. 19544-9033 (porCion oi) b, Ap?licant: L3a,ik G:inalcis ' S 521 Shor Line Driae Spokane, IA'A. 990101 c. Sife S!ze: Ar3prvr:imaCely 39,800 sq.it. d. ExisYfng Zoning: Comme-mial e. Variance Reauasted: To ai3ow a sCructure io 'rsave a zem (0) rsar ' yard seibbcF:, ~•vcereas ehe 3go',:ane 4:oi.inep Lcniny Ocdinance requires a rear yard setback of 15feei:, - f. ApAlic3tion of Zon?r.g Provision: Chz;pter 4.10, Section 4.10.0'30 (b) , ~ Z , `aI3UN~. BwiS; '.-or,ix:g Adiusbr' ` OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER . SrOKANE COUNTY, WASHtNGTON Date j13Jy 26 lnttr-office Cann+unication Spokane County Zoning Adjustor a~ ro ' Bob MeCann, Land Development Coordinator Subjwt&glnda Itemg 5chedulgd for Public Hearinw 3uly 27. 1983 ; • ~ 1. V B 4 0-8 3 o b b i❑s - 14a comments cancerninB this aPplication. ;2. VE 132-83 Hagen - No comments concernirig Chie application. ~ ~ 3. VN 93 A&B Heitman - See attsched commeats. 4. VE 121-83 Brutger Co. - No comment concerning thie application. L- 5. VN 129-83 Thomas - See attached commente. . . - 6. VE 130-83 WAM Ent. Inc. - No comments concerning thie application. 7. Vtii 155-83 {A thru F} - Neu - See attached coamenta. 8. CUW 29-83 Lemay 6 Cochrane - 5ee attached commaents. _ :ry ~ BMc/Bet r ~ r . . ~ , f..k. 4 . . . , . . ~1 I ' • ' y ' , r q• J M r''~`1;.~ ' '~Y,' ! y1. . ~ • ~ ~ • ..a;k 'f . , . , . 'e 7r , , a _ _ _ _ s 1 I 1 f i I