Loading...
1981, 03-05 Zoning InvestigationZONING INVESTIGATION SHE&,' - Property Address f ZZ.I 5. i5owDi5PP F2 rektei< Acidness Directions (if nec.) Bowdish « 12th, 2nd house on left going south on Bowdish Uic,ck. Nature of Investigation 61,1fence in front yard L?. 37oar File Number 34-481• Date Received 3-5-81 Investigator Taken By. Date Resolved Occupant Jn y -e. f Rq�Q �ww�) Phone Address 4R i &u+r[Sh hip �'lcjo?Cfta Owner Dn tmJ L, n7Rnn Phone Address Zip --CONFIDENTIAL-- Complainant Martin Botchek Phone 926-7717 Address ( 3o 5 50i icG.5 ,%. Zip Parcel No. ,i;)544- 912/c Legal Discription 21-25-44 Applicable Permit No.'s Zoning of Property /a,; Effective Date J Sections of Ordinance Applicable Previous Violations Non -Conforming Use File 11's RECHECK:--µ-i--&t d18R� 42-30-8/ CONTACT RECORD DATE TYPE COMMENTS 3• vt 3-. !s 3.01 lr,tizga Aftfox 5' FenIAA frad - 12 2) S 8o-wdCislt -$,er — Fac S k $,.tTo wsan s"dig Maisia-a o jar,Dkr.St" 9x8 9' tic — Swa=t -gZ-Z Biot. CoPv' c/*cLcxl 3• �-(S 3•r conn* raalbt> - taittatim wot iu E202 -Ss -o fir - oU t tcked. 4w.c -o cea crts uat u elatwv.iv' D44. v%Pr Rt FNid Ie -Fn.: i-k'c•n, 'Mir, /k°%• e' c l t -tom; l.A ICo ed N Ali �Ikiektfi Ci o n�k f e i In 51/11C 4o t, D kir +kAAU vu t f o r i v. v�.�F4 Li Oil (UAW of # tf �iAk_ t srG -4.0 - &a rrit A trr -• 2 K Plate t� 1 4i kw w Iwatek (Ale-v•.2a� buy/44A_ not i! No o4.� 0^ I („uevt/t u ca to rt — 1 i / rit y .► •-4 4A -c • 731AA&J IA of4 v DNA a.i- (aQ � +451.oaic pi , . (Stil G•c' c, th Q.QIB..Q d.�o,t.- cra lovl.�L c os Jlt '1 ii Lw�d_. wk _13o,ok 4444.. tail \I era q„, t� 1 eAt ..1 .... ,'sf Ir In tM s, ra B la t0a, rt P l,cwo lei it c, d F.yY'• (,.:•.:.treat -vat 3•t8 It eel CO.o 44.4 Go' Soc.O• VC” Intvy. �.,.;. to 0E44 el 3- Ake Mea i°i s iY-,frl,eP c1'nnr. ,1/21c r4K>e b cer771 �{ Z0 lir 5 Sihnll husinrss ze le els ++:-S_ t/K lC hiork5 the •nrn CeAn {vs dttruet4x,�. N OF mv.. t freCSles c YKiu�� se -M te/sot 61 LAIN sf o- wk• rid Se wets tilts IA eat- ciottrol 14o do i%' fidtlkcdl va4"Fynnc)- ye » t N►r. al3t.S641000141f> p � �P li Z� � � OR I ai r erv.�atited �C C� W 10s 1 toIWS Wouw 2ij tleackrtf ''I ,•,z Sl".s trva, a r it tnto Bes4 'g L y��y66 t. . Jt1oJl v: ' x.k l w..A va f taco ao $eye c-o_� Tec.bw �..or Set A- trap �loA,..:A Wa tOkaet ?as a Totts leas r witonv Note &o,,4 for 54tat W� tat ��c(-ar 2q I',•� o S& vomit:L buw j nvitjert ,A vbt ""It.a ZuittIANC- 1 a1ktok ,N ijo & t1-61�f't ,l' 3 �� ��l' F/S Tlnn�' • 4VS- �i• 7 I tIrS�Q 0 v.s fry- 0(l/iO ;ck.st (tor 10 [le 1v, COvy w Z /. 0,2- '444, t Z•ZT _ Fe BEFORE THE ZONING ADJUSTOR OF SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF: APPLICANT: JOYCE BERGER REQUEST: WAIVER OF VIOLATION COUNTY CODE: 4.25.030 (f) FILE NUMBER: PARCEL if: DATE OF HEARING: DATE OF DECISION: DECISIOII CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FINDINGS OF FACT WVE-3-81 21544-9126 JULY 8, 1981 JULY 22, 1981 DECISION To approve in part the Waiver of Violation. To deny the waiver of violation for that portion of the fence beginning at the southwest corner of the present fence and extending along the south fence line for a distance of eight (8) feet or to the first support post; and that portion of the fence extending along the west line from the southwest corner for a distance of eight (8) feet or to the first support post. INTRODUCTION This matter being the consideration by the Zoning .Adjustor for Spokane County and pursuant to Chapter 4.25, Section 4.25.010, the Zoning Adjustor has the authority to hear and decide such natters coming before him. After conducting a public hearing to receive all public testimony and after review- ing the public record and examining available information, the Zoning Adjustor in accordance with Chapter 36.70.810 Revised Code of Washington and Section 4.25.030 of the Zoning Ordinance hereby snakes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law hereinbelow stated. The applicant, Joyce Berger, filed an application with the Planning Department on May 11, 1981 to allow a fence which is 5 1/2 feet in height to remain on the property. The subject prope?ty is located on Bowdish Road in Section 21, Township 25, Range 44. That on July 8, 1981, a public hearing was held before the Zoning Adjust- or. After receiving public testimony and accepting the file from the Planning Department, the Zoning Adjustor set July 22, 1981 at 1:15 p.m. as the time to announce the decision. That on July 22, 1981 the Zoning Adjustor having reviewed the public testimony and having made a site inspection concluded there are sufficient grounds to support this action. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW That the Zoning Adjustor for Spokane County has jurisdiction over the issuance of the building permit for the project to the applicant pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 36.70.810 RCW and Section 4.25.030 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance. That the applicant submitted an application to the Planning Department requesting a public hearing before the Zoning Adjustor, and that pursuant to Chapter 36.70.840 and Section 4.25.040 of the Zoning Ord- inance, notice for a public hearing was given through the United States nail to all property owners within a radius of 300 feet from the subject property. II. That all citizens notified and public agencies having jurisdiction were afforded the opportunity to testify or submit written comments onthe proposed project. PAGE 2 WVE-3-81 That this action was taken after finding that the public health, safety and general welfare will not be infringed upon. That mitigating measures to assure public safety are being imposed hereinafter. Furthermore, this action conforms to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance in that the issuance of a waiver of violation is not violating the spirit and intent of the Ordinance. Eventhough the applicant acted in good faith, certain modifications are being required as public safeguards. Therefore, this action does not constitute the granting of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations placed upon other properties in the vicinity and under the same zone classification as cited in Chapter 36.70.810 RCW. IV. That pursuant to the above cited provisions of law, Findings of Fact hereinbelow substantiates action taken regarding this application. Any Find- ing of Fact hereinafter stated which is deemed to be a Conclusion of Law is adopted as the same. FINDINGS OF FACT The applicant requested a waiver of violation in order to allow a wood fence approximately 5 feet to 5 1/2 feet in height to remain in the front yard. Under Section 4.17.030 of the County Zoning Ordinance, no fence over thirty- six (36) inches in height may be erected within the required front yard area of any lot used for residential purposes. II. The applicant testified that the fence was constructed approximately two years ago. The fence covers almost the entire yard area because of the swimming pool which is located on the subject property. County Ordinance re- quires swimming pools to be enclosed with a fence at least four (4) feet in height. The applicant further testified that the residence is for sale and that it would be an economic hardship if it was required to have the violat- ing portion of the fence removed and a new fence constructed to complete the pool enclosure. This application is the result of a complaint lodged with the Zoning Investigator, Department of Building and Safety. The file contains a memo from Mark Holman, Zoning Investigator, dated June 30, 1981 acknowledging that as a result of the investigation, the fence is in violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Further it was reported that residential fences do not require the issuance of building permits. IV. The opportunity was afforded at the hearing to any interested person to testify in opposition to the applicant's request. Testimony was received from Martin Botchek who is a neighoborinq property owner adjacent to the sub- ject property to the south. Mr. Botchek expressed concerns regarding sight visability when backing out of his driveway onto Bowdish Road. It was stated that the fence blocked his view of south bound traffic. From on-site review, the Zoning Adjustor found that visability was being restricted by the placement of the fence. As requested by the Zoning Adjustor, the County Engineer's Office reported that Bowdish Road at this location is con- sidered to be a secondary arterial and has a traffic count of 5929 ADT(Average Daily Traffic). Therefore, it is concluded that a traffic hazard does exist, and that removal of a portion of the violating fence is warranted in this in- stance. V. For the remaining fence area, the Zoning Adjustor finds that the fence can be allowed to remain as there was no evidence submitted to show that the fence will adversely affect the public health, safety, convenience and general welfare. PAGE 3 WVE-3-81 VI. From these Conclusions of Law and Findings of Fact stated hereinabove, the Zoning Adjustor orders the following: ORDER Within sixty (60) days from the date of this Order, the applicant shall cause removal of that portion of the fence that is found to be in violation with the zoning ordinance and this decision. Specifically, that portion of the fence beginning•at the southwest corner of the present fence and extend- ing along the south fence line for a distance of eight (8) feet or to the first support post; and that portion of the fence extending along the west line from the southwest corner for a distance of eight (8) feet or to the first support post shall be either removed or reduced to 36 inches in height. If the applicant chooses to remove the fence, then the two fence ends shall be connected with a fence of equal height (5 to 5 1/2 feet) to fonn the hypotenuse of a "clear view" triangle. If the applicant chooses to reduce the fence height to 36 inches, then a fence of at least 4 feet in height shall be constructed at some other location on the property to enclose the swimming pool. ENTERED THIS 22ND DAY OF JULY, 1981. ATTEST BY: THOMAS L. DAVIS ZONING ADJUSTOR FOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON SOON ANY COUNTY SPOKANE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & SAFETY BUILDING -PLUMBING - MECHANICAL - FIRE 811 N. JEFFERSON SPOKANE, WA. 99260-0050 TELEPHONE: 456-3675 JAMES L. MANSON, DIRECTOR March 6, 1981 CERTIFIED - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Ms. Joyce Berger South 1221 Bowdish Spokane, WA 99206 Dear Ms. Berger: The laws and regulations in our society are, at times, difficult to under- stand and fully comprehend. This is true of zoning ordinances, which are laws intended to protect and govern the many different uses of land in Spokane County. It is my responsibility, as the Zoning Investigator, when the situation arises, to help resolve conflicts involving the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance. This office has received reports regarding a five to six foot fence located in the front yard of your property, loacted at South 1221 Bowdish, Spokane County, parcel number 21544-9126. A recentvisual inspection by our field inspector indicated, we believe,that these reports are accurate. Unfortunately, Section 4.17.040 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance stipulates that, "No lienee oven th,h ty-e.ix (36) .inches .in height may be enected within the nequ.ined 6nant yard o6 any tot used bon nez.identi.at punpo4e4." The required front yard setbacks for your property, located in an Agricultural Zone is, "A minimum o6 55 boot 'setback 6nom the cententine o6 aEE noadway night -o6 -way on 25 600.t aetbaek 6nom .the ex.i..s.ting pnopenty Lite; whieheven pnov.ides the gneatteh setback 6nom .the eenten2.i.ne o6 ,the noadway night -o6 -way." As an alternative to bringing .your fence into compliance with the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance, you can apply for a Waiver of Violation, which, if granted might allow you to keep your fence at its present height in its present location. Please contact the Spokane County Planning Department for further information concerning this Waiver of Violation. Page 2 March 6, 1981 Ms. Joyce Berger We are of the opinion that a period of 30 days, beginning with your receipt of this letter, should be sufficient time for you to either bring your fence into compliance with the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance, or to contact the Spokane County Planning Department and take the necessary steps as required by that department, in a timely fashion, with regards to applying for a Waiver of Violations. Do not hesitate to act upon this important matter, since a violation of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance is a criminal offense and does carry a penalty. I am sure it is important to you, as it is to nie, that we resolve this situation quickly. If you wish to discuss these findings, have any questions, or believe these allegations to be unfounded, please feel free to contact nie at 456-3675. Mark Holman Zoning Investigator MH:db Dept. of '.Bldg. & Safety 811 N. Jefferson Spokane, Wn. 99260 RECEIVED MAR 131981 BUILDING CODES S. 1221 Bowdish Rd. Spokane, Wn. 99206 March 12, 1981 PE: In response to our phone conversation on 3.9.'81 Dear Mr. Holman, Enclosed please find pictures of the fence located at South 1221 Bowdish Rd. (parcel `21544-9126) I have talked extensively with Mr. John Nunnery of Spokane Zoning Dept. on your advise. Through our conversation it was brought to his attention that the fence in my front yard is cut to a scalloped effect which doesn't make the fence 6 ft. high in any one spot. The measurements being; 'Aft. scalloping to 5 ft. and is 23 ft. from the center line. i'lr. Nunnery also checked the height of a fence when there is a swimming pool involved and found it to be required to be 4 ft. - it is a growing dilemma As I have mentioned to you, I and my children live at South 1221 Bowdish alone this past year and as you can see on the pic- tures the house is more than I can afford and is listed for sale. The past year has been one untimely expense after another to the house of which the latest being completely replacing the sewer drain field which I am still trying to pay for. I neither have the means, financial or otherwise to remodel the fence only to find out a Waiver of Violation would cost another $250.00 just to apply for. I have been trying to get someone to shorten the fence; I have called Owl Construction and Morgan Fences only to be told by one it would cost their crew ;r. 35.00 an hour to do the work or by the other to find some neighborhood kids or neighbors to do it because they don't know of one fence company here in town that would bother with such a job. Mr. Nunnery also suggested, due to my situation, to contact you and ask if it would be possible for the complaining party to recede their complaint or to meet with me and resolve this matter amongst ourselves about the fence. I truly hope this could be possible. Please let me know by return mail or by phone call. Residence; 924-7527 Work: 922-2623 EXT: 292 8:a.m. - 4:30 p.m. Sincerely, SPON.NE COUNTY SPOKANE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & SAFETY BUILDING -PLUMBING - MECHANICAL - FIRE 811 N. JEFFERSON SPOKANE, WA. 99260-0050 TELEPHONE : 456-3675 JAMES L. MANSON, DIRECTOR November 25, 1981 CERTIFIED -RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Ms. Joyce Berger S. 1221 Bowdish Road Spokane, WA 99206 Re: WVE-3-81 Dear Ms. Berger: This letter is in regards to the above referenced Waiver of Violation and that portion of your fence, located at S. 1221 Bowdish Road, for which WVE-3-81 was denied. A recent visual inspection by our field inspector indicates, that, to date, the fence has yet to be brought into compliance with either zoning ordinance requirements or the Zoning Adjustor's order as stated in WVE-3-81, though progress has been made. Unfortunately, this office does not have the authority to modify the require- ments set forth in WVE-3-81. This can only be done through the change of conditions process at the Spokane County Planning Department. Therefore, we are of the opinion that a period of 30 days, beginning with your receipt of this letter, should be sufficient extension of time for you to either bring your fence into compliance or to contact the Spokane County Planning Department with regards to legalizing the fence as it currently stands through the change of conditions process, or other options as that department might indicate, and taking the necessary steps as re- quired by that department in pursuit of these options in a timely fashion in order that your fence be brought into compliance with ordinance require- ments. If these matters are not taken care of within the previously mentioned 30 days, we will be unable to grant any further extensions of time and will have no choice but to forward this case to the Spokane County Prosecuting Attorney's Office for appropriate legal action. A violation of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance is a criminal offense and does carry a penalty of, "...two hundred and fifty dollars ($250.00) or imprisoned in the County Jail for a term of not exceeding ninety (90) days, for exch offense. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense." Page 2. Ms. Joyce Berger - November 25, 1981 Please be advised that this is not a matter that will go away if ignored. I am sure it is important to you, as it is to me, that we resolve this situation quickly. If you wish to discuss these findings, have any questions, or believe these allegations to be unfounded, please feel free to contact nye at 456-3675. Sincerely, hark Holman Zoning Investigator MH:gw livrenhe