VE-47-89
• a _
CIFF X CE OF -f'HE COUIVTY EhlG T NEER
SPOk::ANE COUhITY, WASHTIVGl"C]Id
A 1_t q Lt s t 'r y 1'D 8'3
T0: SPOk:ANE COUNTY PLAhlNTNG DEPARTMEhlT (Ci_tr r-ent P lanni ng
Acimini5trator )
F= ROM : S PC] k:.ANE C(7UNTY EhlG T IVEER l~ f?~
SUBJ: VE 47-89 (Albertson's)
ree Variances
The COLinty Enqineerinq Uepartment has reviewed the abave referenced
application. Tfie fc-l.lowinq comments are c-ffiered fcer inclUsion in
the Findinqs and Order as "Conditions c-f Apprclval" shoLild thP
reqi_test be
apprc-ved.
1. WF HAVE REVTEWEU THE ABCIVE REFERENLED PROF'OSAL Ah1D HAVE NO
COMMENTS TO MAk::E CONCERIVINV THE APPL ICATIQN.
UFFT CE OF I'HE GOUhl'TY ENV T NEEFi
SPQk::ANE COUNl"Y, WASHIhlGTON
AUqLts t 2, 1989
T0: SPOKANE CCJUNI"Y F'LAIVNTNG DEPARTMEIUT (Cl_trrent I'lanninq
Administrator )
FRQh1: SPOk;AIVE COUhITY EIVG I hIEER
SUBJ: VE 47-89 (Albertscin's)
reo Variances
The County Enqineerinq Department has reviewed tt-ie above referenced
app 1 i cat ion. The fo1 1owing comments are of fered for i nc 1i_isi-Dn i n
tfie Findinqs and Order as "Conditions of Approva1" should the
reqijest he
approved. •
1. WF_ HAVE REVTEWED "fHE ABOVE REFEREhICEU F'FZOPCISAL AND HAVE NO
COMI`1ENTS TO MAk::E CONCERN I Nv THE AI'PL I CAT I I7N.
e
t;_•,- _
• S<•
1 j _ ' t:. _1 •
t:1i: se, :I . - r`.i•: f I
} a( t . ~T--'o`- - • C'xawm,
\ ~ i
~ : ~
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~
BROAOWAY CENTRE BUILOING N. 721 JEFFERSON STREET
I
PHONE 456-2205
. ,;1^:_- SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
.e:''l r •-,e
SPOKANE COU„TV COURT NOUS[
~OTIICIE OIP' SPOKANIE cCOjiTNTIY 7LORT~~ ~JUSTOIIB PUIB1LIIC EDEAIIBIIRTG
DATE: August 9, 1989
TIME: 9:45 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible
PLACE: Spokane County Planning Department
2nd Floor Hearing Room, Broadway Centre Building,,
North 721 Jefferson Street
Spokane, WA 99260 ^ I n( 6 ^(C1
AGENDA ITEM # 3 ~i
,
' tl ' . " f
File: YE-47-89 ~ • ~ ~
- VARIANCE FRQM FRONT YARD SETBACK REOLIIREMENTS:
L'O C A T I O N: Generally located north of and adjacent to Sprague Avenue and east of and
adjacent to Pines Road in the SW 1/4 of Section 15, Township 25N, Range 44EWM.
P R O P O S A L: The applicant ' proposes to construci an enclosure to and existing truck dock
1 foot 8 inches short of the 35 foot setback as required by_ Section 4.10.080 of the Spokarre
County Zoning Code requires.
EXISTING ZONING: Commercial & Local Business CAOSSOVER : B-1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Urban
SITE SIZE: Approximately 4.7 Acres
APPLICANT: Dale Del Soulio
Albertson's 250 Parkcenter Blvd.,
Boise, ID 83726
ITEMS CARRIED OVER FROM PREVIOUS HEARINGS MAY BE HEARD FIRST, POSSIBLY
CAUSING DELAYS. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND PROJECT DETAII.S FOR THESE PROJECTS
ARE AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNIlNG DEPARTMENT FILES. APPEALS OF THE DECISION ON
THE ABOVE LISTED CASE MAY ONLY BE FILED BY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF
RECORD ACCOMPANIED BY A$100.00 FEE. (Sections 4.25.090 and 4.25.100 of the
Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.)
V =47m89
u. r - '-TZ_ , ~ . - -
LLl w44& &Orv C T.
a O . J
r Q _
a ~
>
pAgau
~ ~ . , , . . .
'~t"O~'th4~~~ EL 2 " o
~
ELD
~in~S;:llinior
~ A L K I ' ~,N' ~ h ~c,~~l~ ■ . ~ K~ Av
,
- . • ~
~ .
, -
- - ~ •
~ .
OtIVI AvI J .
~ Z _ L... ~ O
m ALL Y WAY VA Ll.. E r
f • Z •
~ O ~
Ce
( AIN W ;
t
0 w!liaOf 3 . . Q _ ~ L IOE ~ t~r : ~N
r 7 = ppui t RIVER510E
3 X
T. C
DEL./993 ILD~
.71" ~ R auE v. ~
. . . .
f i PC 5 T «I C •
. ~
bo - ~ ` - ^J ~ O
AVE T ~ = a
4.
- .
- - _ . - - - --1 - - . .
2 l
OUPTH AV 4TH 4T'N AVE.
~ Z r
~ ~
O ~ 0 ~ 71 ° < A~k
J ~ r . • , .
3 6rrr ~ . IQLX
vE ♦v
4969
7rw 4VE 1
Y W
E1 GHTH ^v=. El- 2014 • Z 8 TN AvE
21 .
9 r. ~►v e T ~
~ ♦ . ..J ~
a u
iOTH
I I T N ~ 1 r.~we ~1 O
ITH . . ~
~ trPOP'RJN fTY ~ Z• . J
3C?+OOL .
vvi 12 T., A E 12 T %JAV E
. . . . ~ -
13 A•.rt
~ J ~ 13TN 13 Tti •%iC
0 cc Z o4n, a - ~
p 0 T w ~
3 ~
o ~ .
~ ~ ► r .
TH vE 1 M
At ,~in I S i ~ --~-MCI= CemVltry, P'n, 0
~ T 1:1000
. . . _ . ~ . - - ~
. ~2 6-0*Aw-e~l
V
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
P I ATIO '
Certircate of Exctaption No.: Application No.:_L4~ LL7 - C~
Namc of Applicant:1.1~>AL-%. JzJ*k.5gJ'j L-Lv
Strcet Address: ZSn Pp12-u-~T~''~iL- 1;~ v n' Zip Phone - Homc:
City: ISE Stato: i Q. Codc: 61140 Woric:
Agants No.
N amc of Property Owner(s_J4&)L~-AN~~ &Yll ~t'J r
Strcet Address: ?,ip qq gob Pbone • Home:
City: 5~10 Qh[P. Statc: Coda: ti 1 work:
REQUESTED AC'CI4N(S) (Circle appropriate acuon):
Coaditional Usa Pcrmit,. Nonconforming Lot/Usc
f Violation Tomporary Usc/Structurc Othor:
F R~'AFFiU E ONL-Y CODE: ORDINANCE ulations Scction(s): ~ ~ ► V g V ~
~~tc Reg . , ~te
Proper ~~~Enfolation/
Section: Townshipv~~` Ran ge:~ Size: orcemant: YCN
t `
Existing Zoning: Comp. Plan Dcsignation:
I.EGAL
PSSA Y N UTA:O N ASA Y N FIRE DIST.~,~" , CHECKED BY:--,~~
~
Hearing Date: ~.q_ ~ Personnel Taking in Application: ~
Existing Use of Ptoperty: a40C<-04'e 0..UJTQ?. fo
Describe Intended Proposal in Terms of REQUESTED ACTIONS above:__U,41 ~ ~r L
5JgZ4&4C- 7W
74 -a.'~
~
Strcct Address of Propcrty: '
Legal Dcscription of Property (include easement, if applicable):
to
~G = Le? ~
Lt? - LE4q•4b" ~04- -r4O L~ ' O 77
_ ..\1.~,~.tt
Pa rc el No (s): !S&C Sourco of Lc g a al I~1 V~ ~
~
-
Tocal amount of adjoining land controllcd by this owncr/sponsor: GQ. FT +
What intcrest do you hold in thc propcrty,?,~ '[J±f TJt,i&Pr
~ ~ ~?~~1.~ ~ ~ ~!s~.~ ~a 5~.
Pleasc list previous Planning Dapartmeat actions involving this property: T i~
Tkfr- M I N I8V MWM •'T'o ~/~v*77 t,.l /'J~
i SwEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERNRY, THAT: (i) : AM T1~ OVFINER OF RECO O
AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED SI'I'E; (2) IF NOrT THE OWNER, WRI[TI'EN
PERMISSION FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHAi.F IS
ATTACHED: AND (3) ALL OF THE ABOVE RESFONSES AND THOSE ON SUPP'ORTI G
DOCUMENTS ARE MADE TRLTHFULLY AND EST OF O E.
Signcd: • -~-t.~
- - - ~r- - Address: 250 Parkcenter Blvd. , Boise, ID 83726
-"Phone No.: (208 ) 385-6343 Date: 6/23/89
.
ty~~
4' -:v`O''AR Y Sr~i.L: Notary: ~r/ 7~
^
~ Datc: 6/23/89
My comn.is'sion expires : 9-28-94
Page 1 of 4 (Over) Revised 3-4•88
A. BU_ RDE_;, OF PROOF
It is _ncccssary for the applicant or his/her rcprescntativa to cstablish the rcasons
why thc REQUESTED P:CTION should be approved and to litorally put forth the basic
case. AccoTdingly, you should have been given a form for your requested action
-(yariancc, conditional usc, ctc.) dcsigncd to hclp you present your case in a way
which- addresscs the critcria which the Zoning Adjustor must considcr. Plcasc fill
thc. fonm out.-and return it with your application. If you did not get a form. ' ask the
Planning Departmcnt pcrsonncl for advice on how to proceed.
~SIGN-OFF BY COCINTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTH .R AG.N _I .S
01. ('OCINTY HEAL.TH DISTRICT a) Proposcd mathod of watcr supply: G(~ ~
• b) Proposcd mcthod of scwagc disposal:
,
A prcliminary consultation has becn held to discuss the proposal Thc applicant
has bcen informcd of rcquircmants and standards. ~
(SignatuTC) (Date) (Sig f V~aivcd) ~TY ENCINEERINC DEPARTM .NT
~
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. w The applicant
has_ _ h if rme of r uirements end standards. No ~EE
(S'g aturc) (Datc) (Sign-off Waivcd)
'3. UTILITI _S D_PARTMFNT (Waivo if outsida WMAB)
[ J A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The
applicant has becn informcd f r quirements and standards.
A / . ' ( r Z
'
(Signaturc) (Date) (Sign-off Waivcd)
(]~LThc applicanc is r rcd to discuss the proposal with
to bccomc informed of water system
rcquiramcnts and standards.
( l V~The a licant is rc ' p' cd t• discuss the lroposal with
to bccomc informed of sewage disposal
rcquiramcnts and standards.
,~VATFR P1IRVFVnT2• (W •
C a) The proposal locatcd within the boundary of our future
~ scrvicc arca. . , .
b) Thc proposal ' locatcd within the boundary of our currcnt
distri t.
C) c able to serv
c 's sita with adcquate watcr.
d) ;na tis ctor a ngcments ~ been made to servc this
o os
( re)(Dat (Sign•off Waived) .
5. SEWFRAr . P 1RVFY0RT
(If other than Spokana County)
A prcliminary consultation has been hold to discuss the proposal.
Thc applicant has been informed of requir7gn~bff an tandards.
(Signaturc) (Date) Waived)
Page 2 of 4
a
. L APPLICANT'S FORM - - '
NAME : r~ ~~~C~'S► -
FILE: -
. . s.. -
I. VARIANCES - ' . .
Wi 11 the vari a e authori ze a use otherwi se prohi bi ted i n this zone?
Yes ; No Comment: . . . .
. . , . . , ~ , r . ~ , , . . , . : . . . ,
B. Wi 11 speci al ci rcumstances a 1 i cabl e to the roert f such as si ze,
~ shape, topography; surround ngs when combine w t7he standards of
the Zoning Ordinance, create practical difficulties for use of the
property and/or depri ve the property of ri ghts and. pri vi 1 eges common
to o her properties in the vicinity and similiar:zong classification?
:
Yes ; No' ; Comment:
3 ~ o" ~1 I , ~3~►':~ ua . . ~
r~ &CX0
C. Will the granting of the :.variance be material~ly.4detrimental''to, -the public welfare or injurious to pr p ty-or improvements in the.,
vi ci ni ty ,-and zone? Yes No ; Comnents
`I s . - s,.~ I 'q\• /~I O ' 1' A~•~•,I,', .
`r~~. . f~_~ ~~'-nv ' . ~ ~ . , • .t•` , ' . N' . .
`
~ D. Does. strict application of the zo in% standard, create an unrea onable
burden in light of purpose to be served by the standard? Yes ~ ;
No ; Comment: 8'
. . . , _ . .
~ - • . . .
~
/
E. Would relaxation of the zoning standard make a more environmentally
sensitive or energy-conserving project or encourage continued or new
use of an historic property? Yes No. ; Comment: _M~P
. t
,
~ • ~ .
~
F. Will,a broader, public need or interest be served by grantin verse
denyi ng *the vari ance? Yes No . ; Comment: ~ ~
~ '~'r~"`.~ Q~ ~ ~V.~l''~~~C~ •
G. I s the case for a vari ance supported by other 1 i ke or simi 1 ar
si tuati ons i n the vici ni ty and i n simi 1 ar zones? Yes ; No
Comment:
s-ro~• JO~NT A a$ ~ I M i L44L-- 70 7084Lm
~
(continued on reverse side)
'l
H. Will granting the variance adversely affect the overall zoning design,
plan or concep for either the imnediate area or the entire County?
Yes ; No ; Comment:
I. Is the case for a variance substantially based upon a lack of
reasonable economic return r claim that the existing structure is
too small? yes ; No ; Comnent:
~ T~- ' . . i~ •
~ J. Wi 11 granti ng the vari ance be i nconsi stent wi th the general purpose
and intent of the Comprehensive Plan? Yes ; NoComment:
K. Did the practical difficulty which gives rise to the variance request
exist before the property was acquired by the present owner? Yes
No ; Comment: ' ~ta~ 1'Tt vr•J r,
1,.''
-~r • Lc~~~oN , I vs,
L. Will the granting of the variance result in defacto zone reclassifica-
ti on; that i s, the establ i shi ng of nearly al l the pri vi 1 eges conmon to
a different zone classification? Yes ; No Comment:
M. Does the requested vari ance resul t i n the ci rcumventi on of, de ~si y,
regulations designed to protect the Aquifer? Yes ; No ;
Conr~ent: . '
0046z/Arch. 0002z 2