VE-07-90
-4
ZUNING AllJUSTOR
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IlV THE MATTER OF A VARIANCE FROM )
SIGN SIZE AND PLACEMENT ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
REQUIREMENTS [VE-7-90] ) CONCLUSIONS,
R. W. ROBIDEAUX AND COMPANY ) DECISION AND ORDER
ADDRESS: N. 1510 ARGONNE PARCEL NUMBER: 17554•0727
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: Applicant rcqucsts approval to locatc two
additional detached signs of 104 square feet cach approximately 1 foot from the
east and west propcrty lines for tcnant idcntification, whereas Scction 4.09.125 (b)
of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance rcyuires that no sign shall be located in
any strcet or alley nor project more than two feet into any required yard; (D) the
aggregate gross area of all permanent exterior signs for any one business or use
shall not exceed 1 1/2 square feet in area for each lineal foot of principal street
frontage occupied by the use; and (d) permanent exterior signs for individual
establishments shall, when exceeding 40 square feet in area, be placed flat against
the building facing a street, the accessory parking area, or pedestrian mall.
Authority to consider such a request exists pursuant to Section 4.25 of the Spokane Counry
Zoning Ordinance.
PROJECT LOCATION: Generally located east of and adjacent to Argonne Road
and approximately 200 feet south of Mission Avenue Road in the NW 1/4 of Section
17, Township 25N, Range 44EWM Spokane County, Washington.
OPPONENTS OF RECORD: NONE
PUBLIC HEARING:
After consideration of all available information on file, exhibits submitted, an on-site visit and
testimony received during the course of the public hearing held on April 11, 1990, the Zoning
Adjustor rendered a written decision on May 1, 1990.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The proposal is described above.
2. The adopted Spokane County Comprehensive Plan designates the area of the proposal as Major Commercial. The proposed uses are generally consistent with this category
and an upgrade of the zoning to a11ow the requested signs is available. `
3. The site is zoned Local Business, which would allow the proposed use upon '
approval of this applicaaon. The Zoning Adjustor notes that the existing signage on this
property was allowed through a previous variance, VE-170-80. The current proposal is to
expand upon the present signage. The basis of the request is to keep up with identification
♦
CASE NO.VE-7-90 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 2
needs of the property, however, the property is not disadvantaged any more than other
propemes which obtained rezones.
4. The existing land uses in the area of the proposal include professional offices, gas
stations and other commercial uses, all of which have signage associated with them.
5. The pmposal is exempt from the provisions of the Washington State Environmental
Policy Act, Chapter 43.21 C RCW pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
6. The applicant has been made aware of the recommendations of the County
Engineer's Office requirements in reviewing this project and has indicated those
recommendations are acceptable.
7. The proper legal requirements for advertising of the hearing before the Zoning
Adjustor of Spokane County have been met.
8. No adverse public testimony or written comments were received regarding the
proposal.
9. That the applicant has ind.icated the total signage in question would be allowed in
1991 with crossover zoning.
10. The Zoning Adjustor notes that other signs in the area are larger than proposed by
the applicant. In many instances these signs were approved through a rezoning of the property
to B-2 or B-3 zones or which were approved prior to the Asthetic Corridor Policies of the
Spokane Counry Comprehensive Plan adopted in December of 1988.
11. The property already has had one variance approved and approval of larger signs is
appropriately the subject of a rezoning acrion which would allow larger signs and at the same
time take into consideration the Comprehensive Plan policies which seek to maintain the
aesthetic character of the Argonne Mullan corridor.
12. In total, the applicant is asldng for 208 square feet of signage in the Local Business
Zone which has much more restrictive standards. See Spokane County Zoning Ordinance
4.09.125. If the applicnt can demonstrate that the project will comply with the B-1 zone when
totally completed then the project is approved. If the applicant is unable to demonstrate
compliance with B-1 standards then the project is denied.
DECISION
From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Zoning Adjustor APPROVES
the proposal subject to complete compliance with the B-1 signage standards.
II. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING & SAFETY
1. The issuance of a building pernvt by the Department of Building and Safery is
required.
w
~
CASE NO.VE-7-90 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 3
III. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
1. Sewerage facilities are not affected by this proposal, therefore, we have no
recommendations.
IV. HEALTH DISTRICT
1. Spokane County Health District has waived plan review input.
V. SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE
1. The proposed signs shall not be constructed within or extend into the County Road
Right of Way. Total Right of Way width in the vicinity of the subject property appears to be
50 feet. Prior to construction of the sign the applicant shall check with the office of the
County Engineer to determine the location of the County Right of Way adjacent to the
property.
NOTTCE: PENDING COMPLETION OF ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH
NEED TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, PERMITS CAN BE
RELEASED PRIOR TO 7'HE LAPSE OF THE TEN (10)-DAY APPEAL PERIOD.
HOWEVER, THE COUNTY HAS NO LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES AND
INCONVENIENCE INCUR.RED BY THE APPLICANT IF THE PROJECT APPROVAL IS
OVERTURNED OR ALTERED UPON APPEAL.
DATED this 1 st day of May, 1990.
.
/j,~ .
DOU LAS S. ADAMS
Zoning Adjustor
Spokane County, Washingtocl
FILED:
1) Applicant (CertifiedlReturn Receipt Mail)
2) Paraes of Record
3) Spokane County Engineer's Office 4) Spokane County Health District
S) Spokane County Urilities Department
6) Spokane County Department of Building & Safety
7) Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 1 8) Planning Department Cross-reference File andlor Electronic File
~
.
CASE NO.VE-7-90 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADNSTOR PAGE 4
NOTE: ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FII.E AN
APPEAL WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNING.
APPEAL MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A$100.00 FEE. APPEALS MAY BE FILED AT
THE SPOKANE COUNTY PLAN1vING DEPARTMENT, BROADWAY CENTRE
BUILDING, NORTH 721 JEFFERSON STREET, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Sections
4.25.090 and 4.25.100 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance).
t .
G
F~1 c1 q . Per m i t F-e e N o. F i 1 e NO~~
~
I='r~~~ J L,t Na me
~-7,;, P~~ rce1 N►-O. Z
Ad ci r ~ s: s
f 1 S s N c=i f Tl e P h : "in C? #
AA?r ~ E~r~U 3. nE~E?r / Sur vey~~ors~ i t~~~ ~ s Nam~
Te.l eph-Dne #
F'] ar1ni nq 1; c+nt act F'er san
Datr~ Subma.tted Desc r ip t i~_~n In at ials
, . . ~
,
0;~, ' 2 . ~ ~ ' i
4 - <<r PLANNING DEPARTMENT
~ BROAOWAY CENTRE BUILOING N 721 JEFFERSON STREET
PHONE 456-2205
.a t r ~ i
•^ti - SPOKANE, WASHINGTpN 99260
Si'OKANE COUN7Y COURT NOUSE
RTO'II'IIcCIE (DIF SIPOKARIE ~~UNTZY 7L0I4IIIYG AIIDJUSTOIIB PUBILIIC HEAIRIIMG
DATE: April 11, 1990
TIME: 10:15 a.m. or as soon thereafter as possible
PLACE: Spokane County Planning Department
2nd Floor Hearing Room, Broadway Centre Building t, ~s
North 721 Jefferson Street
Spokane, WA 99260
i
AGENDA ITEM 4
F1lC: VE-7-90 ! _ t ws{ ib
VARIANCE FROM SICN SIZE AND PLACEMENT REQUIREMENTS
Il O C A T I O N: Generally located east of and adjacent to Argonne Road and approximately
200 feet south of Mission Avenue Road in the NW 1/4 of Section 17, Township 25N, Range
44EWM Spokane County, Washington.
P R O P O S A L: Applicant requests approval to locate two additional detached signs of 104
square feet each approximately 1 foot from the east and west property lines for tenant
identification, whereas Section 4.09.125 (b) of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance
requires that no sign shall be located in any street or alley nor project more than two
feet into any required yard; (D) the aggregate gross area of all permanent exterior signs
for any one business or use shall not exceed 1 1/2 square feet in area for each lineal foot
of principal street frontage occupied by the use; and (e) permanent exterior signs for
individual establishments shall, when exceeding 40 square feet in area, be placcd flat
against the building facing a street, the accessory parking area, or pedestrian mall. .
EXISTING ZONING: Local Business COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Major Commercial
SITE SIZE: Approximately 41,500 square feet
APPLICANT: R. W. Robideaux and Co.
John Johnston, Agent
W. 421 Riverside •
Spokane WA 99201
ITEMS CARRIED OVER FROM PREVIOUS HEARINGS MAY BE HEARD FTRST, POSSIBLY
CAUSING DELAYS. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND PROJECT DETAILS FOR THESE PROTECTS
ARE AVAILABLE 1N THE PLANNING 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.)
~
d~
.
.
• SPOK;ANE COUNTY PLANMVG DEPART'MENI'
~jwTTON4 BEPORp Tf~ 20NIlNC3 AD~? 1S'~'[)R/~OARD OF AnICTSTAIENT
Ccnificacc of Examptioa No.: Applicatioa No.:.,~-
Name of Applicant:.Rw ~~~k eehL'x ~ C o pg~tION,~oh~
Street Address: W''~a1~ Rl u tv $L~~;, 53.s ?2y
Zip Phone - Homo:
City: Statc: Codc: CG~o 1 Woric:
Agents No.
Namc of Property Owncr(s): tk~. \vA c.
Strect Address: E G- oY 16Q
Zip Phone • Home:
City: ~~W1"1/y ~ State: ~aa~•4 Code: Work:
RE STED ACTION(S) (Circle appropriatc acdon):
ariancc(s Conditioaal Use Pcrmit _ Noaconformiag Lot/Usc
~ o Violation Temporary Use/Scructure Other:
.
FOR STAFF USE ONLY . GODE: ORDINANCE
~
Cite Ragulations Section(s): -11,09•
roparty ~,,Violation/
Sectioa:-L-1 Towaship:y2s Range: Stze: yL,-~-od Enforcemcat: Y~
Existing Zoae:-&Z Coinp. Pian Des.:- - Crossover
~ LEGAL
PSSA:Q N L'fIAQN ASAO-N FIRE DIST.; r CHECKED BY: ~
Hcaring Datc: Parsonnel Takiag in Applicatioa:
Exisung Usc of Propcrty:j (--a A ,&-'L~/
Describc Intcnded Pro osal in Terms of UE TED A ONS a ove:
\ o p ~J!-~~ e ~ ~ ~g-~S e ~
'
Z\ 4 ae ~ 1 O ~ 4. t~ ~=e ~e V t,~ C\,.~~ F ~ t t, Vt o't,~
%\qa ~n~ o ~n.-c ~ -c.. b{,%V U cL
r
Sueet Address of Property: Y1~ ~~P N4~ q o u v 'e,
Legal Descriptioa of Propeny (include esaement, it applicabla): 'a r •
e
8c.,:, 7he w 5~~. 4h~ F ss
N
,
Parccl No(s)j T~`{r4 Source of I.agal:
Total amount of adjoiaing land controllcd by ihis owncrlsponsor:
W'hat intcrest do you hold in thc property?
Please list previoua Plaaning Department actions involving this proporty:
:Ir' / "-7 d ` 76
I SWEAR, LTNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM 1'HE OWNER OF RECORD OR
AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED STTE; ('Z) IF NOT THE OVVNER, WRMrEN
PERMISSION FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZINC MY ~TIONS ON HIS
AITACHED: ALL OF THE ABO RES TH G
DOC~ , TR Y TO O E.
. 1
. .
~~Q►,b~ VGA t~,~~~:~;~~~ lr Signed: ~ ~
Addtess: Y\ l ~ A 14~.
a-s-qa
Phonc No . ~ atc:
b• . ~
NOT . • iuKE~•• Notary.
p~ 1~.,...• •
Date:
Pagc 3 of 4 (Over) Revised 3=4-88
•
• .
H. wi 11 granti ng the vari ance adversely affect the overal l zoni ng desi gn,
pl an or concept for either the imnedf ate area or the entl re County?
Yes ; No ; Cortment: "'Ckx-s
I. Is the case for a variance substantially based upon a lack of
reasonable economic return o a clalm that the existing structure is
too small? yes ; No ; Comment:
,
t, ~ . •
-
J. Wi 11 granti ng the variance be i nconsi stent wi th the generai purpose
and intent of the Cortiprehensive Plan? Yes ; No ; Comment:
~ -
,
Y _ • + 1
'1 ' j ♦ , K. Oid the practical difficulty which,glves rise to the variante request
exist before,the property was acquired by the-present owner? Yes
'No ; Coament:
.,L. , ,
. , , • V
• G ~ ' • y 1 Ir l
L. Will the granting of the; variance _result in defacto ioae reclassifica• ,
ti on; that-1 s;.°the establ i shi ng of nearly a11 the ri vi1 e9es common to
a different ione.,clpssification? :Yes ; No ; Comnent:
. = - • . . , a ~
- , . -
. . .
, .
R•
. ^ l
M. Ooes the requested vart ance resul t i n the ci rcumventi on of densi ty
regu lat ions des igned to protect the Aquifer?. Yes ; No ;-Coment: = - . ' ' i - 'J • '
i ' .
'
00462/Arch. 0042z 2
i
►
l
e 1
+4
. . .
APPLICANT'S FORM
NAME : ` ct o ~ ~ .
,
FILE:
1. YARIANCES . A. Wi 11 the vari ance authori ze a use otherwi se prohibi ted i n thi s zone?
Yes ; No ; Coament: • ~u aCS e^ S%c~ l`~ ~Q. 1 e 40 ~ 0 4.~ Z~~.1 eti.
w
~,a
, . .
r7~0~,5~~ o ~e ~ .e ~ t-Qk
. . ~ .
. tl y. _ B. Will speciat circumstances a licable to the ro ert (such as-size,
shape, topograpty, surround ngs when comBine w t the , standards of
the Zoning Ordlnance;",create practical difficultiea for use of the `
property and/or deprive the property of ri ghts and pri vi 1 eges comnon
to other properti es i n'the vi c1 n1 ty and simi 1 i ar zone , cl assi fi cation?
Yes No ; Gortment: . ~.~''..,~~cps so4.''~► 'Ls,~. ~ 04~ Vo~.~d
Twff• c~, ~t~c~►~~ . l~ v\ o„~ C~c~c~.. ~F
i~,►~~ ou. wc c o ♦
j ~ 004 a ~
o~..~~~ c°w►vyet, c
iii r•` _ , ..s , i
s ~c,~,jp~~ c~, w ~-c ~,c ` .
C. Wi 11 the rantlnQ of thQ varianco be materially dotrimental to' the .
publ ic~re~fare or f njur1 ous to pro erty or improvements i n, the vicinity and-Yes ; No'. ; Comnents:
• ~f ~ - . _ q . . 'i~
r t. „ti
Vt, cri v b 4Lset,~ µro~~,~~.
' `t,~ C-, Isk c~\AaAt kv. <<1,~1,< ~ ~v~ v%uVZ , . .
.
0. Ooes strict applicdtion of the zoning standdrd create an unreas nable
burden in 11ght of purpose to be served by the standard? Yes ;
No ; Cowent: tlk~'<' V.C,~0ti.S 01% ha
- . ,
~
~c CO~ S~t kk t3'. L e~►C4.\ot. -~o.
,
4
~441t • ~ IL6 ~ft%%&_
E. Woul d rel axation of the zoni ng standard make a more. envi rormental ly
senst ti ve br energy,-conservi ng project or enc rage conti nued or new •
use of an historic property? Yes ; No Comne~t:
F. Will a broader, public need interest be served by 9ranting verse
denying the variance? Yes No ; Comment:
. •
~,u~, 6-t ek&~, iC'b ~ C
Is the case for a variance supported by other like or similar
si tuati ons in the vi ci ni ty a nd i n simi 1 ar zones? Yes No ;
Comnent:
(continued on reverse side)
s • , a • ' ~il,', ♦ a .
A. BIJ$j2ErI QF PROOF
It is neccssary for the applicant or his/bcr rcprasentativa to cstablish the reasons why the RFQUEST'ED AC"TION should bc approvcd and to litcrally put forth the basic
casc. Accordingl•yr~you should havc bccn given a form for your rcquested action
(variancc, condffi9pJP'4tse, etc.) designed to help you present your case in a way
whi addrasse* tbc, cr`toria which the Zoning Adjustor must consider. Plcasc fll
the ~ orpn - out apd r, ~urn`it with your application. If you did not get a form, ask the
Plar,ning DepaiEmea~; p7sonnel for advice op how to proceed.
' . : B. ~ . ~
. . ,
s i•r
' .
1
a) Proposed method of watcr supply:
b) Proposcd method of sowagc disposal:
A prcliminary coasultation has been hold to discuss the proposal. Tha applicant
has becn infonned of requirements aad standards.
(Signature) (Date) (S' ff Waivad)
4 2
A preliminary c;onsultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant
h been inform d of requirements and standards.
~
el 9
~
ignaturc) (Datc) (Sign-off Waivcd)
3. (_'OLINTY L1TIL.ITIES DEPARTMF.NT (Waivc if outsidc WMAB)
•
[I A prcliminary consultation has bcon hcld to discuss the proposal. Thc
applicant bas been informed of requiremonts and standards.
(Signaturc) (Date) (Sign-off Waivcd)
Thc applicant is rcquirod to discuss the proposal with
to bccomc informod of water /
rcquircmcnts and standards.
Thc applicant is required to discuss the proposal with
.to becomc informcd of sewage disposal
rcquiremcnts and standards.
4. W AT _R P 1R .YnR ~ (%V• •
a) The proposal is/'ocatad within the boundary of u f uro
scrvica arca.
b) The proposal isli_ s not located within the bouadary o our currcnt
district.
c) We are/are not able to servo tbis site with adequate water.
d) Satisfactory arrangcmeats have/have not been made to serve this
proposal.
(Signaturc) (Datc) (Sign-off Waivod)
5. SEWERAGE P 1RVFVnR:
(If other than Spokaaa County) A prcliminary consultation has been held to disc the proposal.
Thc applicant has been inforaied of requirements and standards. ~
,
(Signaturc) (Data) (Sign-off Waivcd)
Pagc 4 of 4
.
-...,.Q ~ ~ .
r,~.. . .
[ • /
' • SPOK:ANE COUNTY PLA►NNING DEPART'MENT
~pP'L-ICATIONS B,__EPOBE THE ZOh= AAD]C1S'I'OR/ROARD OF ADJLISTT,~'EI~I'T
Certificatc of Exemptioa No.: Application No.:,-1_/,.,45'
Name of Applicant: ~Ob ~~~x 4 G o AgentoN Street Address: W,41D1Rku c v1t:i.3e
Zap Phone - Home:
City: State: Codc: Qq`o1(o t Work: ~'s~~>%-'Zcy'7d
" Agcnts No.
Name of Propcrty Owncr(s): ~ ~ ~ • l\AG
Street Address: 4E:R.61- ~>dY169
Zip Phone - Home:
City: ~~►h~~v~`1 StStC: taa\%0 Code: Work:
I
Zv ESTEDACTION(S) (Circte appropriata aciion):
a n c e( s Conditional Use Permit Nonconforming Lot/Use r o Violatioa Temporary Use/Structure Othar: FOR STaFF USE O CODE: ORDINANCE
Cite Rcgulations Section(s):
Property Violation/
Section: Township: Range: Size: Enforcemeat: Y N
Existing Zonc: Comp. Plan Das.: • Crossover
LEGAL
PSSA: Y N UTA: Y N ASA: Y N FIRE DIST.; CHECKED BY:
Hearing Date: Porsonncl Talcing in Application:
,r
TExisting Use of Property: •
Describe Intended Proposal in Terms of REQLTESTED ACI'IONS above: W~ v~q
. l c
-t>et k► ~.av<
,
~~C~ Vt~ e~n.,e G t,. ~ ~ c~ v~,t,~t,e ~-t b~-~ at-. ~ C~. ~,~,2'~V~ •
.
Street Address of Property: Vl-~ ~ ~ ~ p o XnM -2...
Legal Descriptioa of Property (include easement, if applicable): Parcel No(s): Source of Legal:
`Total amount of adjoining laad controlled by this owner/sponsor: .
V'~hat interest do you hotd in the property? V
e~G~~ ~"C.~
~
Ploase list previous Planning Dcpartment actions involving this property:
/`r d -76
I SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OR
AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED STTE; (2) 1F NOT THE OV'VNER, WRITTEN
PE;RMISSION FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZINC3 MY ONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF IS
ATI'ACHED: AND (3) ALL OF THE ABO RES TH SUPPORTING -
DOCUNTINTS ARE MADE TRLrf Y TO O KN4 E.
Signed:
Address: V\ %5i 144~
Phone No.; Date: a-S "a d
NOTARY SEAI.: Notary: Date:
Page 3 of 4 (Over) Revised 3-4-88
. . ' • ~ 1
A. BIIRDEN OF PROOF
It is necessary for the applica.nt or his/her representative to establish the reasons why the REQUESTED ACTION should be approvcd and to Iiterally put forth the basic
case. Accordingly, you should have been given a form for your requested action
(variance, conditional use, etc.) designcd to help you present your case in a way
which addresses the criteria which the Zoning Adjustor must consider. Please fill
the form out and return it with your application. If you did not get a form, ask the
Planning Department personnel for advice on how to proceed.
B.
1
LUE
a) Proposcd method of water supply:
b) Proposed method of sewage disposal:
A preliminary consultation has been hold to discuss the proposal. The applicant
has been informed of requirements and standards.
(Signature) (Date) (Sign-off - Waived)
Z ,
A preliminary c.onsultation, has been held to discuss - the proposal. Tha applicant
h been~ •inform d of requirements and standards.
10 ' q -,G -9 o
ignature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived) 3. COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT (Waivo if outside WMAB)
[I A prcliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The
applicant has been informcd of requirements and standards.
, (Signature) (Date) ` (Sign-off Waivcd)
. r ' .
The • applicant is required to discuss the proposal with
' to bocome informcd of water j
requirements and standards.
The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with
to bccomc informcd of sewage disposal
requirements and standards.
~ 4. WATER PIIRVFYnR~ (W
a) Tbc proposal ' locatod within thc boundary of u f urc
scrvice aroa.
b) The proposal is/is not located within the boundary o our current
district. '
c) We are/are not able to serve this site with adequate water.
d) Satisfactory arrangemonts havelhave not becn made to sarvc this
proposal.
(Signature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived)
5. SEWERAGE PL1RY EYORr
(If other than Spokana County) [ j A preliminary consultation has been held to disc the proposal.
The applicant has been informed of requirements and standards.
(Slgnature) (Date) (Sign-off Waivcd)
Page 4 of 4
a
,
o
~ . • . ~
. _,,~t •
H. Will granting the variance adversely affect the overall zoning design,
p1 an or concept for ei ther the imnediate area or the enti re County?
Yes ; No ; Comment: -ttzx-s
6, ~\A 1ctq1. ,
I. Is the case for a variance substantially based upon a lack of
reasonable economic return o a claim that the existing structure is
too smal l? yes ; No ; Cortment: `
J. Will granting the variance be inconsistent with the general purpose
and i ntent of the Comprehensive P1 an? Yes ; No Comment:
t '
~
K. Did the practical difficulty which,gi,ves rise to the variance request-
exist before the-property was acquired by,the present owner? Yes
'No ; Comment:
t . u .
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 ri vi1 eges comnon to
a different zone classification? Yes ; No ; Comment:
.
~
.r
M. Does the requested vari ance resul t i n the, ci rcumventi on of densi ty
regulations designed to protect the Aquifer? Yes_ No
` Cortment: .
. - -r :
f
.I
0046z1Arch. 0002z 2
t
✓ - i
1
~
.
r
APPLICAN7'S FORM . NA►ME : G o z
,
FILE:
, I. YARIaNCES u
A. Wi 11 the vari ance authori ze a use otherwi se prohi bi ted 1 n thi s zone?
Yes ; No ; Comnent: ~ - ,
eL.
`
~.a 4 ~~Wo~a ~.a~.~~. ,,~c.~
4, • ,
B. wi 11 speci al ci rcumstances a 1 icabl e to ,tthe ro ert ( such_.as _si ze. .
,shape, topography, ,surround ngs when com~ ne w t the standards of
the Zoning- Ordi nance; create practical d~i f f i cul ti es for u se of the.. property and/or depri ve the property of -,r_i ghts and pri vi 1 eges common
to other properti es i n the 'vi ci ni ty and `•simi 1 i ar zone cl assi f i cati on?
Yes No ~ Co1Tient: o' i.~~zKPS soc.,"~ 'ZC,t
~c c,ti-~.
Cee~~n. d"~' tacv.T~
o~•.1~~ wes ` o ~ rt~.~ ~o o MS_ cnw~,,,,eu ci~~
`
zov~. c~o~, 3..~%da5 W V~o u vNc 1~aas,' :
C. wt11 the granting of the-variance be materially detrtmentat to the
publ i c wel fare or i njuri ous to pro erty or improvements i n the
vi ci ni ty and zone? Yes ; No". ; Comments :~e
. . .
.r
tAJo v..1 ~-V&crk \Aoa,~lh c %"e..
't~ ~ s~ 4~•c, -c c~ ~ Ev t. `e ~~t t~ ~~.'~1,~ w l~ CA,..c.. h,~, ~ o tr.
v • ~
D. Does strict applicdtion of the zoning standard create an unreas nable
burden in.,light of purpose to be served by the standard? Yes
No ; Comment: ~.vr,~,w~ vx~.ce.~ ~~.vmk..L
c~,~ ~•~.~~o,ks
b cc c~.~-c c 4.~0~. ~o
ac.a:
E. woul d-' rel axation of the zoni ng standard make a more envi ronmental ly
sensi ti ve or energy-conservi ng project "orenc rage continued or new
~use of on hi stortc property? Yes ; No Comnent:
4 .
•Y r
F. Wi11 a broader, public need ~r interest beiserved by granting verse
denyi ng the vari ance? Yes ; No - i`;, Comment: •a_ ,
- - - ,
• C~ G~.~~ _ ~cAtiS~` c~,S
1Z
G I s the case for a vari ance supported by other 1 ike or simi1 ar
si tuati ons i n the vi ci ni ty and i n simi1 ar zones? Yes No ;
Comment:
,
(continued on reverse side} -
~
. ~ ~ . ,
\
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
March 27, 1990
TO: SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Current Planning
Administrator)
FROM: SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER
SUBJ: VE 7-90 / Robideaux
re: Variances
The County Engineering Department has reviewed the above referenced
application. The following comments are offered for inclusion in
the Findings and Order as "Conditions of Approval" should the
request be approved.
The proposed signs shall not be constructed within or extend into
the County Road Right of Way. Total Right of Way width in the
vicinity of the subject property appears to be 50 ft. Prior to
construction of the sign the applicant shall check with the Office
of the County Engineer to determine the location of the county
Right of Way adjacent to the property.
. .
~
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
March 27, 1990
TO: SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Current Planning
Administrator)
FROM: SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER
SUBJ: VE 7-90 / Robideaux
re: Variances
The County Engineering Department has reviewed the above referenced
application. The following comments are offered for inclusion in
the Findings and Order as "Conditions of Approval" should the
request be approved.
The proposed signs shall not be constructed within or extend into
the County Road Right of Way. Total Right of Way width in the
vicinity of the subject property appears to be 50 ft. Prior to
construction of the sign the applicant shall check with the Office
of the County Engineer to determine the location of the county
Right of Way adjacent to the property.
, .
~ _ _ . . - \
1 - , o-
~ p• ESrI~ 0 Mi1 t woeo
. ~
A
L~-_- < I ~ x , ~u~.y
VRA
SARG T p ~ • 1G`NT ~
I T
~
su iTC
.
;
ARGQNN ROAO
C R P 968A MULLAN R-OAD
ROAD
iLLOW
, t
Z a
YZ L ~
Z L U '
LO C u T bpE~wd ~
D
< ROl1
* ~ ~
' ~ gchool c ~ unOtR t ~
VA i ROAO
F ~ .
. ~
ROAO WA +NUT RD ~ wAL+4 s
RALD R p~► ~ ~ M <
~ot ~ <
~ ! { Z 1
,
F LTS fELTS
~ a
o
~
. 1 , . "~1 ' ►
ROI►0 .
~/~f~~I~IAA' \~ur• • .
. i
. ~
I ~
' D,F
~
BI i ~~~~r+. b+sa.hY
~
_ Z
~
~ L ~ • - - 5~~ LrnS. P-r. rzco
~s ~ SHRI~
PT 9"CK .
~to ~i .`~x, [3Ka-D. PT. (►5 `fou,.o~
~
~ ~
. ~
~
Picr. PT, ovAcAc.-
,
i i ► + ~
~ . . - .
r ~
I '
, i.
_ ~La~
I I'~
- ~
f ~
! ~ •
t ,
~
T~.I 3-A~..
OV,
. ' /
. . . .
""~-"'p R - . ~.r..' •."°"-"'""..y4-
i
~ - - ~A55~ . ' ~ - . - - -
..T• = -
La
J
72
4
~ vi
QC
kc>
~
, ;
~
. , ,
159
;
, ` .
u• ~ c. f~' -
1
~
~
~
. o ~