CUE-3-95
~
~ WAII
m RECElVED
ZONING ADJUSTOR MAY 16 1995
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
Coumy Engineering
IN THE MATTER OF A CONDITIONAL ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
USE PERMIT FOR A HOME INDUSTRY ) CONCLUSIONS,
(retail sales of crafts and antiques) ) AND DECISION
APP WWNW..' ' '~y Simonson (Watson)
„
FIL ~
COM NION FILE(S): CV-222-94
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: The applicant seeks to establish a home industry for an
existing business of retail sale of antiques and crafts in a detached structure. The applicant also
resides at the site. Section 14.616.240.4 of the Zoning Code of Spokane County allows this
use upon issuance of a conditional use permit. Authority to consider such a request exists
pursuant to section 14.404.100 of the Zoning Code of Spokane Counry and Spokane County
Board of County Commissioners resolution No. 89 0708, as may be amended.
PROJECT LOCATION: Generally located in the Spokane Valley, north of and adjacent to
Wellesley Avenue, approacimately 960 feet east of McDonald Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 34,
Township 26N, Range 44EWM; 13409 E. Wellesley Avenue, Spokane, WA. Parcel No.:
46344.0832
OPPONENTS OF RECORD: Tom Tupper
PUBLIC HEARING AND DECISION: After consideration of all available information
on file, one or more site visits, exhibits submitted and testimony received during the course of
the pub.licearing held on April 12, 1995, the Zoning Adjustor rendered a written decision on
May ~p~~•, 1995 to APPROVE the application; restricted and conditioned as below.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Testimony was taken under oath.
2. The proposal is described above and detailed in documents contained in the file;
more particularly the following is significant:
a. The retail sales activity takes place on the ground floor of the existing barn,
minus the area on the south end of the barn devoted to a vehicle garage. The second
story level of the barn is presently not used for retail sales customer area.
b. Parking is presently located, east southeast of the barn in a somewhat restricted
manner, generally handling a maximum of 10 customer vehicles. The area is presently
lighdy graveled.
c. A 7 foot tall barrier fence partially exists on the north property line of the
property and is appazently intended to be erected along the entire north property line;
except that, the portion of the fence in the front yard of Keller Road should be no greater
than 3 feet, unless an administrative exception for a 4 foot height has been granted by the
Planning Division.
,
.
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 2
d. The hours of operation and days of the week of operation are presendy
respectively restricted to 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m, Tuesday through Saturday.
e. There presently exists an unlighted sign at the east edge of the driveway. The
sign exceeds the sign size for the zone and must necessarily be adjusted in size at some
future date. The sign shall not exceed 4 square feet on a face. (Zoning Code:
§ 14.616.240.4.d.ii.) There are no other outward indications of the business; that is, no
window d.isplays or outside displays.
f. The square footage of the barn and the existing residence are consistent with the
standard located in the Zoning Code for the respecrive size. (Zoning Code:
§ 14.616.240.4.b.)
g. The house and the barn (housing the retail establishment) exists today much as
they have for decades; with the exception that the barn has recendy received a new roof
and exterior paint Without cars parked near the barn, the property looks much as it has
in the recent past one or two decades.
h. The property is located on the north side of Wellesley Avenue, approximately
midway between Forker Road and McDonald Road. A visual survey of that stretch of
Wellesley Avenue shows approximately lO large, barn-like accessory structures on both
sides of Wellesley. This is an addition to the old Knights of Columbus structure located
across the street and slightly west of the subject property.
i. The subject property also has a large garden plot on it, not unlike other
properties in the area.
j. The driveway appearance is common and ordinary, with a lightly graveled
surface.
3. The adopted Spokane County Comprehensive Plan designates the area of the
proposal as Urban. The proposal is generally consistent with the Urban category of the
Comprehensive Plan and complies with RCW 36.70.450. The following is from the Urban
section of the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan. _
a. Under "DETAII,ED DEFINTI'ION: B. Characteristic Features: The presence
of neighborhood commercial business is described as acceptable to be found with the
predominant residential uses.
b. Under "bETAII..ED DE;FINTTION: D. Non Comparible Uses: There are few
land use activities that would be inappropriate in the Urban category; but the text goes on
to say that "major commercial" uses would not be compatible within the Urban area.
Major Commercial is a defined term referring to Division Street strip-type commercial and
shopping centers.
c. Major Commercial users are specifically described as not being comparible
within the Urban area. The proposed home industry is not a Major Commercial use.
NOTE: The land use is primarily a residential use with a proposed accessory, limited
activiry business operated subordinate to the primary residential use.,
HD/CUE-3-95 Simonaon (Watson) .
w
r .
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOK:ANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 3
d. Objective l.l.i describes'home occupations' as being allowed provided they
are non-disruptive of neighborhood amenities.
e. The Comprehensive Plan defines 'cottage industry' in its glossary in fairly
broad terms. 1'he Comprehensive Plan addresses cottage industries in the Energy
Management section, encouraging conservation of all forms of energy. The present
operation is consistent with the definition of 'cottage industry' contained in the glossary
of the Comprehensive Plan insofar as it: is clearly incidental to the residential use of the
property; is of a small-scale; does not generally change the residential character of the
property (most properties in the area have outbuildings including bams and storage
sheds); is conducted in such a manner as to not give the outward appearance of a
business in the ordinary meaning of the term; and is an opportunity for employment
performed primarily by occupants of the residence.
4. The site is zoned Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5), which allows the proposed use
upon approval of this application. Minimally, the applicant must meet or be capable of ineeting
the standards of section 14.616.240.4 of the Zoning Code of Spokane County, the section
pertaining to the conditional use pernut for a home industry. This section contains
subparagraph "a" through "i". The standards of subsection "b" though "i" are very objective
and measurable. The applicant either meets these standards and/or is easily capable of ineeting
them. However, 14.616.240.4.a is a subjective standard the property shall retain its
residential appearance and character. In an effort to clarify the purpose and intent of the
home industry concept and to assist in deterniining if the property retain(s) its
residential appearance and character. the definitions of key words from Webster's
Colleeiate Dictionarv, lOth Edition are:
residential: of or appropriate for residences
residence: the place in which one lives
appearance: definition of outward aspect
character: a distinctive feature or aspect
5. The existing land uses in the area of the proposal include a range of lots from about
1/3 of an acre to a little over one acre. Typically, uses listed as a conditional use are assumed
as permitted in the underlying zone, subject to the listed standards and any other conditions
needed to assure comparibiliry in the given instance. But, pursuant to 14. 404.101, the
requested cond.itional use pemut may be denied if the Hearing Body cannot find that the
requested use will be compatible with other permitted uses. Section 14.616.240.4 lists certain
standards to achieve compatibility, some of which the Hearing Body may exercise nominal
discretion over in order to achieve the overall intent of compatibility with suirounding
properties. Clearly, 14.404.102 allows the Hearing Body to impose any and all manner of
additional conditions and requirements in an effort to achieve maximum compadbility. In the
instant situarion, the existing retail operational is alleged to have caused considerable
inconvenience and adverse impacts to the property adjacent to the north (Tupper), as
documented in Exhibit 4. Although the fence recently erected by the applicant, along the north
property line which separates the applicant from the neighbor immediately to the north, has
alleviated a substantial portion of the inconvenience, the following inconveniences are alleged
to remain.
HIDlCUE-3-95 Simonaon (Watson)
.
~
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SFOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 4
a. A perception of the feeling of the invasion of privacy on the part of the Tuppers
exist in the three center windows on the west side of the barn.
b. The presence of automobiles relatively close to the common property line is a
continued nuisance to Tuppers; not so much visual as audial.
c. As viewed from the Keller Road end of the Tupper driveway, looking toward
the applicant's barn and house, automobile traffic is visible and a nuisance factor with
respect to the business activity.
6. Regardless of whether this conditional use permit is approved, a substantial concern
remains as to the volume to which this business might grow in the future, thereby, changing
the nature of the activity over time. If it is approved as it is presently operated and thereby
found to be retaining the residential appearance and character of the neighborhood, how will
this decision be able to ensure that the property will hereafter maintain its residential appearance
and character? The only answer would seem to he the limitation of the volume of business
conducted at the site in terms of the number of visits per day or customers at one time.
7. Subsequent to the hearing, the Zoning Adjustor inspected the property again for the
sole purpose of viewing the Tupper residence from inside the craft shop. The view through the
window from the office area in the northwest corner of the barn has no gerception of the
Tupper residence, due to the 7 foot tall sight-obscuring fence. Views from the windows in the
shop also were mostly obscured by the 7 foot tall fence. There was neazly no leafed-out
foliage on the deciduous trees and the bare branches and the coniferous trees obscured, as
viewed from the inside of the shop, nearly the entire Tupper residence. The most visible part
was a portion of their east facing shingled roof. The photo views presented by Tupper from
his home are not distinguishable in reverse as viewed from the shop towards the house.
Having said that, there is nonetheless, on the part of the Tupper's, a feeling that their privacy
has been and is being still invaded. Mr. Tupper has proposed a simple solution of lightly
frosted glass on some of the windows. Apparently seeing such frosted glass would render any
perception of invasion of privacy neutral, in his opinion.
8. The applicant was brought into the permit system through a complaint Complaint
file CV-222-94 is made a part of this record. It was clarified to the applicant in the hearing that
the sign for the home industry needs to conform to the standard of the Zoning Code. With the
adjustment of the sign, the granting of the Conditional Use Pernut could eliminate the validiry
of the complaint, insofar as the Conditional Use Permit withstands appeal.
9. The applicant may possibly have established this business without a Change of Use
Pemut or Certificate of Occupancy for the building from the Spokane County Division of
Buildings. The record dces not so reflect one way or the other. Consequently, there may be
requirements associated with the access with respect to such issues as wheelchair access,
handicap parldng identification and the possible need to provide public restmoms, etc. On the
other hand, some of these provisions may not be applicable due to the limited volume of
business being carried on at the property. Such decision rests with the Division of Build.ings.
10. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, the environmental checklist and
other data have been reviewed and the project has been found to not have any pmbable
significant adverse impacts to the physical environment. A Mitigated Determination of
IID/CUE-3-95 Simonson (Watson)
~
.
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SFOKANE COUNTY ZOIVING ADJUSTOR PAGE 5
Nonsignificance (MIDNS) was issued on March 13, 1995 and sent to ten (10) agencies and
parties of interest. T'he agencies reviewing the checklist neither indicated that a more detailed
environmental review should be provided nor commented that the MDNS should be
reconsidered.. Comments regarding the envirorunental matters were made at the public hearing
or in written testimony. There was not sufficient evidence presented pursuant to WAC 197-11-
340(3)(a) to withdraw the MDNS. Initially, there were some concerns regarding chemicals
that might be associated with refinishing fumiture and other processes that were suggested by
comments in the checklisL This resulted in a disclosure by the applicant that very little
refuushing was done at the site. The quanddes of chemicals are in orders of pints and quarts.
Because of the time consuming nature of furniture stripping, etc., almost all pieces are sent out.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Clearly, the proposal generally satisfies the performance standards suggested by the
phrase retains its residential appearance and character. as supported by the
following points; although, the sign will need to be reduced in size in order to conform with the
specific standard of the Zoning Code.
a. At and related to the specific residential site, including man-made improvements
and the general appearance of the environs:
i. "appearance" is defined as dealing mostly with "outward aspect." The
outward aspect of this property is consistent and compatible with properties in the
area; that is, its accessory building (the barn) looks not unlike other structures
throughout the area, if not more picturesque than the newer style metal-sided
buildings. The daily parking of several vehicles next to the barn, particularly on a
greater than 2 acre parcel of land, is also not uncharacteristic of the area.
ii. "character" is similar to "i" above-described appearance of the site. The
distinctive feature of a barn is completely consistent with the character of the old
cobble stone constructed house, the large mature trees, the large expanses of grass
(even with the small graveled parking lot), and the various garden supplies and
small storage shed accessory building in character with the barn. _
b. Off-site character and appearance:
i. two aspects of off-site appearance and character are the visual
impression of the property as viewed from Wellesley Avenue and Keller Road and
the business as viewed from adjoining properties. With respect to the views from
the road and the character and quality of the traffic on these roads, the views are
very characteristic of the area, as described above. The sign exceeds the standard
provided in the Zoning Code; but, can he reduced in size and not be offensive.
Traffic will be generated by the continued operarion of the craft store; but, traffic is
fed to the site by Wellesley Avenue, a nunor arterial. The residential property to the
immed.iate southeast, has fenced its property, which effectively blocks the view of
any busy acriviry at the craft store site, and furthennore registered no complaints
with respect to the continued operation of the craft store. On the other hand, the
Tupper property to the immediate north advanced strenuous objections to the
HDIcvE-3-95 sixnanson (watson)
,
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOK:ANE COUNTY ZONING ADNSTOR PAGE 6
activity of the craft store. That objection was substantially reduced by the 7 foot tall
fence which was erected on the north side of the property, with Tupper
acknowledging a great reduction in inconvenience and intrusion. The Tupper
farnily still feels a potential for visual invasion of privacy from the three interior
windows of the craft store and have asked that these windows be "frosted" in order
to eliminate their (Tupper's) perception that their privacy is being invaded. This can
relatively cheaply be done without an adverse, detrimental effect to the craft store
business.
ii. The Tupper family also urges that automobiles be kept south of the
property line, to a location approximately even with the steps leading into the
present craft shop, in order to lessen the sound of car doors slamming and people
talking or laughing as they may come and go from the shop. The concern that
remains with respect to this off-site character and appearance is the degree to which
the business could grow and expand before becoming inconsistent with the
character and appearance of the neighborhood. Control of this measure can best be
maintained by requiring a continual renewal of the permit, with no permanent status
-being possible, and reviewing the level of traffic at the renewal time. Additionally,
the best control of this seems to be control the amount of parking by requiring that a
more formal parlang lot be established, with defined limits to the parking lot and a
requirement that no business parking be allowed in the public right-of-way or in an
area streetward of the rear of the house. That is, that the driveway be kept clear of
vehicles from the back of the house to the street. Consistent with comments made
by the applicant in the hearing, the parking lot should be prepared to handle no
more than 8 cars, plus maneuvering space, generally in the area east and southeast
of the barn. On rare occasions some parking may occur between the rear of the
house and the barn.
Although the proposal, mitigated as suggested above, will not significantly alter
the surround.ing area, and may only slighdy impact the specific locale, it is unrealistic to
expect 'no effect' from the proposal. The law does not require that all adverse impacts be
eliminated; if it did, no change in land use would ever be possible. Miranatha Mining,
Inc. v. Pierce Cy, 59 Wn. App. 795, 804, 801 P2d, 985 (1990).
c. The facts do not support a claim of a loss of'residential appearance and
character,' on-site or off-site, sufficient to deny the application. The legislative
assumption (the presumption of validity) is that a listed conditional use permit can, in
most cases, be made acceptable by complying with the required standards and make
conditions of approval. The burden of proof otherwise rests with the opponent(s). The
opponent(s) are not persuasive in this respect.
2. In order to maintain residential appearance and character, in almost every sense of
the word, it will be necessary to limit the impacts on the neighborhood, particular the Tupper
property to the north, by establishing certain performance and prescriptive standards beyond
which the business activity is not entitled to advance. These include, but are not limited to,
such items as hours of operation, frequency of deliveries, hours of deliveries, noise, parking
locarion, parking lot definition, visual privacy of the property to the north, etc. '
HD/CLTE-3-95 Simonson (Wataon)
r ,
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOK:ANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 7
3. The Comprehensive Plan, with which every proposal should show general
compliance, is clearly supportive of the home industry (cottage industry) concepL The
Comprehensive Plan generally requires compliance through various plans, policies and
regulations, which is the purpose of the hearing and this decision. Barrie v. Kitsap C'y, 93
Wn. 2d, 1148 (1980). The Plan was used for the development of the Zoning Code, which in
turn authorizes conditional use pernut for home industries under certain qualifying conditions
and circumstances.
4. Some aspects of a home industry were not raised as concerns or aiixieties by those
in opposition. However, experiences shows that issues of parking, deliveries, problems
existing with employees arriving and departing from the site, hours/days of operation, etc.,
need to be dealt with to maintain residential appearance and character. The primary use in the
area and the intent of the zone is for residential purposes. Any businesses run in the area
through a conditional use permit must be subordinate to and consistent with the primary
residential uses of the area These include mitigating measures, as appropriate, as were listed
in the Mitigated Detemvnation of Nonsignificance (MDNS) issued by the Planning Division
and agreed to by the applicant, on March 13, 1995. This also includes a condition to require a
covenant agreement with respect to supporting a petition for a sewer iJLID in the future. It
also includes provisions to pave the parking lot area, striping it with paint and including rire
stops to keep cars contained within the parldng lot area. The parlcing lot area must comply with
the '208' storm water drainage requirements for a parking lot.
5. The proper legal requirements for advertising the hearing before the Zoning
Adjustor of Spokane County have been met.
6. The Zoning Adjustor may require such conditions of approval as necessary and
appropriate to make the project most compatible with the public interest and general welfare.
7. Various performance standards and criteria are additionally neederi to make the use
compatible with other peimitted activities in the same viciniry and zone and to ensure against
imposing excessive demands upon public utilities, and these shall be addressed as conditions
of approval.
8. The proposal, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to surrounding properties.
9. The proposal does not impose excessive demands on public utilities.
10. The proposal, as conditioned, is compatible with uses pernutted outright in the
zone. ,
DECISION
From the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the Zoning Adjustor
APPROVES the proposal, subject to compliance with the following
HID/CUE-3-95 Simonson (Watson)
ti
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 8
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. GENERAL
1. The following cond.itions shall apply to the applicant, owner and successors in
interest and may run with the land at the discretion of subsequent owners.
2. Failure to comply with any of the conditions of approval contained in this decision,
except as may be relieved by the Zoning Adjustor, shall constitute a violation of the Zoning
Code for Spokane County and be subject to such enforcement as is appropriate.
3. The Zoning Adjustor may a.dministratively make minor adjustments to site plans or
the conditions of approval as may be judged by the Zoning Adjustor to be within the context of
the original decision.
II. DIVISION OF PLANNING
1. The business may only continue to be run while parcels B and C of SP-87-481
remain in common ownership and no residence is constructed on parcel C. The business also
may not operate if the barn and the house are allowed to deteriorate into disrepair and neglect,
as judged by Planning Division staff.
2. The proposal shall comply with all applicable standards of section 14.616.240.4 of
the Zoning Code of Spokane County unless deviations, variances or exceptions have been
lawfully granted. Parcels B and C of Short Plat SP-87-481 must also comply with the
underlying standards of the UR-3.5 zone, all as set forth in Chapter 14.616 of the Zoning
Code.
3. This permit expires on June 1, 1997 unless renewed under the following terms:
a. The property and the business shall continually have demonstrated compliance
with conditions of approval 1 and 2 above, the standards of the underlying zone, tbe
standards of the conditional use permit section of the Zoning Code, including a revised
sign size, and the following terms and conditions listed hereafter.
b. The applicant shall apply for renewal no later than the expiration date.
c. Property has been inspected by the Planning Division staff and a review of all
complaints of record shall have occurred.
d. Any initial administrative detemlination to renew the pernut shall be sent to
adjacent property owners, with a description of the right to appeal such administrative
deternunation.
4. Additional improvements or alterations of the site shall consist of the followirig and
be installed within 90 days of the final disposition of this permit, unless adjusted by the
I?ivision for weather interference:
HD/CUE-3-95 Simonaon (Wauon)
~
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADNSTOR PAGE 9
a. The applicant shall cause the west facing windows of the public areas of the
shop to be lighdy frosted, sufficient to distort the vision of anyone looking from the
inside to the outside.
b. The upstairs part of the barn sha11 not be used for any public places. The
ground floor shop area shall not be expanded beyond its present square footage, with
respect to publicly accessible square footage.
c. The building and house shall be maintained in a similar general overall quality
and appearance as they exist in at the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, generally
as depicted in file photographs of the present day situation.
d. No business or delivery vehicles or customers shall park or stop longer than a
few moments in the area between the rear of the dwelling unit and the street. A small
paved parlang lot shall be developed in the area generally east of the barn, in the general
area of the present gravel. The parlang lot shall be striped and have a physical banier
capable of stopping vehicles from proceeding east onto the lawn. Curb stops or a fence
shall be erected sufficient to keep automobiles from occupying space north of the steps to
the shop. The parking lot may provide for a maximum of 8 car parks and shall be striped
and drained into a qualifying, engineered storm water maintenance swale, designed to
comply with storm water drainage swales to protect the aquifer. Adopted storm water
management standards shall be used for the design. The suggested parking lot design is
a row of automobiles parked in front of the east facing "porch" of the accessory building
with a travel way and another row of car parks which would face toward the east. An
overflowing parking lot is not acceptable and the Planning Division may administrarively
require remedies to restrict the customer load.
e. The 7 foot tall fence shall be extended westerly to Keller Road, dropping to a
maximum of 4 foot height as it approaches Keller Road, consistent with the legal front
yard, as defined by the Zoning Code, of the Tupper property to the north. The fence
shall be maintained in goai repair and in an appearance similar to its present state,
including periodic maintenance of the north side of the fence unless such maintenance
would be perceived as detrimental by the property owner to the north.
f. No security lights may be erected on the west or the north side of the accessory
building. Any security lights placed on the south or east side of the accessory building
shall be of a down light design, no more than 20 feet in height and designed to not allow
any light to spill onto adjacent properties.
5. The craft shop may be may be operated any five days of the week except Sunday.
The hours of operation shall open no earlier than 9:00 a.m. and sha11 not be opened any later
than 6:00 p.m.
6. The Planning Division may make any administrative adjustment to any of the
conditions of approval as the Division sees fit in order to maintain residential appearance and
character, including linutations to restrict the volume of business if the volume of business
grows to the point of threatening the residenrial appearance and character of the neighborhood.
7. If the Division of Planning believes there are extenuating circumstances associated
with the renewal of the permit, it may cause there to be a public hearing and reconsiderarion of
I-IDlCUE-3-95 Sunonson (Wauun)
c
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 10
the permit. The notification expense shall be that of the county if such reconsideration takes
place.
8. The I?ivision of Planning shall prepare and record with the Spokane County
Auditor a Tide Notice noting that the property in question is subject to a variety of special
condirions imposed as a result of approval of a land use action. This Title Notice shall serve as
public notice of the conditions of approval affecting the property in question. The Tide Notice
should be recorded within the sarne time frame as alloweri for an appeal and shall only be
released, in full or in part, by the Division of Planning. The Tide Notice shall generally
provide as follows:
The parcel of property legally described as is
the subject of a land use action by a Spokane County Hearing Body or
Administrative Official on , imposing a variety of special
development conditions. File No. is available for inspection
and copying in the Spokane County Division of Planning.
III. DIVISION OF BUILDINGS
1. The applicant shall contact the Division of Buildings in order to be informed of code
requirements administered/enforced as authorized by the State Building Code AcL
Design/development concerns include: FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS; FIRE
HYDRANT/FLOW; APPROVED WATER SYSTEMS; BUII..DING ACCESSIBILITY;
CONSTRUCTION TYPE; OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION; EXTTING; EXTERIOR
WALL PROTECTION; AND ENERGY CODE REGULATIONS.
2. The applicant shall comply with any requirements of a Change of Use pernut or
Certificate of Occupancy. If neither are necessary, the Division of Buildings shall file an
explanatory memo with the Planning Division indicating that no additional permits are
necessary to carry on the business of a craft shop.
3. The Division shall require IV.2. below prior to issuance of permit(s).
IV. DIVISION OF UTILITIES
1. Pursuant to the Board of County Comnussioners Resolution No. 80-0418, the use
of on-site sewer disposal systems is hereby authorized. This authorization is conditioned on
compliance with all rules and regulations of the Spokane County Health District and is further
conditioned and subject to specific application approval and issuance of pernuts by the Health
District.
2. The Owner(s) or Successor(s) in interest agree to authorize the County to place their
name(s) on a petition for the formation of a ULID by petition method pursuant to RCW 36.94
which the petition includes the Owner(s) property and further not to object by the signing of a
protest petition against the fonnarion of a ULID by resolution methal pursuant to RCW
Chapter 36.94 which includes the Owner(s) property. PROVIDED, this condition shall not
prohibit the Owner(s) or Successor(s) from objection to any assessment(s) on the property as a
HID/CLJIE-3-95 Simonaon (Wataon)
r
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOK:ANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 11
result of unprovements called for in conjunction with the formation of a ULID by either petition
or resolution method under RCW Chapter 36.94.
3. Any water service for this project shall be provided in accordance with the
Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended.
V. SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
1. Sewage disposal metliod shall be as authorized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane
County.
2. Water service shall be coordinated through the Director of Utilities, Spokane
County.
3. Water service shall be by a new/an existing public water supply when approved by
the Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Health.
4. Subject to specific application approval and issuance of permits by the health
officer, the use of (an) individual on-site sewage disposal system(s) may be authorized.
5. Disposal of sewage effluent beneath paved surfaces is currently prohibited.
VI. DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND ROADS
None is needed.
NOTICE: PENDING COMPLETION OF ALL CONDIfiIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH
NEED 'PO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PERMTT IS SUANCE, PERMITS MAY BE
RELEASED PRIOR TO 1'HE LAPSE OF T'HE TEN (10)-DAY APPEAL PERIOD.
HOWEVER, THE COUNTY HAS NO LIABILITY FO XPENSES AND
INCONVENIENCE INCURRED BY THE APPLIC IF TBE PROJECT A.PPROVAI, IS
OVERT'URNED OR ALTERED UPON APPEAL.
DATED ttus day of May, 1995.
THO S G. OSHER, AICP
ning djustor
Spok e Coun _ , Washington
FILED:
1) Applicant (Certified/Return Receipt Ma,il) 2) Opponents of Record
3) Spokane Division of Engineering and Roads ,
xn/cLW,3-95 simonson (w,tson)
~
~
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 12
4) Spokane County Health District
5) Spokane County Division of Utilities
6) Spokane County Division of Buildings
7) Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 1
8) Division of Planning Cross-reference File and/or Electronic File
NOTE: ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FII.E AN APPEAL WITHIN
TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF'THE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNIIVG. APPEAL MUST BE
ACCOMPANIED BY $215.00 FEE APPEALS MAY BE FILED AT 'I'HE SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION
OF PLANNING, PUBLIC WORKS BUII,DING, 1026 W. BROADWAY AVENUE, SFOKANE, WA 99260
(SECTION 14.412.042 OF THE ZQ ODE FOR SFOKANE COUNTY). DEADLINE FOR
APPEAL IS 4:00 PM ON ~?-!o
HD/CiJE-3-95 Simonsoa (Watson)
~
r ~ .
~
~
S P O K A N E C O U N T Y
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WALLIS D. HUDE3ARD, DIRECTOR
~
MEMORANDUM
- t
TO: PARTIES OF INTEREST REG G CUE-3-95
FROM: THOMAS G. MOSHER,
Zoning Adjustor
DATE: 6/26/95
SUBJECT: RECONSIDERATION OF CONDI'I'ION OF APPROVAL II.4.d. OF THE
MAY 16, 1995 DECISION
The applicant in the above case has requested a reconsideration of the condition of approval which
required a small paved parking lot to be developed in the area generally east of the barn. She has
presented a reasoned approach addressing air quality, storm water management, aquifer protection
and physical appearance of the parking lot (in keeping with residential appearance and character).
The attached, amended decision, establishes a change of the parking lot requirement to not require
a paved parking lot. Although the rest of the decision stands unappealed as it has to date, this
particular change in condition of approval is in and of itself appealable under the conditions and
terms set forth at the bottom of the amended decision.
hrd
Attachment
1026 WEST BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANG, WA51fINGTON 99260-0240 •(509) 456-2205 • FAX: (509) 456-2243 • TDD: (509) 324-3 I fib
r
ZONING ADJUSTOR
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF A CONDITIONAL ) AMENDED
USE PERNIIT FOR A HOME INDUSTRY ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
(retail sales of crafts and antiques) ) CONCLUSIONS, •
AND DECISION _
APPLICANT: Penny Simonson (Watson)
FILE: CUE-3-95
COMPANION FILE(S): CV-222-94
RECONSIDERATION REQUEST & BACKGROUND: The applicant requests
reconsideration of a portion of condition of approval II.4.d. of the Zoning Adjustor decision .
dated May 16, 1995. This request urges reconsideration of the requirement for a small paved
parking lot and proposes instead a gravel parking lot.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The May 16, 1995 decision of the Spokane County Zoning Adjustor approves the
Conditional Use Permit CUE-3-95. Condition of Approval II.4.d. addressed a requirement for
a small paved parking lot as follows.
d. No business or delivery vehicles or customers shall park or stop longer than a
few moments in the area between the rear of the dwelling unit and the street. A small
paved parking lot shall be developed in the area generally east of the barn, in the general
area of the present gravel. The parking lot shall be striped and have a physical barrier
capable of stopping vehicles from proceeding east onto the lawn. Ctiirb stops or a fence
shall be erected sufficient to keep automobiles from occupying space north of the steps to
the shop. The parking lot may provide for a maximum of 8 car parks and shall be striped
and drained into a qualifying, engineered storm water maintenance swale, designed to
comply with storm water drainage swales to protect the aquifer. Adopted storm water
management standards shall be used for the design. The suggested parking lot design is
a row of automobiles parked in front of the east facing "porch" of the accessory building
with a travel way and another row of car parks which would face toward the east. An
overflowing parking lot is not acceptable and the Planning Division may administratively
require remedies to restrict the customer load.
2. The applicant requested reconsideration of the paved parking lot requirement by
memorandum dated June 6, 1995, including attachments. The justification for the request is as
follows:
a. Air quality: If the purpose of the paving requirement is to control dust, dust can
be controlled by via the periodic addition of a dust palliative.
b. Storm water management: Paving is a permanent addition to the landscape,
which deprives the soil immediately beneath it from receiving water. The impervious
surface also requires collection and management of storm water, to one degree or
another. Alternatively, graveling a similar sized area would allow a less permanent and
somewhat pervious surface, which would allow infiltration of some water. The parking
lot would be less of a defined area, likely being partially grass and partially gravel in
.r .
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 2
areas where use was minimum; thus, better blending the parking area into the residential
character of the area.
c. Aquifer protection: The area of the proposed parking has approximately a 2%'
grade, lending itself to a natural drainage process in the surrounding grass areas. -The
very hardest and most compact areas will drain through areas where the soil is not so
compact and will allow the infiltration of water through the gravel and grasses into the
ground. [NOTE: The Zoning Adjustor does not subscribe to the applicant's position that
gravel itself is a natural filter of pollutants from parking lots; at least not in the manner
intended by the storm water management policies of Spokane County with respect to
parking lots. Nonetheless, the degree of likely pollutants flowing from or through this
parking area will be relatively insignificant, as long as the volume of business does not
become too large. The relatively small lot and other conditions of approval are intended to keep the business volume relatively small.]
d. Limited customer parking areas and alternative design: The applicant proposes
to limit the size of the parking area to a similar size as was proposed by the Zoning
Adjustor decision. The applicant also proposes to enhance the area with some additional
landscaping and "3-rail" fencing to create natural barriers just north of the steps leading
into the barn/shop and just east of the existing gravel parking area. NOTE: A sketch
proposal (not to scale) was included.
3. The applicant concludes the supporting case by stating that her alternative proposal
will better maintain the residential appearance and character of the area, as compared to black
asphalt, yellow parking stripes and tire bumpers and, further, that paved parking lot
requirements detract from the visual image of the property's residential appearance and
character.
4. The applicant's proposal is for a gravel parking lot approximately 100 feet in the
east-west direction and to within an area just north of the steps leading into the shop/barn. The
applicant's sketch is not to scale. The applicant's proposed parking area, as applied to the site
plan of record would provide for substantially more than the maximum of 8 car parking spaces
provided for in the May 16th decision.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The applicant makes a reasonable case for a modification from a paved parking lot
to a graveled parking lot.
2. The applicant appears to show enlarging of the proposed gravel parking lot to a size
larger than the intended paved parking lot.
3. The gravel parking lot alternative is reasonable and should be approved; but, the
size of the lot will be restricted to approxunately the same size intended by the paved parking
lot area of the May 16, 1995 decision. The existing condition of approval II.4.d. will be
deleted and a revised condition of approval will be cited below.
HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson (Watson)
r
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 3
DECISION
The previously issued May 16, 1995 decision is hereinafter amended t.hrough the deletion
of condition of approval II.4.d. and its replacement with the following language and attached Exhibits A and B. II.4.d. shall read as follows:
No business or delivery vehicles or customers shall park or stop longer than a
few moments in the area between the rear of the dwelling unit and the street.
Thus, elinunating customer or delivery vehicles from stacking up and
congesting the driveway. A small gravel parking lot, approximately on the
order of attached exhibit A, shall be developed in the area east of the barn, in the .
general area of the present gravel parking lot. Its limits shall be outlined and
designated by a 3 rail fence, which fence may or may not have additional
landscaping on the north and east sides thereof; but, which shall have two
landscape islands as shown. The parking lot design shall generally follow that
shown in attached exhibit B, which shows the parking lot approximately 60 feet
wide allowing for two rows of 18 foot long parking stalls and a 24 foot wide
aisle. The suggested parking lot design is for a row of automobiles parked in
front of the east facing "porch" of the accessory building along with a travelway
and another row of parked cars which would face toward the east. An
overflowing parking lot on other portions of the property is not acceptable. The
Planning Division may administratively require remedies to restrict the customer
numbers if they become excessive and burdensome and threatening of
residential appearance and character of the area.
NOTICE: PENDING COMPLETION OF ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH
NEED TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, PERMITS MAY BE
RELEASED PRIOR TO THE LAPSE OF THE TEN (10)-DAY APPEAL PERIOD.
HOWEVER, THE COUNTY HAS NO LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES AND
INCONVENIENCE INCURRED BY THE APPLICANT IF THE PROJECT APPROVAL IS
OVERT'URNED OR ALT'ERED UPON APPEAL.
DATED this O~h day of June, 1995.
T MAS Gi OSHER, AICP
Zoning: Adjustor
Spokane Cou4ty, Washington
,
FILED: ~
1) Applicant (CertifiedlReturn Receipt Mail)
2) Opponents of Record .
3) Spokane Division of Engineering and Roads
4) Spokane Counry Health District
HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson (Watson)
r
CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 4
5) Spokane County Division of Utilities
6) Spokane Counry Division of Buildings
7) Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 1
8) Division of Planning Cross-reference File and/or Electronic File '
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 $215.00 FEE APPEALS MAY BE FII.ED AT THE SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION
OF PLANNING, PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING, 1026 W. BROADWAY AVENUE, SPOKANE, WA 99260
(SECTION 14.412.042 OF THE A G CODE FOR SPOKANE COUNTY). DEADLINE FOR
APPEAL IS 4:00 PM ON -77 5.
HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson (Watson)
.
1•1
- ~Co~• ~5
~
' ~ 1 C
' • /
•~~I ~ I • ' ' t ' ~
~ • ~ O ~
~ ~ ~ ~'r ~'1 ~
',r„ ♦ • ► ' r ~
~ 0~
.
` ~
~,'`y 5
~b ~
•
-
•
~
I y C~
~
.w ~ 0000=0
dp~
~ • + l~'
~
~
. ST AND ~''RD S
D~~i g,~~ 2
. • ,~NG EPTHS
, P A►R F1GU KING D G--
Two_.~,~A~, pAR
M~,NIMUNi 26,
.
.2
22' ~ ~ .
t , .
/ / ~
i
18 /,'~~j ~
, . 450
y 2~ ! j 300 I /f f/ .
. ~ J t ~ ~ " / ~
I,~
' 1
4~ ~
,
1 ' , 3
1?+ KOpuLE
1-
. 4-r 3 jNTE~'LQC
~ 3.6_IN'TERLOCK MQpULE
• _ 3~' t '
~ . 24, .
_ ~ .
9 oo . ~
~ , ,
cr.
o ~ J
. ~ . o - ,
1
y~' ► ~l ~ ~ Z 1 a, ~
~
. j
~K MoLS i8`.0" L•
~ 1N~'ERL - G STALLS W.5
. I40T To SCM-F-. .ng C,acie
7~nt
of Sokane Counh'
Page381 ~,--~~J
Ch3ptel 14.802 1995 c V E -
.p~nted,; FebruarY ' ~
. ~
. ~ CORRECTEO RE
► , ~1A
SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAI. ORDIrIANCE ecia~
(WAC 197-11-970) Section 11.10.230 (3) Mitigated Det~rinatioo af Nonsignific~ MENS)
MITIGATED DETERMIlYATIUN OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
FTLE NO(5): CUE-3-95
0~ V=====ft
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant seeks to establish a home industry for an existing
business of the resioration and retail salc of antiques and crafts in a detarched suucture in the Urban
Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone. The applicant also resides at the site. Secrion 14.616.240.4 of the
Zoning Code of Spokaae County allows this use upon issuaiice of a Conditional Use Permit
PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR: April 12, 1995 at 10:15 a.m.
PROPONENT: Penny Watson, 13409 E. Wellcsley Ave., Spolcane, WA 99216
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY:
Gcnerally located in the Spokane Vallcy, approximately 960 feet east of McDoaald Road, north of and
adjacent to Wellesley Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 34, Township 26N, Range 44EWM; 13409 E.
Wellesley Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216.
i.F D A*EN Y: SFOR;ANE COUNTY
The lead agency for this proposal has deoermined that it d+oes not have a pmobable significant
adverse impact on the environmcnt if nutigated as stipulated bclow. An Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) is =required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after
review of a completed environmental checklist and othea information on file with the lead agency.
This information is available to the public on roquest.
There is no comment period for this NIDNS; pursuant to WAC 197-11-340 (1).
(X) This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340 (2); the lead agency will not act on this
pmposal for at least 15 days firom the date issued (below). Comments regarding this
MDNS must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m., Apri17, 1995, if they are intended to
altes the NIDNS.
MIT CATINC MEASU ES:
1. The driveway, apcnn t,o the public road and public parlang areas shall be improved to
curreat engineering and fire appatatus suandards.
2. To easure adequate protection of the SpokauQe Aquifer and in accordance with Section
14.706 [Aquifer Sensitive Area Overiay (ASA) Zone] of the Zoni.ng C,ode of Spokane
County, the proposed activity, which consist of furnituit refinishing has been teutatively
designarred a Critical NZa,ttlial Use Acrivity. Privr to the hearing, the applicant shall provide
the County Planning Departmeni, the County Health I?istrict, the County F'ire District No.
1, the County Engineer-Water QualitY Management aad the County Division of Buildings
with a list of marerials, including quantities, to be used, handled, stored aad/or transported
as associatod with the proposed activity and demonstrate how these naterials will be stored
and uscd so as to not bc deuimental m the aquifer.
3. To ensure proper safety and fire standards are met, a Change of Use Pennit shall be
obtaincd from the County I?ivision of Buildings.
11D/CliE-3-95 'HDNS
~
ARM
BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAO
~
•<<.,, .
M&O
2000 First Interstate Crnter
999 Third Avenue
ENGINEERING DIVISION seattle. VVashinyton 98104-1 105
Mr. Skip Duty, President October 13, 1993
Cheney Rodeo Association '
P.O. Box 14
Cheney, WA. 99004
Dear Mr. Duty:
Bulls-Eye Driving Range, Inc. recently appiied for a private crossirig permit for a
crossing that would be jointly used by the Rodeo. By letter dated 7-22-93 we
informed Bulls-Eye Driving Range, Inc. the permit application was denied.
The proposed level of use by the Bulls-Eye Driving Range and the Rodeo has us very
concerned and that the crossing will no longer be used for which it was intended, as a
private crossing. We wish for you to have Spokane County take on the responsibility
in making this a public grade crossing. Have Spokane County petition the Burlington
Northern Railroad Company in creating a new public grade crossing. The Burlington
Northern Railroad owns the right-of-way and Spokane County will be required to
obtain an easernent frorn the railroad Por the proposed county road.
I
The Washington Utilities and Transpoctation Commission as well as ?he Federal
Highway Administration does not recognize the Cheney Rodeo crossing as a public
crossing. If the eombined use of the Rodeo and the driving range is allowed it will
be required that this crossing become public.
If you have further questions, please call me at (206) 467-3284.
Si erely,
~
' ~ .
. (Mike) Cowles
Coordinator Public Program
JMC
ee: Cleudie Martinez
Cruz Nicacio
Brad Kirnura
Bulls-Eye Driving Range, Inc.
15 Union Street
Cheney, WA. 99004
1 ~
iVlr. Skip Duty
October 13, 1993
Page 2
Robert Brueggeman
Trarfic Engineer ;
Spokane Public Works Dept.
1026 West Broadway Avenue Spokane, WA. 99260-0170
File: Cheney, WA. - General
~ ~ .
. 1 1
ENGINEER' S REVIEW SHEET
BLDG. PERMIT # -or -FILE# CUR-003-9-5--gs
~
Related File # ( } _S ~ Z/~/ ~
Date to Review 4-12-95 Time 10:15 # 3
Date to AA & DR Time
Date Received 3-14-95
Project Name HOME INDUSTRY SALE OF ANTIQUES/CRAFTS No. Lots No.Acres 3
Section - Township - Range
SITE ADDRESS ' N WELLESLEY 13409 E/E KELLER PARCEL # 34644-0832
Applicant's Name PENNY WATSON Phone # 922-4246
Address 13409 E WELLESLEY-SPOKANE WA 99216 Work #
Date Conditions mailed ?
Contact person ~ Phone #
FLOOD ZONE V NO W S SCHOOL
Engineer / Surveyor's / Architect's Name
Planning Contact Person Phone # 456-2205
Date Submitted Description Initials
AGREEN'IENT TO PAY FEES OR PRIORITY FEE COMPLETED & COPY TO ACCOUNTING
FINAL PLAT FEES COMPLETED & COPY TO ACCOUNTING
NOTICE TO PUBLIC # l 3 4 6 COMPLETED - OR IVEEDS TO BE SJGNED
DESIGN DEVIATION SUBMITTED
ALTERATION TO PLAT - BLOCKS & LOTS
BOND RFLEASED -ROAD & DRAINAGE IMPROVEMTNTS
HEARING EXAM _APPROVED _DENIED _APPEALED BBC / PROJECT _APPROVED _DENIED
BOND QUANTITIES FOR DRATNAGE ITEM CALCULATED
STAMPED MYLARS TO PERMIT TECHNICAN (SYL/SUZANNE)
STAMPED 208 LOT PLANS TO ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT (SANDY)
t
~
_6p\Areview. for
A MEMORANDUM
Milluin 5~~~~~ March 23, 1995
To: Zoning Adjustor
From: Scott Engelhard, project Coordinator
We have reviewed the file for CUE-003-95 and have no comments to make regarding the application.
Spokanc County Public VVorkc - llivision of Enginecring and Roads /W. 1026 }3rondway / Spokane, Washington, 99260 / 509-456-3600
~ • ' \
.
,
V
, r
i
1
S P O ~ A N E C U N T X
O
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WALLIS D. HUI3E3ARD, DIRECTOR
lYG'II'IICE C]F STOMANIE CONN'II'ZY 7LGfTIIRTG AD„I1NSTO1R IFNIBILIIcC 1HIlEAIIBIING ANIID
1FOIR'II'ffiICOFvIIIIRTG DIECIISIIGR1
DATE: April 12, 1995
TIME: 10:15 a. m. or as soon thereafter as possible
PLACE: Spokane County Planning Department RECEIVED
Commissioners Assembly Room, Public Works Building
1026 w. Broadway MaR 1:':1995
Spokanc, WA 99260
AGENDA ITEM 3 FILE: CuECPO ftneeriag
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A HOME INDUSTRY
LOCATION: Generally located in the Spokane Valley, north of and adjacent to Wellesley Avenue, approximaiely
960 feet east of McDonald Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 34, Township 26N, Range 44EWM; 13409 E. Wellesley
Avenue, Spokane, WA.
PROPOSAL: Applicant seeks to establish a home industry for an existing business of the restoration and retail
sale of antiques and crafts in a detached structure. T'he applicant also resides at the site. Secdon 14.616.240.4 of the
Zoning Code of Spokane County allows this use upon issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
EXISTING ZOIYING: Urban Residential-3.5 (LJR-3.5)
SITE SIZE: Approximately 3 acres
APPLICANT: Penny Watson
13409 E. Wellesley Ave.
- Spokane, WA 99216
WASHINGTON STATE ENVIROrTMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA):
Environmental Checklist and other data was reviewed and the pm}ect was found to have possible significant adverse
impacts to the physical environment. A Mitigated Determination of Non-significance (MDNS) was issued on March
13, 1995,on behalf of the Spokane County Planning Director, the responsible official under SEPA. The
Environmental Checklist, and MDNS and other information were sent to 9 agencies of jurisdiction or expertise and
identified public intere5t organizations. Comments regarding environmental matters will be accepted at the hearing.
Formal appeal of the NIDNS may be filed. Contact the Planning Departnent for details.
The hearing may break for lunch approximately 12 noon to 1:15 p.m.
Physically Disabled Access: All meetings and hearings witl be conducted in facilities which
are accessible to disabled individuals. For more information, please contact t6e Spokane
County Planning Department at (509) 456-2205.
NOTE: THE ZONIlYG ADNSPOR WII.L ISSUE A WRITTEN DECISION T'O APPROYE OR DEKY'THE ABOVE PROPOSAL.
ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONFNT OF RFCORD MAY APPEAL'IHE ZONIlVG ADJUS'POR'S DECISION AND MUS'T
DO SO WITHIN TIN (10) CAIENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF TI-E DECISIONS SIGMNG. APPEAI. MUST BE
ACCOMPANIED BY A$215.00 FEE FIL,ED AT THE PL.ANNING DEPARTMENT, PUBIdC WORKS BUIIDING,1026 W.
BROADWAY, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Section 14.412.042 of the Zoning Code of Spokane Counry). THE ABOVE
RFFERENCED FIlE MAY BE EXAMINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMEN'T.
1026 WEST BROADWAY AVCNUE • SPOKANC, WASHINGTON 99260-0240 •(509) 456-2205 • FAX: (509) 456-2243 • TDD: (509) 324-3166
~ . . .
• M • r SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
APPL.ICATIONS BEFORE THE ZONING AD.TCISTOR
Name of Applicant: _Pennu (~aA56n CSlMtk4gent: Y
~ o
Street Address: r1_ST 1~~0~ ~K\„P i S itu
'
~ I Zip Phone - Home: ~~~•~~v
City: State: (J-W Code: _cDc~al.SP 1Nork: sarne.
Agent's No.:
Name of Property Owner(s): ~ ~ ~~~QY1SOifl~ -
~ .
Street Address:
Zip ~ Phone - Home: 'C5n 1°aa,-1 -qaL40
Ciry: State: .1AA Code: °_lDc'g-) Cp Work: SG-me.
REQLJESTED ACTION(S) (Circle appropriate action):
Variance(s) Condidonal Use Pernut_.) Expansion of a
Other; Nonconforming Use '
FUR STAFF USE ONLY Violaaon/ 61, zzZ-•,y
Section-34'-( Township RangEnforcement: ~ N
•I.ot and legal checked by: •CWWP sewer purveyor:
•CWSP water purveyor: •CUP standards met: N N
•Existing zone: 3~S Cite applicab e section:_~~ •
•Comp. Plan designation:Uhi-AL •Arterial Road Plan design don:
•Fire District: ~ •Person doing preapp conf.:
•Other revioing Departmer} t a'ons involvin this ro rt
'
•Certificate of Exemption No.: App ication No.:
•Hearing Date: 10 •Site plan dimens,i~on~~n checked by:
_ --S ~~J!~..ZS?~ •
AI30U THE PR RTY/ by 8ppllC '
•Existing use of property:
•Desc 'be proposed se of the prpperty, notin chang rom'e tin use': '-tZ rACPOEEO
U.S tPAND~ '
•IF a variance application, state the Code standard and describe the vanance sought in comparable " p6936RTiot3,
tcrms (i.e., SO feet from centerline verses required 65 feet): 1.1/A
•If a conditional use permit application, does proposal meet all standardss'Y N
If not, has one or more variances been requestcd? Y N -
•What is the size of the subject property. `r0'r`AL nF Pkc&S A~t C i5 3uL5r"DE'2 3 ACY-EI.S.
•Streat address arpraperty (i`knowr,): __Ec^&'T 13409
•I.egal descripdon of property (include easement, if applicable):
UNEST FaYZ,nns iRg Pc,A~- *4 -rn $-ze~5? - 481 Aw!~ No 8-10GQ!+ oif3o
'~Fjt,NE, A PrN nF -p- 11-7 .
•Parcel No(s).: _ A(a344 . ~
•Source of legal: TAX eFccr~s PAM.El
•Total amount of adjoining land conorolled by this owner, s onsor andlor agent: ~geE~.'" C~{ (~3t~.t~33
•What interest do you (applicant) hold in the property7 ~t x1Y1PV
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) S S
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
I SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OR
AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED SITE; (2) 1F NOT THE OWNER, WRITTEN PERMISSION
FROM O ORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF IS ATTACHED; AND (3) ALL OF
THE S AND THOSE Or' UPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND
TO WLEDGE. '
~ ,%orv •gned: ate -L s3fi ~
c~ NO'fARY
PUBLIC e~ - !
N~ yA 9y P iff'and r the state of ashington, r' g at • e
Myappoientexpires: _ ~~5•
~
WApage 1 of 2
. .
7WAPP (REV.
r , '
~ .
A. BURDEN OF PROOF form(s) (by applicant).
It is necessary for the applicant or his/her representadve to establish the reasons why the
RFQUESTED ACTION should be approved and to literally put forth the basic azgument in favor
of approving the applicadon. Accord.ingly, you should have been given a form for your requested
action (variance, conditional use, etc.) designed 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
Q'ti it with your application. '
B. SIGN-OFF BY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES
(applicant must visit each agency whose no. is circled below)
' 1. SPOKANE COUIYTY HEALTH DIS'TRICT a Proposed method of water supply: -'-z4 .
b) Proposed method of sewage disposal: Qh ~S1 *er e,,
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has be'fonned
of requirements and standards. We request consultation with Planning I?epartrnent Y9.
1-26-~ 5 . .
• -(Signatugo' ' (Date) (Sign-off Waived)
~ _ . . _ . . . . ` .
~ SPOKANE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
"Enginec: c:ig & Roads Div:scan) . .
A preliminary consultadon has been held to discuss the proposal. -The applicant has been informed
of re' ments and stan ds. We request consultadon with-Planning Department Y N
~ r ~ ^
(Signature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived)
C3) SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT (Planning Department may waive
- if outside WWMA)
A preliminary consultadon has been held to d.iscuss the proposal. The applicant has been informed 'of requirements and standards. • . • ' ' ' - < ~ a~ q~ . . .
SVI" (Signature) (D~ ~te) ~ (Sign-off Waived bY Planning?) .
The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with ` j 2EX9M00 6 3-_~i2216 W i 1 O IV
to become informed of water system
requirements and standards. (See #a below) [yQ~ The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with SPe K410EAEqLTFj
to become informed of sewage disposal
requirements dards. (See #b below) ,
WAT PURVEY R: ,1 K,Eh9`r' ~JO~11 ~r?!Z t G4
q-a
The e roposal isrs not ocated within ' boundary of our future service area.
2) Th propos i ocated within ` Oe boundary'of our c~ent districL
3) W ab to 3erve this ~it 'th adequate water. '
4) Sa 'sfact arr g nts been made to serve this roposal. .
~ ~
(Signat e)
~ SEWERA URVEYOR: (&LLh ►2&vF2 Q~t wtG_
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has been
info of requiremen d standards.
(Sign e) • na t e)
. 5
, ' ' .
\ • • .
" . . . page 2 of 2 .
ZA/APP (REV. 4/94) •
~
f . ' . .
Spokane County Planning Department
Conditional Use Permit Application
Describe proposed use of the property, noting change from `egisting use':
We are applying for a Conditional Use Permit for a Home Industry - allowing me to
practice my profession, occupation and/or craft in a detached structure on our
property. We have a former da.iry barn building that we have refurbished and I
have set up a small shop in a portion of the inside area to sell items that I have
made, bought and refinished or purchased for resale.
In addition to free-lance writing, I am a Master Gardener and I grow a lot of
flowers and herbs. I dry these and create floral arrangements and craft items to
sell. Also, I buy used furniture and refinish/refurbish it and put it up for sale. In
the fall, I sell pumpkins to the kids and corn stalks for decorating. I buy folk art
and unique jewelry from local artisans and offer it for sale.
My operation is very low key and quiet. I do a minimum amount of advertising and
rely mostly on word-of-mouth customers from friends, family and neighbors who
come to visit me and enjoy the atmosphere I have created.
We feel that this is a marvelous use of an old building and a welcomed asset to the
neighborhood. We strive to maintain the residential flavor of the property and the
historic look of the barn. It is non-intrusive to the surrounding properties and the
neighborhood and community in general - in fact, we have received voluminous
support from the neighborhood because of our restoration efforts on the house and
barn and the enjoyable nature of visiting the shop in the barn and finding a
treasure to buy.
I am currently involved in a research project to have the property listed on the
local register of historic places because of the river-rock design on the house's
foundation as well as the history the barn plays in the agricultural background of
the Spokane Valley. If I am successful, this, too, would be an asset to the
neighborhood.
f . .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BURDEN OF PROOF FORM
Name: PCr1Yl Ia ~-~501', (SITYlOr1SOl'1>
.
File:
V. C'nND1TIONAL USES State Law, Secdon 36.70.020 (7), clarifies that the County
negulations must specify the standards and criteria that shall be
applied in the review by the Zoning Adjustor. Additionally,
condidon of approval may be added to assure compadbility with
other uses in the same zone.
A. Assuming the proposal is listed as a"permitted" conditional use, do you believe the
proposal meets all of the required, established and applicable standards?
41z6le-Lqa. Ur°, r~vlP '1Z 1~1.(0I (0 0Q ~-~nE z~tJ1►.ka C~pOe ~
l' D -QEEL,~ 1 CpApL -40 , 'A
Fort PotAE I Nwusmy 64. cvi(o. (R4d).
B. If you cannot meet the cond.itional uses required standards, are ysLu seeking relief by
applying for an administrarive exceprion or a Variance? Yes Qo (Circle One)
C. What have you done or could you do to:
1. Make the ux compatible with other pernutted acrivities in the same viciniry or
zone? SE6 p.T"TACH~ W2~TT~J Arh1SuJE~
2. Ensure against imposing excessive demands upon public utilides?
5e.C att~c~
D. Explain how or why the proposal will not be detrimental to:
1. The Comprehensive Plan: SeS ATTAvC.4dZ)
; and
2. SurrQund.ing ProPertY: SEE AITA,-C-4E~
E. Whac reasonable rnestrictions, conditions or safeguards will uphold the spirit and intent
(health, safety and general welfare) of the Zoning Code ANp mitigate any adverse
effect upon the neighboring properties including but not limited to: 1) dme limits; 2)
front, side or rear yard greater than minimum stated; 3) suitable landscaping; 4) signing;
5) off-street parldng; and 6) others?
SEE AtfA~N~ . .
Cl1P, BURDFN OF PROOF PURM
REV; 1191
~ . . ,
Spokane County Planning Department
Conditional Use Permit Burden of Proof Form
C: What have you done or could you do to:
1. Make the use compatible with other permitted activities in the sa.me vici.nity or
zone?
While our zone is primarily residential, there are other permitted activities
within the immediate vicinity of our property. For instance, 1 block away (west on
Wellesley), there are two meat packing businesses. Immediately south of our
property there is a community hall (former Grange Hall) where weddings, church
services and dances take place. To the northwest, there is a small in-home beauty
salon.
We have strived to maintain the residential appearance and character of our
property. With the exception of the sign out front, there is little difference to the
way the barn always looked, prior to my opening of the business. We have worked
very hard to continue to maintain this residential flavor.
2. Ensure against imposing egcessive demands upon public utilities.
According to the Spokane County Department of Engineering and Roads,
approximately 3,100 cars per day travel by our property on Wellesley Avenue,
between Evergreen and McDonald roads.
Since opening my shop in October of 1994, I have monitored the number of
cars that visit us. This averages out to approximately 3-5 per day, over an 8 hour
period. We do not feel that this will add any undue stress to an already widely
traveled thoroughfare.
We receive our water from the Trentwood Irrigation District. However,
there is no water to or from the barn and, therefore, no further increase in usage.
D. Egplain how or why the proposal will not be detrimental to:
l. The Comprehensive Plan
According to the Urban Comprehensive Plan, Objective l.l.i of Goal
1.1 is that `Home occupations may be allowed provided they are nondisruptive of
neighborhood amenities." We feel that our small operation is not, in any way,
disruptive to our neighborhood by way of appearance, noise or activity. Only a
small number of people visit our shop during the course of the day. This takes
place during the regular working hours of most residents throughout our area. In
addition, our barn has reta.ined its residential characteristics and is not
aesthetically intrusive nor does it upset the balance of the rest of the
neighborhood by its presence or the activity that goes with it. We have dedicated
ourselves to this, as this is our home, in addition to the way in which I make my
living.
Further within the Comprehensive Plan, the section on Characteristic Features
t ' • . ,
Spokane County Planning Department
Conditional Use Permit Burden of Proof Form
states that "light industrial and neighborhood commercial (activities) will be
located near the heavily traveled streets". While ours is one of those heavily
traveled streets, it is also the street on which we make our home. We have strived
to not create any excessive traffic or traffic hazards by maintaining ourselves as a
small operation and ensuring that the area traveled by our visitors is kept in good
repa.ir and flows smoothly.
Largely, it seems that the Comprehensive Plan for this vicinity is to create an
area that has a number of characteristics - including various residential types
(single-family, two-family, multifamily, etc) as well as neighborhood commercial,
light industrial and public and recreational facilities. We believe that we address
the criteria of the overall plan appropriately with our operation. Ours is a home-
based operation that fits well on our property as well as the rest of the community.
2. Surrounding Property
We conduct our business in a detached structure that sits to the rear of our
3 acres of land (see Site Plan). Appropriate landscaping has been installed and
fencing is in progress as of the date of this application (see expanded fence
information below, Answer E). This will obstruct any views from surrounding
property, which, we feel, would be the only way in which this could be perceived
as detrimental to any immediate surrounding property.
We do not feel that anyone's property value would deteriorate due to our
operation - on the contrary, we have created a lovely site with the loving
restoration of our barn and our many garden spots. We take great pride in the
maintenance of our property and receive input daily from the neighborhood over
their delight that we have brought an old, neglected piece of property back to
bea.uty.
However, to further protect anyone's privacy rights, we maintain operating
hours whereby we close by 6pm; our hours are posted on our street sign; we are
not open on Sundays or Mondays (further protecting the rights of those people
who enjoy 3-day holidays which are usually observed on Mondays) and, we are
installing a gate across the entrance to our property to eliminate lookers who have
not read the posted hours. E. What reasonable restrictions, conditions or safeguards will uphold the spirit
and intent of the Zoning Code AND mitigate any adverse effect upon the
neighboring properties including but not limited to:
Time Limits: Our hours of operation are limited to 10 am to 6 pm,
T.iesday through Saturday.
Front, Side or Rear Yard greater than minimum stated: The structure sits
well to the rear of the 3 acre property and this will not change.
.
.r • . ' , .
Spokane County Planning Department
Conditional Use Permit Burden of Proof Form
Suitable Landscaping: Fencing all along the north property boundary is
being installed. An administrative exception was applied for and approved,
allowing us to install a 7' fence which runs 335' east to west. In front of this
fencing is an arborvita.e shrub hedge to further buffet any possible or alleged noise
or disruption. In addition, there is fencing and landscape hedges to the east of
the property. The rest of the property is full of flower and vegetable gardens that
are ma.intained and added to each growing season.
Signing: In compliance with the criteria for a conditional use permit for
home industry in a UR 3.5 zone, our sign is being modified. It will be on the
southeast corner of our driveway on our property on Wellesley, will comply with
appropriate setbacks and will not block anyone's view, interfere with any
neighboring properties, nor disrupt traffic flow.
Off Street Parking: In addition to our driveway, we offer off-street parking
to the east of the barn in a grassy field. We have graded and added gravel an area
that allows for easy entry, exit and parking. Because rarely is there more than 2-3
cars on the property at a time, the area we offer is more than sufficient. To
further protect the privacy of the neighbors and surrounding property, we are
installing the previously mentioned 7' fence that blocks the parking area from
sight and will be adding to the landscaping shrubs that currently exist, to further
buffet any possible noise disruption.
In Conclusion:
Although this application is being made in response to a violation of the
Zoning Code (please consult with Mr. Louis Webster, Zoning Enforcement Officer
for full details), it was never my intent to break any laws or to be disruptive to the
neighborhood or community by opening my shop without securing the proper
permits.
Although I was over zealous in opening my shop, I was originally hoping to
apply for a Conditional Use Permit based on Chapter 14.822 of the code
addressing Historic Property Preservation. I first wanted to complete my
application for placement on the Spokane Register - then move forward with the
CU permit. That way, if I would be jeopardizing my placement on the register by
the shop in my barn, I would make my decision on which priority had top
placement at that time. Or, if the register allowed me to proceed with the shop, I
would then obtain the proper permits from the County Planning with fult support
of the Historic Landmarks Commission.
I am asking now only that I be allowed to practice my craft and profession in
my shop in my barn. I would make plea with the Hearing Board Officer that his
decision be based on the merit and content on this application and not on the
process to which I came to make application.
SPOKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE
(WAC 197-11-970) Section 11.10.230 (3) Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (1VIDNS)
MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
FILE NO(S): CUE-3-95
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant seeks to establish a home industry for an existing
business of the restoration and retail sale of antiques and crafts in a detacheri structure in the Urban
Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone. The applicant also resides at the site. Section 14.616.240.4 of the
Zoning Code of Spokane County allows this use upon issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED FOR: April 12, 1995 at 10:15 a.m.
PROPONENT: Penny Watson, 13409 E. Wellesley Ave., Spokane, WA 99216
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL, INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY:
Generally located in the Spokane Valley, approximately 960 feet east of McDonald Road, north of and
adjacent to Wellesley Avenue in the SE 1/4 of Section 34, Township 26N, Range 44EWM; 13409 E.
Wellesley Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216.
LEAD AGENCY: SPOKANE COUNTY
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it may have possible significant adverse
impact on the environment if mitigated as stipulated below. An Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) is = required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public on request.
There is no conunent period for this NIDNS; pursuant to WAC 197-11-340 (1).
(X) This MDNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340 (2); the lead agency will not act on this
proposal for at least 15 days from the date issued (below). Comments regarding this
NIDNS must be submitted no later than 5:00 p.m., Apri17, 1995, if they are intended to
alter the NIDNS.
MITIGATING MEASURES:
1. The driveway, apron to the public road and public parking areas shall be improved to
current engineering and fire apparatus standards.
2. To ensure adequate prote.ction of the Spokane Aquifer and in accordance with Section
14.706 [Aquifer Sensitive Area Overlay (ASA) Zone] of the Zoning Code of Spokane
County, the proposed activity, which consist of furniture refinishing has been tentatively
designated a Cridcal Material Use Activity. Prior to the hearing, the applicant shall provide
the County Planning Department, the County Health District, the County Fire District No.
1, the County Engineer-Water Quality Management and the County I?ivision of Buildings
with a list of materials, including quantities, to be used, handled, stored and/or transported
as associated with the proposed activity and demonstrate how these materials will be stored
and used so as to not be detrimental to the aquifer.
3. To ensure proper safety and fire standards are met, a Change of Use Pemut shall be
obtained from the County Division of Buildings.
HD/CUE-3-95 MDNS
. ~ • . , '
NIDNS; File No. CUE-3 -95 , Page 2
4. To ensure proper drainage and collection of surface run-off, this proposal shall comply
with the provisions of "Spokane County Guidelines for Stormwater Management" with
respect to customer parking and the accessory structure.
I acknowledge the above mitigating measures to be modifications and adjustments to the above
described proposal and wan-ant that I will not oppose, object to or contest these measures in the
future.
Date: -9Z5 Pri yped Name:_Pennv Watson
Signature: , Yl ,;r) n~
Responsible Official: WALLIS D. HUBBARD by John Todd
Position/Title: Planner 2 Phone: (509) 456-2205
Address: 1026 W. Broadway, Spokane, WA 99260
Comments regardin environmental concerns are welcom ea~ing
Date Issued: Signature:
~
APPEAL OF THIS DETERMINATION, after it becomes final, may be made to the Spokane
County Planning Department, 1026 W. Broadway, Spokane, WA 99260. This appeal must be
written and make specific factual objections. Contact the Planning Department for assistance with
the specifics of a SEPA appeal.
A copy of the NIDNS was mailed to:
1. WA State Department of Ecology 2. Spokane County Health District
Sepa Review, Olympia, 98504 Attn: Steve Holderby
3. Spokane County Division of 4. Spokane County Division of Buildings
Utilities Tom Davis
Atm: Jim Red
5. Spokane County Division of 6. Spokane County Fire Protection
Engineering and Roads District #1
Attn: Stan Miller
7. Penny Watson 8. Stephen K. Eugster, Esq.
13409 E. Wellesley Ave. 423 W. First Ave.
Spokane, WA 99216 Spokane, WA 99204-0206
9. Trentwood Irrigation 10. East Valley School District No. 361
4402 N. Sullivan Rd. 4515 N. Pines Rd.
Spokane, WA 99216 Spokane, WA 99206
HD/CUE-3-95 MDNS
' . . ~ . ~ 9 # 6:5-S C t / ~ofq5 ~
\Y,
. . P-u . .L2 1~2~k .A...~
. •S..L~S..~. : - - s.~ -~.a- .
SP-OKANE ENVIRONMENTAL ORDINANCE
SECTION Il.1a.230 T1-
~
,
`
.
e • ' .
SPOKAH£ EHYIROTMEtITAI OR6IHANCE •
.
(Y1lC 197-11-960) Section 11.10.230(1)
Environmentnl Checkllst
Ftle Ko. cc:•( It/ • 3 --`I ~
Puryose of Checkllst:
3 jL 95-
The State Environmental Dolicy Act (SEPA) chapter 43.21G RCU, requires all goverrrnental agencies to constder [he enYironmental ttapatts of /Ploposa l
before nwking AecisSons. An Environmental lmpact Statement (E15) must Ce prepared for all proposals wlth probable slgniflcant adverse lnpacts on
the quality of the envlrorment. The purpose of thiz checklSst 1s to provide informatlon to help you and the agency identify lmpacts traa your
proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if 1t can be done) end to help the agenty dectde whether an EIS ls ceQutred.
instructfons for Applicants:
Thts envSrommental checklizt asks you to describe sone bastc lnformation about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this theckllzt to Eeter+alne
whether ihe enrironmental /mpacts of your proposal are signlficant. requlring preparation of an E1S. Ans+rer the questtons briefly, rrith the most
precise information kna+n. or give the best descrlptton you can.
You nust answer each question accurat_;j :#aG :::~'j'.ly, to the best of your kna+led9e. in most cazes, you should be able to answer the Questions
froe your own observationz or proSect plans xithout the need to hlre ezperts. lf you really do noi kno+r the answer, or if a question does not apply
to your proposal, rrrlte 'do not kno+r' or 'does not apply.' Caaplete answers to the questlons no++ may avold unnecessary Eelays later.
Some questlons ask'about governmental "gulations, such at zoning, sRoreltne, and lanGmark desSgnations. Answer these qvesttons 1f you tan. If you
have problens, the goverrmental agencies can asslst you. •
The checkltst questtons apply to all perts of your proposal. even it you plan to do the+n over a perSo6 of time or on different parcels of land.
Attach any addi[ional informatton that u111 describe your proposal or Its environmental effects. TI►e agency to whlch you suhmlt this checlcllst enay
ask you to ezplaln your nnz.rers or provSde addltlonal infonnatlon reasonably related to deternintng 1f there +nay be s19n1ficant adverse impact.
Use of checkllst for nonOroject proposals: Canplete thts checlclSs2 for nonproject proposals. even though questfons may be anzMered 'da s not apply'. '
IN ADDITIOK, ca+plete the SUPPIEMEHTAL SHEET FOR NO!1PROJECT ACTIOHS(Part 0). ,
For nonproSect actions. the refercnces in tfie tfitckllst to the words 'project.' 'appllcent.' and 'property or site' should be read es 'proposal,'
•proposer.' nnd 'affected geagrapAit area,' rezpectlvely.
A. BACKGROUND
1. 'tane of proposed project, if appllcable: ~ •
J6 ~t abU- 40 -001 , 1+0 . . .
. ~ . . . . . ,
2. 'taae of Applicant: n~ ' 1. Address and phone number of applltant or contact person: 4lJ
4. Oate checklist prepared: - 3c) ' S. Agency reqvestSng checklist: - e-oC~~~:~~~~.~
6. Proposed tining or schedule (including phasing. 1f applteable): ~ d K-)C"St-
7. a. Oo you have any pltns for future addittons, expanslon. or further actlvity related to or co mecttE vith this Oroposalt It yes, euplatn.
IV0 b. Oo you own or have optlons on land nearby or adjacent to Ch1s proposil? If yes, explain.
,
- td ~ s . 1 ~o -o Iuk-~)n -r+2 A ((-ov'n er l c~ ~ o-F -P8 7 - 4a I . -t- WE!. e
4hv& san\p~ secA-io r-N Ls ou,~A-e(~ bu 1-.m*A4 .
8. L1st an envtronaental lnfora►atton you knox about that.has b a n prepared, or xill be pnpared, 4lrectly related to thls prpposal.
S l) IZ--C aA0.0UC Or-, drY\
s orbn Pr hu qLP
Rev.2/1/88 • 1
c ' ' ~ '
PO~A1tti CNV'IRONTSENTAL OP.DTlfA:FC° • '
(vAC 197-L1-9b0) Seccioa 11.10.2)0(1) • .
A. LA.CKCdOIIRD (conEinued) ~
9. Do ~ou 1rn av vhcchcr •ppllcatiom ~ce peoding for govecrmcntal approval• of oth~r propoaals direccly affeccing che propercy covered by yout
proposa]'. Lf 7e■, explain. ~„1 ~ ~
10. Li~t an) jovernoeac approvala or pernit~ chat vill be needed for your ptopo~al, if ~,o~,. C_orld ~Tl~ 1\~.1 ~/`7'L~
11. Clve a bcief, coople~e de.crlptLon of y w r propo u 1, is+cluding the propo~ed u~e• and the •lse oC the pro~ec[ and ~1Ce. -T►ece ace seveial
q~aeetlons Lcer in this cheakli~t that aek 7ou to de~cribe cectaln a~peet• of yovr propo~al. You do no[ netd to rep u t tho~e aru vers on [his
pagc X_ 1 1 ~ ~ D W~ _ lq.~l.~. .
~ ~ ~ ' ~ • ' v ~ k f \ Y ~ -
• i ! 1 Q a,~1r~~~
~ .Q , ~,1.~.~1~ ' ~
, ~.~,.~4, ~ L~,~O
• ~ ~ ~ 1.~ .
1=. Location of [he propo.al. Clvc utElcie~c infoc~aCion for a pet~on to undec~t~nd the preci~e lo u tion ot Yout proposed pro~ee[, inCluding a
•treet •ddreas, i[ .nr, and ~ectlon, tovev hip •od range, iL knovn. Lf a propoaal vould oceur ove~ a range.of area, pTOVtde cfu range ot
bouadariei oE che ~Ice(~1• Provtde • leg~l descrlption, site pl~n, vicinity aap, artd CopoQ~aphic nap, lf re~aooably avai L ble. While yov
•hould avbnic aar plio~ [eQuired b~ the agencr. you are not reQulred to dvpliuce nap~ or detailed pLans sub~lt[ed vl[h any pernie applieation
~els ed eo chis checklt■c. . , . •
~1~1. t~~ C,~-P.r~ ~ak ~ ~ l ~ P~ . lS ~
- _ ,
~ 3~- - ac~ , . ~
b P ~ ~1.QYY1r°. ~-~-C~
~ •
, ~f /
~t~.-l ~..t, • , 0~ / ~+~C.O~ L L ~ / ~9 ~'U`~! , ~ ~~~?/L~--•., t[~-~C~ ~
$ ~ ~j~.~- u~-~ c~ ~C'..z.C~-C~~ /'~-~f'_ ~ .
~
l~i,~~.,t.~..~~ , ~F N ~ ~ Z- .3fG 9S
17. Does the proposed ac~lon lie vitAin the Aquifer Senaitlve Ares (/~SA)? :he Ceneral Sevet Serviee Area~ 'ahe Ptio[tty Sever Secviee Aeea! :he
Clcy of Spokaae~ (See: Spolcaae Co~nLr'~ ASA OverL y Zooe A[las tor bound~~ier). '
ca~~~, ~~i. ~.~1`~'~ L.Y1 1~~~~2~11 ~V~e. ;
~no~ ~ ~.~n.~ .r~ ~ ~ .~~;.=..-_r~
-o st cor~.r_a~ ~i nrri.icaxr S ~ C SS~~ , ~-`c.~.z-~.~Cz~ C:~ C,~1~.~ ,~'~l.ct , ~ 3~C `9s
E. Q~VLROR`Ql'fJ►L II.~riS
Evaluation For
' ~~R~r u.~ o~ir
1. EAR_it ~
a. Genccal de~eciption o[ the sice (clrcle oee): fL c rolling, hilly, tteep ~lope~, sount~laou~~
other:
. ' t
b. '•fiat Ls che sceepesc slope on the ~ite (approsiaate pe~tent slope)!_~
~
e. Vhat general c7pes of ~otl• ar~ found on the ~ite (fot exaople~ clay, sand~ 6tavel~ peat. muek)t ~G ,
If you lmov ttu ela~~ifiution of a6rieultueal •olla~ ~peeifr thev snd eote anr prime faroland. Cs~.~~,~.~ ~.~~s„~,,,p~~~ ,,C-t*YLyy
w
~Y1 c~~~.x~ A r.~ ~s ~s~, v~ic~ ~o2.rn~~ 15 v~ _ j,
c. • A ~-r►~~-,.~
~C~r 1~ . -~.~e _v~ ~r~ q,~a ssc~ b~e~d~ . ~ ~u
d. Are thera •uctace iediutions or hi~tor~ of ueutaDle ~oll• 1o Che tmmtdia[e vieinliyl If so, ~"z I`~~~*~~,+
deseribe. ~ . • .►~.W ~i~ , ~ 4
w 1 r~ f~t.t2~i - t'~~ .'~4~ i1-~t.t.~ ~^-s~C
~a•~ o~~i-c~~~ ,v~ ~ .
. ~ ~ ~~~/4S
z
r ' • . .
SPOKAM£ EHYIRONMENTAL URDIHANCE
(uAC 191-11-960) Section 11.10.130(1)
B. ENYIROJ4IENTAL EIEMENTS(contirtued) Evaluatlon For
Agency Uze Only
e. Descrtbe the Qurpose, type, and approximate quanilties of any f1111ng or grading propozed. •
Indfcate source of f111. a fassu _-V.Q.a
..L+-►1~'~ ~-~'vu'~ t-``
~-~1/tu;•.,~ a'~2G,.i .t,..,,,~ ~ y~-
f. Could eroslon o a ur as a result of clearing, conzttuction, or use? If so, generally descrlbe. J
. K~O ~c.l~,,,~ ,~...1 j~
g. About wNat percent of the slte wtll be covered wlth impervtous surfaces after pro3ect• construc- /
tion (for example, asphalt or bufldings)? ,aQ.er,C3 N • <<-C^~G'~'"~-~
• ~ 3 16 !9S
~
h. Proposed meatures to reduce or Control eroslon. or other impacts to the earth, if eny: )
w t~ , ~rr-y ~
Iv
.Qe.~c.2~ /e2 ~~1-c-~ti~¢'
,C•.e .~~+~a-~-r-~-t~ Cc.~.~.cc...,~{ .
lL=-
hs~CLy~s'LC~
2. AIR -
a. uhat type of ernissions to the a1r would result from the proposal (i.e.. Eust, autornobile. odors
industrSal. wood smoke) during constructlon and r+hen the project ts completeQ? If any, ,h
generally describe ind g1ve approxtmate quintttes If 1cnown. .
16"0'
~ a,vL • A~` 3 /c ~9S
b. Are there an off-site sources of emtssionz or odor that ma affect
y y your proposal? 1f so,
generally descrlbe.
c. ProposeQ measures to reduce or eontrol em1 ss ions or other lmpacts to a1r, if any:~'
. (
~t( • CKYJ SC q P G f~ AA-el K-4-
_~o ~ ' O~i.it 13 . J
. ~ t3~~~95
3. WATER
a. Surface: ' '(1) Ts there any surtace xater bedy on or {rt the tmcctdlate vSclnlty of the slte lnctudinq year-
round anE seasonal strenms, saltrrater, lakes. ponds, wetlands)? If yes. describe type and
provi6e names. If approprlate, state Khit stream or rtver 1t tlows 1nto. (2) u{11 the project require any Kork over. in, or adJacent to (withl 200 feet) the descrtbed
waterz? If yes. please descrtbe and attecA availsble plans. ~r"~ .
t ,
SPOF..4NE LNQIROltHEtRAL OADITW3CE ('JAG 197-11-960) Secclon 11.10.230(1)
E. LHVIR0IMLNTAI. ELL`tEN"S (conCinucd)
Cwlw[ion Fo[
Agency Use Only
(J) Es[imate the •oount ot fill and dredge mecerlal that vould be Qlaced le oc cemoved C[oe the
w rfacc water or veclaods and Sndlu [e the •r u of [he rite that vould be affectcd. Indiute
the aoucce of flll meterlal. (4) Vill the proposal reQuire suC[ace watec vi[hdrawala or dlversiona? Give a seneral deserip-
tlon, purpose, and approxlmate quaatl[Les. Lf knwn.
(5) Doe• the proposal lie vithin a 100-year ilood p L1n? If •o, note locstlon on•che tice plan.
da
(5) Doei the propo ul involve any dischargee of vaste eu Cecial• to aurtsce vacers? If so,
descrlbe the cype of vaste and antleipated volume of distharge.
b. Cround:
(1) uill groundva[er be vttndravn, or vill vater De discharged [o Yroundvater2 Clve general desetiptlon, purpose, and approxina[e quanclties. !f 1movn.
(2) Describe vasce nAcerial eRac vill be disehatged into the atound frov •eptie tankt oe other
sanitary vaste [reatsenc taeility. Dasetibe the general size o[ the •yetm, the numbez of
houaes to De served (1f applieable) oY the numbe[ of persotu the systeo(s) •re etpeeted to ~
serve.
Deseribe •ny systeas, other [han those desi6ned foc the disposal o[ sanitary vasce, las[alled tot the puTpose ofdisefiatging fluids pelov the 6round •uTtace (Includes systeas •ueh _
a• those !oT the disposal of •tocv vater or draina6e fron [looc dcaisu). DCfLTibt the type of
irsCeo. che soounc of matecial to De disposed of through the sye[em and the crpel ot oaterials t
llkely io be disposed ot (lneluding aaterlal• vhich aar ea[er the system loadvertentlr thcough ipill• or as a result o! [irefightic►g aetivicies).
(4) Vill any cl+aaical• (especially oraanie •olvents or petsoleua tuels) be stored in above-
sround or und.-ound scora6e tankat II •o. vhat C7rpe• aed Quaa[itles o[ satetial• vill be .
siored!
u P_ ~.t~~hQ a~- '4~ .
InWM . U&,a . Kq_fs
hP .
4
~ . .
4POT.Agt E1(VIRONKEM4I. OR.DINA1i4E .
(VAC 197-11-960) Section 11.10.230(1)
b. L?7VIR0h'MTTAL ELl?MlT5 (continued) •
Evaluatlon For
Agenc7 Use Only -
(S) uhat proteccive oe u ures vill be taken to lneure Chat leiks oc spllle of any chemicala • .
~ '~'~t •
itored or used on site vill not be alloved to percolate to groundva[er (chls includei neasurea /.34
[o keep chemlcals out oE disposal sya[en• deoerlDed in 3b(2) anA 3b(3)?
' , r~u ;-G~. ~ ~-~.~.A-•~-~ ~ -~.~C~„C~~
. ~s:L ✓t-L ~t..~-~ cs~-, .-a.`~ •
c. Water P.unotf (ineludlns aCOrv va[ec): ~~S
(1) Describe the source o[ runo[f (lneluding storm vatec) and aet:wd of colleecion aed dlspoaal
lf any (lnclude Quantities, lf knovn). where vill this veteo Elov? 1ti11 Chla water flov lnto
other vaters' If so, deseribe. ~1r
o - ~ l ~atfy cl'n eL--,
(2) Jill any cheoicals be stored, handled or used on Che site in a loeatlon vhere a apill or
leak vlll drain [o sucfaee or gTOUtldvaCGT or co a s[orm water dlepo ul tystem dlseharging [o
surtace ot grounAvaterT ~ ~ •
(3) Could vaste oaterlals encer ground or surface wrCecsT If so, Qenerally deserlDe.
~ H ' '
d. Proposed neasutea [o reduce or eontCOl •ur[aee, ground, and runoEf water lopaeet. lf any (if
C the propoaed actlon lles vtthin [he AQU1feC Sen.ltlve Area be espeeially elear oa exqlanatloas •
r relating co faci11t1es concerning Sections Sb(i), 7E(5), aad 3c(2) of th1a eheeklist):
ID
I ~
04 6. PUlYTS a. rheck or eircle [ype of vegecation found on [he site:
declduous cree: alder, naple. aspen, other.
L-'-~evergreen cree: Iic, eedar, plne, other. ~
~ shcuba. . .
C/ g r... .
~~pa~cute.
crop or srain.
vet eoil plants, eattall, Dutteccup. bullrvsh, slcunlc eaDbage, other. , .
wter plaets: wcer 1llly, eel6rate, alltoil, o[1+e[. ,
other cype• of veSetstlon. '
b. Vhat kind •nd aaouet oE ve6etatlort vill be senoved or alteTed? N o~ e o C. Lisc chceatened or endaogered specie• knova *to be on or near the site. ,y/rC •
d. Proposed landscapina, us f oativc n• or 9ch-Er aeasures to pr.~ rve or eoh nee vegecatlon
on Ehe •ite, 1f anr: ~ ~ I I Q
~ 5
SPOKANE ENYIROHKENTAL ORDINANCE •
(uAC 197-11-460) Seccion 11.10.230511
B. ENYIROHHENTAL EIENEKTS (concfnucd)
Evaluation For
Agency Use Only
S. AHIMALS
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near thc siCC or are known to be on
or near Lhe site:
~►UCJ~~ IO~~.~.~ pl~,~.. I
birdsr haw hercn, eagle, z
` 1 i
rmmnals: deer, bear, elY., beaver, other:
fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other:
other:
b. List any threatened or endangered speciez knawn to be on or near the s1te.
/
c. [s the sice pnrt of a migration route? If so, explain. •
d. Proposed neasures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: •
uAdi to 4
=T l~
I n (~P,V , ,I .
5. ENERGY A D NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What kinds of energy (electrlc, natural gaz, vood stove, solar) wtil be used to meet the
the completed project's energy needs? Describe xhether 1t will De used for heating. manufac-
turing, etc. .
~ ban ~~4c, . ~XUL-not • ~ _
i
b. iloutd your project affect the potential use of solar energy by ad,jacent propertlez? If so,
generally describe. •
~
C. tfhat kinds of energy conservation features are tncluded in the plans oE thls propozal? l1sL
other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
7. ENYIRONNENTAL HEALTH
a. Are there any envlronmental health hazards, lncludtng exposure to toxlc chemltals, risk of fire
and exploslon, sptll, or hazardous wazte, that could occur as a result of this proposal? It so.
dcscribe.
~t.~z::..f..~.~ ~ y'
L -L,Z.<
i G~ i ; ~►.~1~:
C ~ C ~i.~.n,-c 'vC"7, ~'tc•7t~~ .
(1) Describe specSal emergency servlces that mi9ht be required.
6
seor.ur~ e:rvtaor,~~rcei. os,n~xurce ~
(VAC 197-11-960) Section 11.10.230(1) B. E`rV71ROK:MTfAL,L1.Y_TZNTS (con[Snued)
Lvaluation For
Agency Use Only
E17VIROH-1117AL KE/U.:'H (eontlnued) .
(2) Proposed meesuree to rednce or eontrol •.='.lronmen[al healch hezards, if any:
I'~'Lt-;t~~`t/I.G•y( ~.Gc.~ Li.[> ~.ic-G'~•,~ (~~l
/
? 3A /.?S
~
b. xoi,e:
(1) Nhat Cypcs of noise exlst ln the a[e• whlth mey affeCC your pzoje U(for ez.aople: C[affit,
equip a nt, operatlon, other?
(att- . ~,bvx ~.-na
~
C~ty Y" ~ .
(2) t7hac cypee and levels of noise would be erea[ed by or assoclated vicA the proSeec on a
shorc-term or a long-tera basir (for exAmple: rref[ic, constructlon, opecAclon, other)t Indleate
whec hours nolse vould eome from the slte. .
- I O-Ahk LLPAk I_WMaij ~ r
(J) Proposed~ measure to reduee or eontrol nol~e- ~mp_ac1c5, 1f any: ~
9 ~ ( Y(4n T)f0tQ_c4' Qn.Q_
laiavh c~/11 c - i 51
Gr~~~ -I C~ i•A a-c 4-'r+1
G~~a~~ A, h • _ /t.'c~-t..<.t. L-:~.~~) ~ 3 f B. 1.J1:TD AND SHOAELIt1E USE
A. uhat ic the current use ot the sice and adjacen[ prope[tlea? ~11\.Y/ih
b. ltes fie site been used for •grieulture? It •o, describe.
~ c
~r~s~rn .1
c. Descrlbe any scruccures oo the s1[e.
.
d. Will any •CTUCtucet be deoolished? I[ so. vhlth2
C. Nhat i• the cuTCent :oning elass1[Sca[lon ot the sitet ` u~~~~•~ 1:-`3`S
. f. tlluc Is the current eoopreheosive pLn designatlon oC the site2 )lJl_J '
g. If appllcaDle, vhat 1s the curren[ •horellne aaster program deslgnation oi the sltet
`~r> ~a~- ~,~n o ~ • .
h. Has any part of the sice bcen classlfied •s an "envlroaaencally ssnai[lve" a[eat If to.
•peelfy.
i. Approzimatelpo%kLanr people voald reslde ot vork ln the conpleted project? /
SPOf.A27L TNVI602MEh'LAL ORDINANCY
(VAC 197-11-960) Seccion 11.10.230(1)
6. E'NVIRONTtLTtfAL CLT.~^SEHTS (continued)
Zvaluation For
Agency Use Only
Apptoximacely hov many people vould the conpleted project d1spl.atet
i
d or redute displacement lapacts, !f aoy:
k. Proposed eu su~;s co I
~ W
1. Proposed neasures to ensurc the proposal is eonpatible vith ezistina and projecced Lnd use• and pl*na, if anr:
A-n 6
. 0
Q m ~
9. NOUSINC
a. Approximately hov naor unlts vould De provided, if anrt Indieate vhether hieh-. aiddle-, or
lov-income housirtg. '
r
WA-
b. Approxim.tely hov eL.ny units, if any, vould be elid natedi Indiuce vlxcher fiiah-. siddle-, or •
lov-lncooe Aousing.
NfAK
c. Proposed ueasures to reduee or eontrol housing lopaets, i[ any: .
6 ' . 10. AESTIIF.TI C5 . '
A. Hhat 1s the tallesc helghc of any proposnd strveture(s). noC leeludlnt •ntemaet VTut 1a the
princlp~l exterior bulldins material(s) proposed!
N~
b. trhat vlev• in Che lcmediate vlclnity vovld De al[eTed or obo[ructedl
N%
c. Proposed .easure• co reduce or toncrol aesthetit lmpaees. lI any:
11. LICH'r A.`7D G1..tRP ~
a. '►hat crpe o( liah[ or gLre vlll the ptopoul produeet I7Tut tine ot da7r vwld 1t aainlr oeeuel
1~/~ •
~
b. Could llghe or a L re troa the fieished pro3eet be a safety hasard or lnterfece vith vie w1
~D -
c. Vhat exlsting otf-slte •ources ot liaht or 6 Lre nar affect your ptoposalt
IWN~ C, • .
d. Proposed •eAsures [o teduee or eoncrol light and `lare impactr, if aay: • •
. . -
• ~
SPOXA1tE L'iVIRONlV_H2AL ORDVtANCE '
(VAC 197-11-960) Scction 12.10.230(1) ' •
B. LNVIROKKrti'fAL EI.EHENtS (continued) ,
, Evalua[1on FoT
Agency Use Omlr
12. RLCREATI0J1
A. uhac deslgnatcd •nd informAl recreationnl oppor wnltiee are in the immediace vicinitr'!
r
D. Vould the propoeed projecc d1spL ce Any existing recrm tional uses? L[ so, describe.
c. Propoeed ceasure• to reduce oc conttol iopacts on recreation, lncluding recteacional oppoctuni-
ties to be provl ed by the ptojeet or applleant, lf •ny: C .
13. HIS:ORIC AND CULTUAAL PRESERVA:IOti
A. Arc ehere any places or'objeets liated on or pcoposed for m tional, •cate or local presetva- •
tion regleters knovn to be on or aext co the sSte? If so, gcnerally descrlbe.
b. Generally deserlbe any landm.rks oT evidenee o[ historie arehaeologieal, sclentifie ot cultural
teporcance Srnovn to De on or nexc co the site.
c. Yroposed oeatucei co reduce or control iapacts. if any:
16. T1'.AiiSPOR-ATION . . Q.
A. Idenclfy publlc streecs and highvay• •erving the slce and descCibe proposed aceess to the 'rj~_ (3/L1,~•~1.~'~~•t~' ~`~`~`'G`~.~ 'k<
existing screet •yscea. Shov-on si[e plarts, if any.
nnnoP
'-A . C.C'-~'► ~iy.
94'v.~ k
to _21i .
b. Is site eurrcntly served by public CraasltT If aot. vhac ls the approxlmate dls[anee to the
'
nearesc Cranslt •topt
_ C. (lov oany parking spaces vould the eoapleted pro}ett have? liov saey vould the projeet elldtute!
4t ' c j
d. 4111 r:3pt::! require any aev roads or •[reeto, or Smprove m ats to ezistina roads o[ st[ee[s
• aoc locluding drivevarsT It •o. =enera117 describe (Iodieate vhncher puDllc or pclva[e).
lv~
e. Will the pTOjecc use (oc occur in the lanediate Keloic7 0[) rater. rall, oc air craosportationt
Zf so, geaerally de~cribe. N~
9
. • . .
$pORll2iE LHV'IROIOMN'IAL ORAINANCL
(1JAC 197-11-960) Seccion 11,10.230(L)
B. E11VIRO?lTiZ1;--A1. LLLNENT'S (eontlnued) LvaluaClon For
Ageac7 Use Oalr
iiow many vehieul►: trips per day vould be generatad by the coopleeed proJectl If ltaovn,
indlcate vhen peak wou1d octur.
~ c>
~ e. x 'ca
S. Proposed measures co reduce or control transpoTtation impac[s, lf any: .
L~ 1n nU.X' ~ *-Lg~lp xa~~
_
~ .~...6.y.f.
15. PllBLIC SERVICES
a. :Jould the project result in an inerearcd need for pu511c services (for eunplc, [ire procection,
pa!:ce pce:e.clon, health catc, ichools, other)t If so, aenecal}.y deseTlbe.
b. Proposed meawrea to reduee or control diceet imQae[s on puDlie sacvicea, 1f an7: •
C.^~►-~/~'.►,`''~ . ~ . .
16. :J:ILI :IES
a. Ctrele u[i1ic14a....Surrently •valLble ac ch e: C-lee[rleity, natural ga~ vacer, Jrefuae
serviee,Ct elephoee, s.nicnry sever, Feptic rr~cea other. ~
r
b. Deseribe the ucllities that are proposed foc the projec[, the u[llity providing the service and '
' the general conscruccion ac[Svlties on the iice or in the laoediace vicinity wAich nlghc be
needed. ~
4iD
G. SIGPA2VRE .
1
1. the undersigned, aveat under the penalty of perjury that the above responses are aade [n+cAlully and co the Dest of a7 knovledge. L also
understand chaC, thould there De any vfllfuJ. nisrepresenCation or v111fu1 l,ack of full diselosu[e on my paTt, the Ilentr wa7r vithdeav any
determinatlon of nons16n1[leance chac lc aiShC lssue inl-ellanee upon thls cheeklist.
Date: Propoeenc IOn :~'O
c7l ~
(Ple u 1 Princ or Type). t
Propooenc V\ Address: ~-~Ab
. (Aisnacure)
Phone :
Person eoopletlng fors: , Date:
Phone: .
TOR STAlT OSL ONLT
Staff ineaDer(s) Yevievieg cfu cklLst:
based on chis icaff reviev of the eavironmental cf►ecklist •nd o[1+er pertioen[ Safotmatloa, the scaff: '
A. JCoacludes [hat there •re oo pcobabls s16nifieant adverse Sapaets aod reeomaeods a de[eLV►leation of nonsignifieaaee.
E. Coucludes tlut probaDle sl;nifiean[ •dverse eavironoencal iapacts do etlat toc the turrent proposal aod reeoaneod• a tltitated decet-
Slaaclon of aonsi;eifitante vich eoodicion..
C. Coacludes chat chere are probable •lgnitieant adverae eoriro maeetal lnpae[• aod Tecowmendr a de[enioatioa of ti=ni(iuoea. ,
TtLIpC TT3 - 375.00
~
, .
-1 ~ , . . .
.
. ,
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
APPLICATIONS BEFnRE THE ZQNINC AD.TUSTOR
Name of APPlicant: Yt (SiM g ent: Y CN -
-
~
S treet Address: L-JAb°) c~ I ZaP Phone - Home: C'~_~• ~1a lp
City: State: ~_Code: 9C6-11 CQ Work: Za1-►,e..
Agent's No.: .
. .
Name of Property Owner(s): Yl (SUnonsor1, ~
Street Address: l7°) a~
Zip Phone _ Home: C5CS°'t ~ _ ~ (P
City: State: lIJA Code: :~Oc"M CQ Work: Same_
REQUESTED ACTION(S) (Circle appropriate aceon):
Variailce(s) Conditional Use Pernlit ~ Expansion of a
Other: Nonconforming Use
F()R STAFF USE ONLY G~- ZZZ-9~
2 Violation/
Section~? e-( Township249 Range Enforcement: 6b N
•Lot and legal checked by: •CWWP sewer purveyor:
•CWSP water purveyor: •CUP standards met: Y N NA
•Exiseng zone: Cite applicable seceon:
•Comp. Plan designation: -Arterial Road Plan designation:
•Fire District: *Person doing preapp conf.: '
•Other/previous Planning Department acdons involving this property:
•Certificate of Exemption No.: Application No.:
•Hearing Date: •Site plan dimensioning checked by:
,
AROUT TNE PItOPERTY (b applicant)
•Existing use of property: _ •Desc 'be pnoposed use of the prqperty, notin change from 'existin use':
LndU. S ( Inam). see-A1'f~
•If a variance application, state the Code siandard and describe the riance sought in cojnQarable ~pTto1J
terms (i.e., 50 feet from centerline verses required 65 feet): . 1.v 0 ~
•If a conditional use permit applicadon, does proposal meet all standards?U N
If not, has one or more variances been requested? Y N 3~~~~5
.
•What is the size of the subject property. `~mL OF ~PA►~~S q
•Stree: address s; prarerty (:f kncwr): Eal2>-f 13409
•Legal descripdon of property (include easement, if applicable):
WES'~ 7AkMS t gR QlA_T * Al -t'12 Z -ZEB`7 -48 I it_y0_S'7 0(g04 O t S Q
~MCn A Pr~ -M i 1 -7 ,
•Parcel No(s).: •Source of legal: ~['Ax 2Eeorz.AS
•Total amount of adjoiiiing land controlled by this owner, sponsor and/or agent: PA2e.Et C.
•What interest do you (applicant) hold in the property? Qu~Y1fX
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) S S
. COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
I SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OR
AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED SITE; (2) IF NOT THE OWNER, WRITTEN PERMISSION
FROM OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF IS ATTACHED; AND (3) ALL OF
THE ABOVE RESPONSES AND THOSE ON SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE MADE TRUTHFULL.Y AND
TO I 1-I.E BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
Signed: Date
Notary Public in and for the state of Washington, residing at
. ~
. My appointment expires:
page 1 of 2
7A/APP (REV. 4/94) •
A. BURDEN OF PRODF form(s) (by applicant) It is necessary for the applicant or his/her representative to establish the reasons why the ' RFQUESTED ACTION should be approved and to literally put forth the basic argument in favor
of approving the application. Accordingly, you should have been given a form for your requested
acdon (variance, conditional use, etc.) designed 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 ceturn
i[ with your application.
u y
~ B. SIGN-OFF BY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES.p~ (applicant must visit each agency whose no. is circlecl below)
~ 1. SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DIS''I'RICT !
a Proposed method of water supply:
b) Proposed method of sewage disposal:
A preliminary consultadon has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has been informed
of requirements and standards. We request consultation with Planning Department Y''N . s,; . . .
• • • ' ' i(Signature)' ~ (Date) (Sign-off Waived)
• ~ • ' • " • ' - . , . . , .
2 SPOKANE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
~ 'Eng:nce: cng & Roads Di :-6s'san) . . , . . . .
~ A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has be~n informed
; of re ' ements and stan ards. We request consultation with Planning Department Y N
~ .
(Signature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived) (n3. SPOKANE COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT (Planning Depar(ment may waiye -
; - if outside WWMA)
A preliminary consultaaon has been held to discuss the proposal. ~The applica.nt has been informed
of requirements and standarcis. . . . . i ~ • ` ' ; ;
. ; ,
(Signature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived by Planping?) .
I The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with to become informed of water system
reyuirements and standards. (See #a below) , . The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with , to become informed of sewage disposal
: requirements and standards. (See #b below)
q.a j'VATER PURYEYOR:
The proposal i i noiLlocated within ttie boundary of our future service area. + 2) The proposal i i not located within the boundary of our current district.
, 3) We ge/are n_Q1 able to serve this site with adequate water. 4) Satisfactory arrangements have/have not been made to serve this proposal.
,
(Signature) (Date)
b . SEWERAGE PURVEYOR:
. A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has been
informed of requirements and standards.
(Signature) (Date)
. .
• page 2 of 2
ZA/APP (REV. 4/94)
. .
_d, !
r .
TRANSACTION NUMBER: T9500137 - ' DATE: 01/26/95 • a
APPLICANT: PENNY SIMONSON PHONE=
ADDRESS: 13409 E WELLESLEY AVE
SPOKANE WA 99216 CONTACT NAME: PENNY SIMONSON PHONE= ,
TRANSACTION: CONDITIONAL USE/LAND USE ACTION '
DOCUMENT ID: 1) 2) 3)
4) 5) 6)
COMMENTS: PARCEL N0.46344.0832
FEE & PAYMENT SUMMARY
ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY FEE AMOUNT
CONDITIONAL USE 1 50.00
LAND USE ACTION REVW 1 20.00
TOTAL DUE = 70.00
TOTAL PAID= 70.00
BALANCE OWING= .00
,
PAYMENT DATE RECEIPT# ` CHECK# PAYMENT AMOUNT
01/26/95 00000597 1168 70.00
' PROCESSED BY: WENDEL, GLORIA
PRINTED BY: WENDEL, GLORIA
*,t************,r***************** THANK YOU
. • •
BEFORE THE SPOKANE COUNTY SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR
IN TNE MATTER OF ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
SHORT PLAT N0. SP-87-481 ) CONCLUSION AND DECISION
THIS h1ATTER, an application from Art Tupper has been received and decided
upon, pursuant to Spokane County Subdivision regulations, on the 24th day of
February, 1987.
The individual signing below has further been properly delegated the
responsibility for rendering the decision by the Spokane County Director of
Planning.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION
1. The proposal is to divide 2.4 acres into 4 lots for development of single
family residences.
2. 7he proposal is located on the northeast corner of Keller Road and
Wellesley Avenue in the Spokane Valley in Section 34, Township 26N, Range
44, E.W.M., Spokane County, Washington.
3. The current zoning of the property is Agricultural. The proposed lot
sizes, frontage and established uses are allowed within this zone.
4. The Spokane County Comprehensive Plan designates this area as Urban,
inside t he PSSA. The density and uses proposed are in accord with this
planning category.
5. The required public notice was provided for this proposal and agencies
having a potential interest in the project were notified and asked for
recomnendat ions .
6. That one written-response was received. The chief concerns expressed were
traffic, aesthetic and aquifer impacts created by the proposal.
7. That in consideration of the recommended conditions and Spokane County
development standards, the proposal is not detrimental to the public
health, safety and general welfare. Specific requirements will mitigate
impacts to the increase in traffic and aquifer impacts.
8. That the project is exempt from environmental review under the State
Environmental Policy Act.
9. The proposal is with existing lot sizes adjacent to the east and with
general development patterns in the vicinity along Wellesley Avenue.
10. The Subdivision Administrator would strongly urge (but not require) that
the plat be designed so that Tracts C b 0 of the short plat be extended to
the north property of the short plat. The west property line of Tract C
could jog to allow proper setback for the barn on Tract B.
DECISION
Based upon the above noted Findings of Fact, Short Plat Application
SP-87-481 is hereby APPROVED subject to conditions which shall be complied
with by the applicant and/or sponsor prior to finalization of the short plat.
L
DATED TH I S~ DAY OF 1987.
~
~
i
r . JENSEKK
f
Assistant Sub 'visj~fi Administrator .
,
~
~y
6
~
1
. J
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SHORT PLAT #SP-87-481
PLANNING
1. That the preliminary plat be given conditional approval to hlarch 1,
1990. The Subdivision Administrator may administratively approve a
request for a one year extension of time if the sponsor submits a
written request forty-five (45) days prior to the above expiration
date. A request for an Extension of Time may subject the proposal to
new conditions required by reviewing agencies.
2. That the plat be designed as indicated on the preliminary plat of record
and/or attached sheets as noted. A redesign is strongly urged as stated
in Findings #10.
3. That a statement be placed in the dedication to the effect that no more
than one dwelling structure-be placed on any one lot, nor shall any lot
be further subdivided for the purposes of creating additional lots or
building sites without filing a replat.
4. That appropriate utility easements be indicated on copies of the
approved preliminary plat for distribution to the Planning Department
and the utility companies. Written approval of the easements by the
utility company must be received prior to the submittal of the final
plat.
5. That 3 certificates of title be furnished the Planning Department prior
to the fi 1 ing of the final plat.
6. That a survey be required prior to the filing of a final plat.
COUNTY ENGINEER CONDITIONS
l. The applicant should be advised that individual driveway access permits
are required prior to issuance of a building permit for driveway
approaches to the County road system."
2. Dedication of 10 ft. additional right-of-way along Keller Road;
dedication of 4 ft. additional right-of-way along Wellesley Avenue;
dedication of a 20 ft. radius at Wellesley & Keller.
3. Existing County roads providing direct access to the plat shall be paved
and curbed to Spokane County standards.
4. The word "applicant" shall include the owner or owners of the property,
his heirs, assigns and successors.
5. To construct the road improvements stated herein, the applicant may,
with the approval of the County Engineer, join in and be a willing
participant in any petition or resolution which purposes is the . •
formation of a Road Improvement District (RIO) for said improvements
pursuant to RCW 36.88, as amended. At such time as an RID is created or
any Road Improvement Project is sanctioned by Spokane County, the
improvements required (curb, sidewalk, drainage control and paving to
existing pavement) will be at the sole expense of the undersigned owner,
their heirs, grantee`s and assigns.
6. As an alternative method of constructing the road improvement stated
herein, the applicant may, with the approval of the County engineer,
accomplish the road improvements stated herein by joining and
particiapting in a County Road project (CPR) to the extent of the
required road improvement. At such time as an RID is created or any
Road Improvement Project is sanctioned by Spokane County, the
; improvements required (curb, sidealk, drainage control and paving to
a~ existing pavement) will be atthe sole expense of the undersigned owner,
~ their heirs, grantees and assigns.
~
,
~
e
.4
~
. r
Conditions of Approval for SP-E7-481 (cont'd)
County Engineer Department (Cont'd)
7. That the following statement be placed in the plat dedication: "The
owner(s) or successor(s) in interest agree to authorize the County to
place their name(s) on a petition for the formation of a Road
Improvement District (RID) by the petition method pursuant to Chapter
36.88 RCW, which petition includes the owner(s) property, and further
not to object, by the signing of a'ballot, the formation of a RID by the
resolution method pursuant to Chapter 36.88 RCW, which resolution
includes the owner(s) property. If a RID is formed by either the
petition or resolution method, as provided for in Chapter 36.88 RCW, the
owner(s) or successor(s) further agree: (1) that the improvements or
construction contemplated within the proposed RID is feasible, (2) that
the benefits to be derived from the formation of the RID by the property
included therein, together with the amount of any County participation,
exceeds the cost and expense of formation of the RID, and (3) that the
property within the proposed RID is sufficiently developed. Provided,
further, the owner(s) or successor(s) shall retain the right, as
authorized under RCW 36.88.090, to object to any assessment(s) on the
property as a result of the improvements called for in conjunction with
the formation of a RID by either petition or resolution method under
Chapter 36.88 RCW.
8. The County engineer has designated Typical Roadway Section Number Two,
Access Street standard for the improvement of Keller Road which is to be
constructed within the proposed development. This will require the
installation of 18 ft. of asphalt and curb.
9. The County Engineer has designated Typical Roadway Section Number Two,
Major Arterial standard for the improvement of Wellesley Avenue which is
adjacent to the proposed development. This will require the addition of
. approximately 12 to 14 ft. of asphalt, curb and sidewalk along the
frontage of the development.
10. The proposed plat shall be improved to the standards set forth in
Spokane County Board of Comnissioners Resolution No. 80-1592, as
amended, which establishes regulations for roads, approaches, drainage,
and fees in new construction.
COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
l. A combined surface water and sewage disposal detailed plan shall be
approved by the County Engineer and the Spokane County Health District
prior to the issuance of any building permit for this project.
2. Prior to filing the final plat, the sponsor shall present evidence that
the plat lies within the recorded service area of the water system
proposed to serve the plat.
3. Prior to filing the final plat, the sponsor shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Spokane County Health District that suitable sites
for on-site sewage disposal systems are available on Tracts A, C& D.
4. The dedicatory language of the plat will state that: "Subject to
specific application approval and issuance of permits by the Nealth
Officer, the use of indivjdual on-site sewage disposal systems may be
authorized."
5. The dedicatory language on the plat shall state: "Use of private wells
and water systems is prohibited."
6. The plat dedication will contain a statement to the effect that: "The
public water system as approved by County and State health authorities
and the local fire district and purveyor will be installed within this
plat, and the subdivider will provide for individual domestic water
service as well as fire protection to each tract prior to sale of each
tract."
~
> .
Cond i t i on s of Approva 1 f or SP-81-481 ( Cont' d)
COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
l. Pursuant to the Board of County Commissioners Resolution No.80-0418, the
use of on-site sewer disposal systems is hereby authorized. This authorization is conditioned on compliance with a11 rules and
regulations of the Spokane County Health District and is further
conditioned and subject to specific applicaton approval and issuance of
permits by the Health District.
2. The dedication shall state: "The owner(s) or Successor(s) in interest
agree to authorize the County to place their name(s) on a petition for
the formation of ULID by petition method pursuant to RCW 36.94 which the
petition includes the Owner(s) property and further not to object by the
signing of a protest petition against the formation of a ULID by
resolution method pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94 which includes the -
Owner(s) property. PROVIDED, this condition shall not prohibit the
owner(s) or successor(s) from objection to any assessment(s) on the
property as a result of improvements called for in conjunction with the
formation of a ULID by either petition or resolution method under RCW
Chapter 36.94".
3. Any water service for this project shall be provided in accordance with
the Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended.
4. The dedication shall state: "Each new dwelling unit shall be double
plumbed for connection to future area-wide collection systems."
APPROVED TH IS DAY OF L44W 1987
~
~
PAM F. JENSEN
Assistant Subdi )bn5~Administrator
cc: Nealth District
Engineer
Utilities
Building & Safety
Applicant
Surveyor
File
r.
C-UE..3-95 ~
FR AN G ls~ AvE.i•-... ~ ^
~ ...r
. . • 4 . ~•A
• t - , W
* ~ .
_ . ^
\Y
. ~ . ~
. ~ ~
• ~ .
~
_ t
' . •
. ~ ~.2041
a ~ . SA GN AVE E ~ : .
.
. ~ W _ ~ : • O ` ~ M I+C
• 4C . 0 ~ e t
CL
Q l oc
O
1 p • . y Q . • ~ •
k! Q c 09 g Vo iA2
TL
'2 Y . 1:~y ~N~ ~ . • ~ o
ar:WlE R. 1.: t.''''*' {36 ~137.~~
~ w E LLES L.EY AV.E ~ 1,s0 t3 III
R oy ~1 ,
126 ~27 ►2a W
~124 cc ~ LpNGFELIc
.r••~
r ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ Z .y • -
~
~ ui 7 '
ne P/onte ~4~ 0~~
Y S ~
f
R y~,f
p~r rk K
• ti ~ N
' LKWEI.L .1 J ' N . f
2 Z ~ ~
. O~c 3 0 ~ ROCKMtE1-L Y~ r ~
4
LA qpSSE ; ° " m S TENO
` a V
0 .ZQZ6'
~ A ♦
• ~ ON
R
TN
1 '
RtDGE Q N 5+ ~ ~
8 ~ t e
8U~ o,
R 500 k~` . A
.
LF~
,
3 .90,
, r , , 'n
~ i ~
I 00
( 25 I 11/2 7' Heigbt /335' Total Length
' ~ 189--r--- Story 200~
`L,►f _
Barn
~ I F1oweriGardarp 60
~ 01 0 ~ . ~
~ • , ~ 23'
Heignt 40 N
Vegeteblc Garden
36' 100' 1
I 4~ ~
ro
Garden Shed
O , 47 ~k r 6' x 6' ~
v M~ Total Squan Footage
.
of Existing Bldgs
° (Gross F'loor Area)
1 1/2
~ N N Story ~J_ , •Primary Residence: 2362.88 sq. ft
Residence Barn: 4020.05 sq. ft.
~ 19' Height
I -------142'------ ( , •
36. Flowet, C~atdeos , ~sxI ' I . " Hey to Site Plan
V =5o
Topography: Flat
Parcel A Parcel B Parcel C~ k k~k = Fencing
I ! I
\ , Y 79.96' 1 25'39' 100, ~ - ~ = Tree
Wellesley Avenue ~ = Shrub
Vicinity Map 30'
= Grass
F k,~, . .
, • ~ • Rock Landscaping
y • ~
n ' ~f Gravel
t ~ t ~1~ wM ,
•~i
~
Site Plan I I ~
~ e
= Drlveway
..r R
Conditional Use Permit Application ( I Customer ingress
~
5 Penny Watson (Simonson) I = p~-king
~
Avt East 13409 Wellesley
okane, Washin~f{ on 99216
SP D"
- - 1
r
~ 3