VE-22-94
ZONINt~ :~~~.;1 ~ I~c~~~
SPOKANE CO UNTY, WASH INGI-ON
IN THE MATTER OF A VARIANCE FROM ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
SIGN STANDARDS ) CONCLUSIONS,
AND DECISION
FILE: VE-22-94
APPLICANT: SMITH'S HOME FURNISHINGS, INC.
COMPANION FILE(S): None
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: The applicant requests permission to place a third wall
sign on the west side of the existing Smith's retail store; whereas, section 14.804.120.1.a of the
Zoning Code of Spokane County stipulates such signs shall not cover more than two (2) walls.
Authority to consider such a request exists pursuant to section 14.404.080 of the Zoning Code of`
Spokane County and Spnkane C'ountv Board of ('mlnty Cnmnii~,~ioncrs, resnlutinn N'n. 89 0708,
as may be amende(i.
PROJECT LOCA'I'IUN: Generally located in the Spokane Valley, at the northeast corner o:
Sprague Avenue and Sullivan Road, in the SE 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25N, Range 44E«
212 N. Sullivan Road. Parcel Number: 45133.1259
OPPONENTS OF RECORD: NONE
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 thc
public hearing and during an authorized window of rime after the hearing~~he on August 10.
1994, the Zoning Adjustor rendered a written decision on September 1994 to D L`~.
the application as set forth in the file documents.
FINDINCS nF FAC7'
1. Testimony was taken under oat h. ~
2. The proposal is described above and cietailed in documents containeti in the file. More
specifically, the Smith property is approximately located in the vicinity of the northeast corner of
Sprague Avenue and Sullivan Road. It is in a complex dominated by a new Fred Meyer store; btit.
the actual corner is occupied by an older building which is presently a bingo hall. The Smith's
store is located north of Sprague Avenue, east of and adjacent to Sullivan Road. For free-standin(i '
signage it has a simple, relarively low, free-standing sign adjacent to Sullivan Road. This sign is
internally illuminated for visibility at night. Although not prominent, the sign is visible from some
parts of Sprague Avenue for persons traveling both east and west. The building contains two (2)
"Smith's" wall-mounted signs: one is locateci on ttie solith si(1e c)f the hwlc?irig. The north side of'
the building has a"Smith's" sign on its facc.
3. In compliance with RCW 36.70.450, the Plaiining Department determin ~.iit-this
proposal is neither consistent nor inconsistent with the Major Commercial categorY the
rf
{
Comprehensive Plan. The Plan does not address signs. i S EP ~
s
4. The site is zoned Community Business (B-2), which allows the use upo4 approval of i
this application. The use is not the issue; signage is. However, section 14.804.000;(po *;01'
intent and scope) of Chapter 14.804, Signage Standards, states that the purpose and ntent ot P.
I
1
~
r
CASE NO. VE-22-94 SPOK:ANE COUNTY ZO1vING ADNSTOR PAGE 2
section is "...to promote commerce, traffic safety and community idendty while improving the
vi.sual environment of "conunercial" areas. (emphasis added) All restricdons on signs, be it size
or numbers, stems from the purpose and intent of the Code to improve the visual environment
5. The exisdng land uses in the area of the proposal include business and commercial,
ranging from drive-up espresso booths to a neighboruig Fred Meyer super store.
6. The proposal is exempt from the provisions of the Washington State Envuonmental
Policy Act, Chapter 43.21 C RCW pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
7 The reasons for granting the vanance, as set forth by the apphcant, are as follows.
a. The architect designed the building, not aware of sign regulaaons prohibiting a
thud sign, and provided a location on the west side of the building for the
"Snuth's" sign. The side of the building will look strange mnthout the sign
located in the intervenmg space between two down-wash hghts.
b. The applicant feels they need the exposure a sign as vnewed from the west side of
Sulhvan Tius was mosdy with respect to the ultimate future redevelopment of
the northwest corner of Sullivan and Sprague in which there might be a
substanaal number of prospecdve customers using pazlQng lots and businesses to
the west of the Srruth's location; not so much based on the present scattered single
businesses
c. The apphcant purchased the land from Fred Meyer. The apphcant claims that the
negotiated sale involved restnctions on signage. (NOTE• The applicant was
given a two week period of ame to produce a letter of explanauon, preferably
from Fred Meyer Corporation itself.) A letter of August 18,1994 from Rembold
Trusts, Inc. (with no acknowledgment from Fred Meyer Corporation) conveyed
the followuig infoimation. "In negotiations, Fred Meyer, the land seller, set -
restnctions on our (Smith's Home Furnishings) signage. We were limited by a
larger setback and unable to erect any free-stancimg signs on Sprague. We agreed
to be restricted to a small pylon on Suluvan Road and 3 signs mounted on the
front, side and reaz of our budding."
CONCLUSIONS
1 The Zoning Adjustor visited the site and drove the surrounding road system of Sprague
Avenue and Sullivan Road for the purpose of determimng the visibdrty of signs on the "Smith's"
property
a. The free-standing pylon sign, adjacent to Sullivan Road, was visible fiiom both
direcaons on Sullivan Road
b The "Smith's" sign located on the front (south side) of the budduig was visible
while dnving north on Sullivan Road, east on Sprague Avenue and west on
Sprague Avenue.
c The "Snuth's" sign located on the north side of the building was visible while
dnving south on Sulhvan Road.
HDNE-22-94 Smith's
~
r
CASE NO. VE-22-94 SPOKANE COUNTY ZOivING ADNSTOR PAGE 3
d The free-standhng pylon sign was visible from vanous locations of parking lots of
businesses on the west side of Sullivan Road, although, not extremely visible
2. The language of the purpose, intent and scope secaon of Chapter 14.804 of the Zorung
Code (Signage Standards) is attempting to fulfill an objecave of improvuig the visual environment
by restncang the number of signs appeanng on buildings
3 Where the problem complauied of is common to land in the area or throughout the
communiry, the proper solution is leg7slative rezorung, rather than piecemeal adminlstranve
exempaon. The alleged problem or har+dslup must relate to the land Community ne.eds or
personal or coiporate hardships do not qualify as leginmate grounds for issuing a variance
(Zomng and Land Use Controls, Rohan, § 43.02 [4] [b] [i])
The property is not unlilce literally hundreds of other rrud-block propernes in
commercial stnps throughout the County There are no particular special circumstances idenafied
uruque to this site. There are indeed some unique circumstances related to the purchase of the land
by the applicant from the Fred Meyer Corporation, but they are relationships willingly and
knowuigly entered into at the tune of purchase of the land. The property is not depnved of nghts
or pnvdeges enjoyed by other nud-blvck propernes sufficient to warrant a deviation from the sign
standards. The exisang signs on the property, the north and the south side of the building plus the
free-standing pylon, give the property exposure from every major artenal approach
4 If the application for variance were to be granted, the Zoning Adiustor or Board of
Adjustment would have no basis for denyuig subsequent vanance applicanons by other owners
under sunilar circumstances. With no special circumstances at the site, this would amount to a
defacto text amendment to the Code; an authonty neither Heanng Body possesses
5 Section 14 404 082 of the Zoning Code addresses the requuements for granting a
vanance Subsecaon 1 of the above secaon is as follows
" 1 Any vanance from the terms of the Zoning Code shall be subject to such condinons as
will (a) ensure that the adjustment shall not constitute a grant of special pnvdege
mconsistent with the limitaaons upon other propernes in the vicimty and sunilar zone
classificanon in wluch the property is situated, (b) ensure that the intent and purpose of
the Zoning Code is maintained with regard to location, site design, appearance,
landscaping and other features of the proposal, and (c) protect the envuonment, pubhc
uiterest and general welfare, and that the following circumstances are found to apply
a. Because of special circumstances appdicable to rhe property, including size,
shape, topography, locanon or surroundings, the stnct applicatton of the Zorung
Code creates pracncal difficulties and is found to deprive the property of raghts
and prtvileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and sunilar zone
classificauon, and (emphasis added)
b That the granang of the vanance will neither be matenally deaYmental to the pubhc
welfare nor injunous to the property or improvements m the viciruty and zone in
which the property is located "
Subsection 4 of the above section defines several key terms, one of the most unportant
of which is 14 404.082 4 e wherein 'practical difficulties' are established as one or more of any
HD/VE-22-94 Smirh's
~
GASE NO. VE-22-94 SPOKANE COUNTY ZOIVING ADNSTOR PAGE 4
number of differences and pnvileges characterisric of a property due to a combinatlon of special
circumstances and standards of the Code.
In response to the above, the following is true•
a. There are no special circumstances applicable to the property related to size,
shape, topography, location or surroun&ngs in which the smct application of the
Zoning Code creates a practical difficulty.
b. One of the pruiciples examined when considering a vanance is whether the
pracacal difficulty or hardship from which the applicant seeks relief is self-
created. By the applicant's own admission, verbally in the hearing and in the
August 18th letter from Rembold Trusts, Inc , the applicant acknowledged that it
entered freely into an agreement with the seller of the land to restnct signage to 3
signs and a free-standing pylon. The fact that the apphcant did not to lcnow about
sign restncaons at the nme of agreement is not a basis for seeking a vanance; it is,
rather, a wdlful act, apparendy without knowledge of the zoning regulations in
the community
c If the property is depnved of nghts and pnvdeges enjoyed by other propemes in
the vicimty and surnlar zone classifications, no evidence was presented in
evidence
6. The applicant claims lack of knowledge of the sign resuicaons. Any such lack of
knowledge is not a reason for granting a vanance
7. The apphcant has not presented a convincing case that a broader public or comanunity
need or interests would be served by granting the vanance, as opposed to denying the application
8 Subsecnon 14 404 082.3 addresses a number of situanons which granang a vanance -
should not be substanaally based upon Subsection 14.404.082.3.b continues that grannng a
vanance should not establish a precedent which would adversely effect the zoning concept for an
area or the County as a whole. Th2s subsecaon militates against granting the vanance.
9 Rohan, in Zoning and Land Use Controls, § 43.02 [5], states that over the years a
number of factors have been considered by courts with respect to granting vanances. These
include: (1) whether stnct compliance with the teans of the ordinance will preclude a permitted use
from being pursued, (2) whether the land will yield a reasonable return; (3) the degree to which the
apphcant seeks to vary from the ordinance; (4) the degree of harm which will be unposed on the
surrounding area ff the variance is granted, (5) whether some other method can be pursued to avoid
the need for the vanance, (6) whether the difficulty is self imposed, and (7) whether the interest of
jusdce and the general welfare will be served Rohan continues that no factor alone contrals and all
must be considered It is a balancing act of the compeang interest between the landowner and the
commuruty, as expressed through the zoning document
After consideraaon of all the facts, testimony, relevant case law and instructive
usefulness of Rohan's Zoning and Land Use Controls, it is concluded that the balancing test of
competing interest lies wnth denying the vanance for the following reasons
a. strict comphance vvith the terms of the ordhnance wdl not preclude the pennitted use
(Snuth's Home Furnishings) from being pursued,
HD/VE-22-94 Smith's
r
r
CASE NO. VE-22-94 SFOKANE COUNTY ZO1vING ADJUSTOR PAGE 5
b There was no evidence presented that the property will fail to yield a reasonable,
econonuc return;
c. presunung the ordinance is based upon the aesthetic appearance of an area, a
measure of harm will be unposed on the sunounding area if this vanance is granted and 1t
serves as precedent for other "quantity" sign vanances to be granted; and
d. the practical difficulty is self-unposed.
10 The proper legal requuements for advertising of the heanng before the Zoning Adjustor
of Spokane County have been met
DECISION
From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Zoning Adjustor DENIES the
proposal as set forth in the file documents
NOTICE: PENDING COMPLETION OF ALL CONDTTIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH NEED
TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, PERMTTS MAY BE RELEASID
PRIOR TO THE LAPSE OF THE TEN (10)-DAY APPEAL PERIOD HOWEVER, TBE
COUNTY HAS NO LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES AND INCONVENIENCE INCURRED BY
THE APPLICANT IF THE PROJECT APPROVAL IS OV RNED OR ALTERED UPON
APPEAL.
DATED this ZVftday of September,1994.
THO S G OSHER, AICP
Zomng djustor
Sp ane Coun y, Wastungton
FILED•
1) Applicant (Cemfied/Return Receipt Mail)
2) Opponents of Record
3) Spokane Division of Engineenng and Roads
4) Spokane County Health Thstnct
5) Spokane County Division of Uuliues
6) Spokane Counry Division of Buildings
7) Spokane County Fue Protection Distnct No. 1
8) Plammng Department Cross-reference File and/or Electronic Ffle
NOTE ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FILE AN APPEAL
WM-IIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF 1'BE ABOVE DATE OF SIGIVING. APPEAL
MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A$210.00 FEE APPEALS MAY BE FII,ED AT THE
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING, 1026 W
BROADWAY, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Section 14 412 042 of the Zoning Code for Spokane
County)
HD/VE-22-94 Smith's
f ENGINEER'S REVIEVV SHEET
BLDG. PERMIT # -or -FII..E# VF-,=022-94.qA
Related File # ( )
Date to Rcview 8-10•94 Time lU:OQ # 3
Date to AA 8c DR Time
I)ate Iieceived 7-15-94
Project Name siGN szv 3 wAa[..Is (coDE z wAt.,Ls) sMtTVI's xoME No. Lvts 1 Nv.Acres 3.5
-Section - Townsbip - Range
SITE ADDRESS E SULLPVA►N N 2121N SPRAGUE PAR+CEL # 13543-1259
Applicant's Name CHUCK Ir►iELSON SMITH'S HOME FURNISHIINGS Phone # 534-1539
i
Address 924 N LAKE RD-SPCaKANE wA 99212-1048 Work # 503)22207258
Uate Cvnditions mailed
Contact person Phone #
FLC1QrD Z(]NE v' NO W S 5CHC3OL
Engiueer 1 Surveyor's 1 Architect's Name
Planning Ccxntact P'erson Phone # 456-2205
Date Submitted Description Initials
1 1 ACrREEMENT TC1 PAY FEES (JR PRIORI'I'Y IEE COMPLETEI3 &CCIPY TO ACCOUNTTNG
J 1 FINAI. PLAT" FEES C[JMPLETEp & eOPY mo AccourUNG
! J' NU'TICE TO PUBLIC # 1 3 4 6 GC3MFi,E'IEII - t)R NEEDS 7`O BE SIGNL-D
1 1' DESIGN I7EVIA11ON S[JBMITTEI}
1 1 AI.TERATIC}N "Tt7 PLAT - BLOCKS & LOTS
1 / BOND RELEASED -RfJAD & DRAINAGE IMFR+QVEMTNTS
I I HEARIPdG F,XAM APPRC)VED _DENIED- APFEALEA BBC ,l PR0JEC'I' -APPROVED _DENIED
klpltlreview,tor
.
, . 1. ,
t~
S P O K A N E O U N T Y
. •
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WALLIS D. HUBBARD, DIRECTOR
►~~~~~NIE Q.~~~~Y Z~~~YqG ~~IBILRQ.
~~AIRRNG
DATE: August 10, 1994
TIME: 10:00 a. m. or as soon thereafter as possible aal\/to
PLACE: Spokane County Public Works Building
Commissioner's Hearing Room ~ U L 1 ~ 1994
1026 W. Broadway
Spokane, WA 99260 Engineeriat
AGENDA ITEM 3 File: VE-22-94
VARIANCE FROM SIGN STANDARD
LOCATION: Generally located in the Spokane Valley, at the northeast corner of
Sprague Avenue and Sullivan Road, in the SE 1/4 of Section 13, Township 25N, Range
44EWM; 212 N. Sullivan Road.
PROPOSAL: Smith's Home Furnishings requests permission to place a third wall sign
on the west side of the existing Smith's retail store; whereas, section 14.804.120.1.a of the
Zoning Code of Spokane County stipulates such signs shall not cover more than two (2)
wa11s.
EXISTING ZONING: Community Business (B-2)
SITE SIZE: Approximately 3.5 acres
APPLICANT: Smith's Home Furnishings
1022 SW Salmon, Suite 450
Portland, OR 97205
A G E N T: Mark McKinley
Physically Disabled Access: All meetings and hearings will be conducted in facilities
which are accessible to disabled iodividuals. For more particular information, please
contact the Spokane County Planning Department at (509) 456-2205.
NOTE: THE ZONTNG ADJUSTOR WILL ISSUE A WRITTEN DECISION TO APPROVE OR DENY
THE ABOVE PROPOSAL. ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY
APPEAL THE ZONING ADJUSTOR DECISION AND NiLJST DO SO WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR
DAYS OF'THE DATE OF THE DECISIONS SIGNING. APPEALS MUST BE ACCOMPAIVIED BY
A$210.00 FEE. APPEALS MAY BE FII.ED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SPOKANE
COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS BUII.DING, 1026 WEST BROADWAY, SPOKANE, WA 99260
(SECTION 14.412.042 OF THE ZONING CODE OF SPOKANE COUNTY). THE ABOVE
REFERENCED FILE MAY BE EXAMINED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.
WEST 1026 BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260-0240 •(509) 456-2205
~
1
~
9
F ~
2 Q ,V a ~tqisr
~ O
``~•:r.~..:
DG f- ~
Nt4SCb
~irc
P2~►.< 5tation
14 ~ ~ ' f o
~.t ~jt ngc?° ti ~
r
r ' ' ~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ 1~ 4 ~ ~ ~
~
N
-w-~r 'D
ri
,
RAW-'E
. S P
. , _
N
\y ~
t ~ - . ~ r----~`-' - _ ~ • _ i - C
St. M ~ ~.l~ „ l - _
Pa rod~~~ ' v /
cyG~AO i y .~EL
l+
r~ L. A K G
t a 2,
6r"
, •~nt.tt?~~ ~',l1
Tr Q' TM f~ Y .
r
7Tx '.ApAM ~ ` . •'~,f~- ,
" ~NO o. ti C K'~ N ~`j E - ' :-~*r ~ " ~
' - 404
IOT o 107
1
C1N T ' ►FT~c x !
. ~ Z
~
e
~ FT rl t1
Q ! I ~~~1~
~ +3TM 3T
.
000000200
z
, T.A~_-•- _
.
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
APPLICATIQNS BEFORE THE ZONING ADJUSTOR
Name of Applicant: SMI'TH's Agent: Y N CHVCx NELSON I
Street Address: NORTH 924 LARE ROAD ,
Zip Phone - Home:
City: SPOKANE State: WA Code: 9 9 212 -10 4 8 Work: 1_5_3~t - I±`• ~<< ``t-~
Agent's No.: ,
Name of Property Owner(s): SMITH' S HOME FURNISHINGS (WAYNE REMBOLD ) !
Street Address: 1022 SW SALMON, SUITE 450
City: PORTLAND S tate: OR Zip Phone - Home:
Code; 9 7 2 0 5 Work: (5 0 3) 2 2 2- 7 2 5 8
REQLTESTED ACTION(S) (Circle appropriate action): ,
Variance(s) SIGN Conditional Use Permit Expansion of a
Other: Nonconforming Use I
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Violation/ . -Secrion Township.=Range =-I Enforcement: Y ~_N ;
•Lot and legal checked by: •CWWP sewer purveyor:
•CWSP water purveyor: •CUP standards met: Y N NA ;
•Existing zone: j~~-r Cite applicable section: 7
•Comp. Plan designation:k_~i'r i i.,► `t 4 i Arterial Road Plan designation:
,
•Fire District: •Person doing preapp conf.:
•Other/previous Planning Department actions involving this property:
•Certificate of Exemption No. : Application No.: ' ' i
-•Hearing Date:,;~f Site plan diMensioni g checked by:
-
~ z`-< -it' I \I-lec /C3 1 .
ABOUT THE PROPERTY (by applicant)
•Ex.isting use of property: RETAIL SALES
•D scribe proposed use of the property, no. ing change from 'existing use': ~~`l i,%/~: . /~!~z• ~ . C ,~V r ,1.~i_/ . i ~ ~ ~ I /ti~1 f"1 •If a variance application, sta'te the Code standard and describe the variance sough in comparable
te~ (i.e.f 50 feet from centerline verses re uired 65 feet): i( i?? ~ , , y,
i .'V/..t.'~~/ ~~a1~ ~ '_f ,i i i '1 1: ~ ni~~ I ! i ' •
WE~~€ a conditional use permit ap~lication, does proal meeet~ all standards? Y N
If not, has one or more variances been requested? Y N,
•What is the size of the subject property.
•Street address of property (if known): SaLaIL .'9,LLJ'&/,¢.A1 kg um ,
•Legal description of property (include easement, if applicable):
VERA B28 S1/2 EXC W173 FT LYG S OF N117FT & EXC WlOFT & EXC S30FT &
INC VAC GN R/W(PARCEL 45133.1259)
•Parcel No(s).: 4h''/33.- 1.4"L6^1
•Source of legal: ~ L t' .
•Total amount of adJoining land controlled bY is owner, rsP ~ onsor anv or agent:
•What interest do you (applicant) hold in the property?
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) S S
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
I SWEAR, UNDER PE~?;~L''Y P~: ; ~R';Tii~: ~ i j I Hivl i HE UWNER OF RECORD OR
AUTFiORIZED 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 SUPPOR DOCUMENTS ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND
TO THE BE$J,+QFMY KNOWLEDGE.
BAD`6Si ne Date
~Q'.~\ssIo ru ~`~q~ g
~ , I.
~ : ~,ot~►ar _ .
Not Public in and for the state of Washington, residin at
, o ^
,
=,,sr•.. My appointment expires:
40
q • A. ~ e, •
lF • • . page 1 of 2
ZA/APP ('Auy~+iWi~'
. ,
. `
. .
VARIANCE BURDEN OF PROOF FORM
Name:
File Number. ✓
A"variance" is the means by which an adjustment is ma.de in the application of the specific
regulations of the zoning classification for a particular (the subject) piece of property. This
property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, is deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in a similar zone classification. This adjustment
remedies the d.ifference in privileges. A variance shall not authorize a use otherwise prohibited in
the zone classification in which the property is located.
The following questions will help to deternune the outcome of your request Your request requires
accurate and complete responses. First circle either the "yes" or the "no" answer(s) following the
questions below as they apply to your situation and then explain as needed (in the space provided)
to make your unique situation clear. Certain phrases from the Zoning Code of Spokane County
section on variances are included in these questions and are underlined for convenience.
A. Will this variance permit a use which is otherwise prohibited in this zone? Yes No
Explain: Zoninq Code Section 14.804.120 ALLOWS SIGNS ON ONLY
TWO WALLS. THIS VARIANCE IS FOR USE OF A THIRD WALU
B. Are there special circumstances (lot size, shape, topography, location, access,
surroundings, etc.) which apply to the subject property and which may not
apply to other properties in the vici~nitv.? Yes No
Explaill: BUILDING ENTRANCE ELEVATION FACES SPRAGUE AVE.
SETBACK IS 250' + MAIN ACCESS IS FROM SULLIVAN RD.
C. Is the subject property depriv of privReges cornmoz,~yeajoyed b,Y other
p:'~..'es thP ••:C;nify '1La lII 3s11?'LI3.'' ZOiiP C? ,-,,CifiC1t17Ii? Ve s Nn
Explain: NO OTHER BUILDINGS IN AREA HAVE USE OF 3
i9ALLS FOR SIGNS ,
D. Will this variance be harmful to the public welfare or to other properties in
the yic~ and a§imilU zon 1 tion? Yes No
Explain: REQTIFST IS DUE TO SIZE AND SCOPE OF LOCATION
ADDITIONAL SIGNS WOULD NOtINFRINGE ON PUBLIC WELFARE
E. Are there other similar situations in the 'V1C. in ity in a similar zone, classif cadon? Yes No
Are they permitteti uses? Yes No Are they "nonconfornung"? Yes No
Explain: NONE TO OUR KNOWLEDGE
F. Could the subject property be put to a reasonable and permitted use by you or another
person without the requested variance? Yes No
~xPjain: TIIE COaE WOiJLD ALLOW FOR LARGER SIGNS, BUT WOULD I
NOT ALLOW FOR THE SIGN ORIENTATION CLIENT FEELS IS NECESSARY.
G. If this request is granted, will the subject property be more environmentally
sensitive, energy conserving, or will it promote the use of an historic property? Yes No
Explain: NOT APPLICABLE
Page 1 of 2
,
.
~
;
S P O K A N E C O U N T Y
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DIVISION OF ENGINEERING & ROADS
W 7026 BROADWAY, SPOKANE, WA 99260-0170
CHUCK NELSON
SMI'TH'S HOME FUR1vISHINGS
924 N LAKE RD
SPOK;ANE WA 99212-1048
),~r7MAY-24-199±,4 09: 27 ,TH-QREGON SIGN ~ P.1001/001
. ~ - . t
HOE-AT SIGNS l
~
YAKtAAA. KENNEWIC& PORrLaNO, SEI►rnE, sPOKJ►wE, TaCOMA
-
_ I
i
~
TO: City1of Spokane
RE: 511ffnrS HOME FURNISHINGS ~
- I
VER:ADALE ~
sPoKArnE, wA ~
~
Please use this 'Ietter-as our aut.hority to'have Chuck Nelson of Heath Signs act as
oui agent af record concerning the sign variance for our above referenced locati'on.
Smiths Home Furni ' gs; Inc.
. ,
. f
a t Mulvey ~
Chief Operating Office ~
~ - - _
~
~
a
~
~
~
7
a
~
I
~ 0
1 •
~
HEATH NO,RTHWEST INC. d,
4644 SE 17th PORTLANO.OREGON 97202 (503) 232-2820
gwA 1'he J4Yt Fotttlson S1gti Group